Missing Babblers Continuation Thread, Hold The Hostility

108 posts / 0 new
Last post
Unionist

Pogo wrote:

The Koolaid crowd?

Yes, Pogo. Definition: Those who judge individuals, their opinions, and their actions, by whether or not they conform to the press releases and leader's statements of an organization (any organization) - those who were well characterized in these immortal lyrics (and strains) of Gilbert and Sullivan:

Quote:
Sir Joseph Porter: I grew so rich that I was sent

By a pocket borough into Parliament.

I always voted at my party's call,

And I never thought of thinking for myself at all.

Chorus: And he never thought of thinking for himself at all.

Sir Joseph: I thought so little, they rewarded me

By making me the Ruler of the Queen's Navee!

Chorus: He thought so little, they rewarded he

By making him the Ruler of the Queen's Navee!

Sineed

Can't see the Perseids from Toronto.

Fifteen years ago I drove up to my parents' place in Medonte township in the middle of a nice dark forest.  Hubby and I and lay on the road in front of my parents' house and watched the meteors rain down upon us.  Perspective is good.

Sineed

Unionist wrote:

"I was sent

By a pocket borough into Parliament.

I always voted at my party's call,

And I never thought of thinking for myself at all.

Chorus: And he never thought of thinking for himself at all."

Sounds like Stephen Harper's ideal MP.

Fidel

I read where Dion and Iggy have had to crack the party whip at times when their MP's have shown a desire to vote with the NDP against the Harpers. Independent thought in that party is discouraged for the most part. And independent candidates will never be a progressive political force in this last bastion of political conservatism in the world, or anywhere in the world for that matter

Stephen Gordon

Sineed wrote:

Unionist wrote:

"I was sent

By a pocket borough into Parliament.

I always voted at my party's call,

And I never thought of thinking for myself at all.

Chorus: And he never thought of thinking for himself at all."

Sounds like Stephen Harper's ideal MP.

<Snicker>

And I bet a NDP/Liberal/Bloc MP who broke ranks with her leader would be given a pat on the back by her party and encouraged to "Give Jack/Michael/Gilles hell!"

Slumberjack

The day that partisan operatives of any party succeed in monopolizing the pablum, force feeding it with a ladle, while managing to have outlawed the involuntary gag reflex of dissent, will be a sorry-assed day indeed.  This is what is being attempted here of course, a concerted effort by a few to manipulate board policy changes and stymie legitimate criticism through complaints about being unfairly picked on by a few non-aligned malcontents.  The issue of a few missing babblers has been appropriated by those who would shut down any critique of the party being discussed, who would rejoice if short term or permanent vacations were handed to those who insist on pointing out to the oblivious, enough holes in the dish being served up that would make the Swiss envious.

Bookish Agrarian

Oh horsefeathers.

All it would take would be for a few posters to stop treating NDP supporters as social lepers and respect those of us who have chosen to channel our activism through the NDP. 

No one is suggesting you need agree, or that criticising the NDP on substance, should be disallowed.  However, much of the posts are not substantive but merely baiting such as the one I quoted above.

Unionist

Stephen Gordon wrote:

And I bet a NDP/Liberal/Bloc MP who broke ranks with her leader would be given a pat on the back by her party and encouraged to "Give Jack/Michael/Gilles hell!"

Right. They are all the same. But sadder still than an MP who won't break caucus ranks under any circumstances, is an anonymous internet poster who isn't even subject to such discipline, but voluntarily cedes their own soul for the Party and the Leader. That would be fine, if they didn't debase, ridicule, and demonize those who prefer to maintain their freedom.

 

Fidel

Quote:
http://www.rabble.ca/about/babblepolicy

 rabble.ca is a public, independent, progressive news and information source. As part of rabble.ca, this message board (babble) was created to ensure that readers/participants could explore any issues of interest and concern. In defining itself as "progressive," rabble.ca embraces a pro-human rights, pro-feminist, anti-racist and pro-labour stance. Discussion which develops and expands progressive thought is encouraged and welcome. . .


 
And what a progressive message it is. I am certainly encouraged by it.

 
[url=http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/progressive]progressive[/url] adjective:
1. favoring or advocating progress, change, improvement, or reform, as opposed to wishing to maintain things as they are, esp. in political matters: a progressive mayor.
2. making progress toward better conditions; employing or advocating more enlightened or liberal ideas, new or experimental methods, etc.: a progressive community.  
3. characterized by such progress, or by continuous improvement.
4  (initial capital letter) of or pertaining to any of the Progressive parties in politics

Bookish Agrarian

Unionist wrote:

Stephen Gordon wrote:

And I bet a NDP/Liberal/Bloc MP who broke ranks with her leader would be given a pat on the back by her party and encouraged to "Give Jack/Michael/Gilles hell!"

Right. They are all the same. But sadder still than an MP who won't break caucus ranks under any circumstances, is an anonymous internet poster who isn't even subject to such discipline, but voluntarily cedes their own soul for the Party and the Leader. That would be fine, if they didn't debase, ridicule, and demonize those who prefer to maintain their freedom.

