Kommentaarid on kirjutatud EWR lugejate poolt. Nende sisu ei pruugi ühtida EWR toimetuse seisukohtadega.
VanemadUuemad
F.Y.I. the option of staying on Broadview has been thoroughly examined and assessed!
If the minority calling themselves "concerned shareholders" remain unconvinced, that does not mean that the majority shareholders are "unconcerned".
If the minority calling themselves "concerned shareholders" remain unconvinced, that does not mean that the majority shareholders are "unconcerned".
Teardown residential homes on good lots have been sold in the Toronto suburbs for $1.5M. We have a gem of a lot with a gorgeous heritage building and it is being sold at a fire sale price, it seems. And instead to build on a fugly lot over a subway?? Makes no sense.
Reluctant selgeltnägija speaking: Dear how dare you. Why so defensive? Things change. Sometimes rapidly. Who's the minority, who's the majority? Especially now? Does anyone really know? And just because a group is concerned does not for a moment imply that others are not concerned. Can we agree that everyone is concerned? Let's not be enemies. Let's try to understand where we are. As to the claim that the option of staying at Broadview has
been thoroughly examined and assessed, you must be talking pre-Tulge Külla proposal, right? No one has previously envisioned quite such a possibility. Organic to site, purpose and non-profit status. This is new. It may be a game-changer. We need to consider rationally. It is not primarily
residential and does not need the arguably highly unlikely change (as so many others in the area have been rejected) to zoning that due diligence confidently but perhaps misleadingly claims has a small chance of not succeeding. That is a strong - and completely central - claim, based on
what exactly? Does anyone know? Would this be the first time in history that someone's report is flawed? Obviously not. So, until the proof of that statement is demonstrated it is mere assertion, and claims to the contrary are not only acceptable, but highly responsible. Let's be real. Not mired in partisanship, mere emotion, and the past. Let's be guided by one standard: what's right for the future and best for our youth. And, of course, let's be adult and stop the shaming, once and for all.
been thoroughly examined and assessed, you must be talking pre-Tulge Külla proposal, right? No one has previously envisioned quite such a possibility. Organic to site, purpose and non-profit status. This is new. It may be a game-changer. We need to consider rationally. It is not primarily
residential and does not need the arguably highly unlikely change (as so many others in the area have been rejected) to zoning that due diligence confidently but perhaps misleadingly claims has a small chance of not succeeding. That is a strong - and completely central - claim, based on
what exactly? Does anyone know? Would this be the first time in history that someone's report is flawed? Obviously not. So, until the proof of that statement is demonstrated it is mere assertion, and claims to the contrary are not only acceptable, but highly responsible. Let's be real. Not mired in partisanship, mere emotion, and the past. Let's be guided by one standard: what's right for the future and best for our youth. And, of course, let's be adult and stop the shaming, once and for all.
Please tell Allan Meiusi!
Go back to Allan Meiusi's series of articles printed here recently where he alleges that the majority faction of shareholders are incompetent and mischievious bordering on illegal.
Meiusi is smart enough to compose allegations and innuendo in a sufficiently ambiguous manner to avoid slander suits.
After you've read that come back tell us to avoid emotion and partisanship!
Go back to Allan Meiusi's series of articles printed here recently where he alleges that the majority faction of shareholders are incompetent and mischievious bordering on illegal.
Meiusi is smart enough to compose allegations and innuendo in a sufficiently ambiguous manner to avoid slander suits.
After you've read that come back tell us to avoid emotion and partisanship!
Yes, there are plenty of obstacles facing the Madison proposal. The same is true for redeveloping Eesti Maja on Broadview and some of them are simply crazy!
In EWR, we saw a video about a guy named Matthews who lives near Eesti Maja and objects to developers who don't live in the neighbourhood and are only out to make a buck. He also spoke up for the deer who would once again frolic in the Don Valley.
If such obstacles can possibly be overcome, we can be certain that more can be devised; just as many as required!
In EWR, we saw a video about a guy named Matthews who lives near Eesti Maja and objects to developers who don't live in the neighbourhood and are only out to make a buck. He also spoke up for the deer who would once again frolic in the Don Valley.
If such obstacles can possibly be overcome, we can be certain that more can be devised; just as many as required!
There are plenty of restrictions on what can be done with Eesti Maja. Among a host of other reasons, because it's been designated as a Heritage Site.
Meiusi's found a guy in the neighbourhood named Matthews wants it restored to its original condition, complete with deer prancing around it. It's just an old schoolhouse with no particular architectural significance.
Meiusi took this guy seriously and made a EWR video of him piously telling Estonians what they should do with their own property. It's good for a laugh and ought to shown again.
Meiusi's found a guy in the neighbourhood named Matthews wants it restored to its original condition, complete with deer prancing around it. It's just an old schoolhouse with no particular architectural significance.
Meiusi took this guy seriously and made a EWR video of him piously telling Estonians what they should do with their own property. It's good for a laugh and ought to shown again.
To whoever is citing the Matthews guy, stop already! It's just nonsense.
What's really scary is that there may be NO Eesti Centre or Eesti Mahja when all is done. Then what?
What's really scary is that there may be NO Eesti Centre or Eesti Mahja when all is done. Then what?
It's Meiusi who found Matthews and posted his video-interview with him on EWR.
It's both we should see the last of. Both of them are trouble makers.
It's both we should see the last of. Both of them are trouble makers.
Samalt IP numbrilt on siin varem kommenteerinud: Stop the Meiusi guy! (12:05)
Kommentaar on kustutatud EWR toimetuse poolt.
This comment has been deleted by EWR
This comment has been deleted by EWR
Kommentaar on kustutatud EWR toimetuse poolt.
This comment has been deleted by EWR
This comment has been deleted by EWR
Kommentaarid sellele artiklile on suletud.
This comment has been deleted by EWR