 

For which you constantly provide the mirror image.

Pot

Kettle

Black

Unionist

Hey, it works! Thanks, Michelle, and please convey my thanks to the software team!!

 

Fidel

I remember learning how to drive. I was always driving the speed limit and sometimes in excess of. One teenaged fun-filled night we were cruising down main street and whistling at friends and girls in other vehicles. I must have changed lanes one too many times in all the excitement,  because the cop asked me to: PICK A LANE AND DRIVE!

Bookish Agrarian

That's right- do what ever you can so you don't have to come to terms with the reality that while it might not be Kool-Aid in that glass in your hand it is indeed Freshie.

Unionist

Fidel wrote:

 I must have changed lanes one too many times in all the excitement,  because the cop asked me to: PICK A LANE AND DRIVE!

Did she say what to do when the semi was approaching head on? Or when you had a flat?

 

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

Fidel wrote:

 I must have changed lanes one too many times in all the excitement,  because the cop asked me to: PICK A LANE AND DRIVE!

Did she say what to do when the semi was approaching head on?

Even as a younger man I never made a habit of driving for long periods in the passing lane on TransCanada.

 

Quote:
Or when you had a flat?

Tire was flat in Ottawa several decades ago and Canadians driving on rim ever since. Yes, it really is time for a progressive tire CHANGE.  And I know you think so, too. And this is Trans-Canada Hwy not Eisenhower interstates, so it's crucial that we pick a lane and steady as we go.

al-Qa'bong

Judging from this thread, the hardcore Nude Ems must need a big hug.

 

OK, hugs all around.

 

Quote:
I also think it would be great if people who say they're going to ignore each other actually ignore each other.  You know how dumb someone looks when they, in high dudgeon and righteous indignation, state they will no longer read the posts of another, then three posts down quote that person and underscore again how contemptable and ignore-worthy they are.

 

Is it possible that we could mark the change in the tone of babble when "plonking" ended? Granted, plonking is a tad childish, but what's wrong with being childish once in a while?

 

 

martin dufresne

If it was just once in a while, I could live with it. What if we dedicated one day of the week to dysfunctional behaviour? I remember one poster who was especially pugnacious on Friday nights - and not too articulate about it either.

I finally figured he was ripped on Fridays and cut him some slack instead of answering.

 

Coyote

Again, in my view, it comes with actually showing each a little bit of respect. Assuming some honesty and integrity in one another.

On both sides. On all sides.

But getting the next good one is is more fun to some people, I guess.

martin dufresne

And on full moons, we go for collective terminal silliness! (Next one is Sept. 4)

Fidel

Unionist wrote:

Fidel wrote:

Anonymous monikers and without declared political party support. Those are absolutely vital for the m.o. of every self-respecting internet concern troll frequenting progressive forums

The above is precisely the type of Jim Jones Koolaid post which makes my technological suggestion to Michelle utterly essential. Either that, or we actually speak our minds about what people post here. Imagine that scenario!!

I believe I already did. And it put you over the edge apparently.

 

Sven Sven's picture

Lard Tunderin Jeezus wrote:

Once upon a time, when the internet was as young and foolish as I, I posted regularly under my own name in a political forum.

And here I've been thinking that Lard Tunderin Jeezus was your real name. Tongue out

_______________________________________

Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!!

Sven Sven's picture

This merits repeating:

Michelle wrote:

I wonder if it would be possible for people who have fallen into a pattern of really not being able to stand each other and constantly bickering to try to ignore each other.

_______________________________________

Eleutherophobics of the World...Unite!!!

Michelle

I feel very strongly about allowing anonymity on babble, although I understand jrootham's point, and, like him, use my real name here.

The reason I feel very strongly about it is not only because of the type of scenario LTJ outlines above, but also because I think a lot of people might not feel as free to participate or post legitimate political views on babble if they had to use their real names, either because of their employment situation, because they might want to post personal experiences (e.g. that often happens in the feminism forum when women talk about their experiences with abuse) but don't want their real names attached to them, and experiences of other types of oppression.

There have been many times where people have felt uncomfortable and asked me, sometimes in a panic, to change real names to pseudonyms because they're being stalked online, harassed, or they're looking for work and don't want potential employers to read all their (legitimate) political views ahead of time, etc.

For some of us, it's a strong political act to voice our opinions online using our real names, and I think that's commendable.  But not everyone feels free to do that, for various reasons, and I think we'd be missing out on a lot of voices if we told babblers they had to use their real names here.

Michelle

Fidel, we get your point.

I would really like people to stop insulting each other in this thread, and needling each other like this.  It's getting really old, really fast.

Fidel

I dont think real names are necessary either. Who would do it anyway other than someone named jrootham, Jeff House, or Daniel Grice?

What I find really silly is that some anonymous posters only want to be identifiable by their anti-NDPness. How lame is that? No guts no glory. And mostly no integrity whatsoever. It's extraordinary cowardice as far as progressive forums go. Why dont they just pick up a copy of the National Enquirer for all the interest they have in progressive political commentary?

M. Spector M. Spector's picture

Fidel, we used to have another poster around here who continually demanded to know the political affiliations of everyone else who disagreed with him. He was banned for repeated red-baiting.

Please don't repeat that mistake.

Michelle

Just so it's clear - no one is going to be forced to declare a political affiliation on babble.  Thanks for the suggestion, but it's not going to happen.  People are allowed to disagree with the NDP on babble without being forced to declare their support for some other party.  Heck, some of us don't belong to any party at all, vote NDP every election, and are still very critical of them.  Because contrary to some people's beliefs (or wishful thinking), this is not an NDP web site, and you don't have to support the NDP to post here.

Cueball Cueball's picture

I find all this talk about forcing people to use their real names and identify their political affiliations revealing of the real political attitudes of some so called progressive people. Why is this kind of totalitarian measure even being discussed?

Fidel

That's okay, because not for a moment did I believe that anyone should be forced to declare their political allegiance. That would represent a kind of Hitlerization of babble, or a bottom-up McCarthyization of things.

My point about wiki's definition for internet concern trolling is made entirely for the moderators' benefit, and not for those progressive-anonymous posters who also happen to bash the NDP as their progressive contribution to babble discussions. I was warned for trolling just prior to my most recent suspension. And I think the moderators will at least be aware now of what concern trolling is all about when deciding who is trolling and who is reacting.

And absolutely rabble/babble is NOT pro-NDP. That much is crystal clear to us all. But for a non-NDP discussion forum - and one where the federal Liberals arent typically presented in very good light by rabble's highly acclaimed columnists -  the NDP sure is discussed a lot. Wink

martin dufresne

Givn that the NDP is currently the "best bet" for progressives, I find it normal that it be discussed (and challenged) a lot here.

It seems to me we are generally in agreement and that this discussion is going in circles.

 

Fidel

Okay then, we're all NDP babblers. That was easy enough. I'll put a stop order on the show trials now. I wasnt looking forward to writing up all those anonymous names in black ink, and turning everyone over to the NDP's internet feds anyway. As much as I'd like to. bwahahahaha!

Bookish Agrarian

Yet martin, many of the most virtiolic against the NDP rarely ever mention the Liberals or Greens. 

Personally I would argue that they aren't progressive, but I do find curious the regularity of drive by smears against the NDP and NDP activists by the same posters over and over and yet those parties are never mentioned.

And most of those posts are just smears - like I quoted above, they are not substantive criticisms of policy, or tactics, or anything- just silly little baiting smears.  However, when a few posters who identify as NDP members (although who really knows if they are or not)making similar sorts of comments they are chastized for it.  It just seems like an uncouncious double standard.  Sort of like the old story of the parent who ends up teaching a relative and bends over backwards to be doubly hard on them just to prove they aren't favouring them.

For me I look at it this way.  For my entire life I have been putting up with attacks (the kind of attacks you see on new websites) for being involved with the NDP.  So I come to a website that says it is for progressive Canadians and instead of disussing ways to defeat non-progressive forces at the polls or to discuss0-well just issues- a substantial amount of space and energy is taken up with attacking the NDP and attempting to link it to all that is bad in the world.  It makes it a very unwelcoming place for those of us who have decided to channel our activism- for good or ill through the NDP.  Their behavour is dismissed as okay simply because this is not an NDP board.  However, it is a progressive board and NDP activists should not be attacked simply for working within the NDP as part of our activism.  You see it happen in threads about all kinds of things where two or three regular posters will come in and make comments like 'well if you really did like potatoes you wouldn't support the NDP because Obama likes potatoes and so do thong wearers and don't get me started about what Bob Rae did to potatoes 2 decades ago in Ontario."  Well that might be an exageration, but the comments often are totally unrelated to the discussion or topic and they take things off in this other tension filled direction. 

I don't begrude those who choose to channel their activism through other vessels.  I do begrude those who do nothing but sit on the sidelines and piss and moan at others who choose electoral politics, or an NGO or an issue advocacy group though.  However, it often feels like those of us who do channel our activism through the NDP are treated like 2nd class progressives on babble.

genstrike

Cueball wrote:

I find all this talk about forcing people to use their real names and identify their political affiliations revealing of the real political attitudes of some so called progressive people. Why is this kind of totalitarian measure even being discussed?

To be fair, there seems to be only one advocate for each position and these two proposals seem to be going over like a lead balloon.

Fidel

I feel your pain, Bookish Agrarian. And I see things really have advanced for the NDP in the last  10 years or so. Before proliferation of internet forums, the public was exposed to a relentless onslaught of old line party propaganda and nil next to nothing about the NDP in mainstream news media. Like youve experience I'm sure, I can remember a time when we really were opening ourselves up for ridicule by declaring our political allegiance to the NDP. My home town in Northern Ontario was big red and big blue machine by and large. Today it's NDP federally and Liberals relying heavily on the local ethnic vote, and the local paper is contantly covering up for their shortcomings and lack of effectiveness in dealing with real issues affecting the community. The two old line parties have come down a peg or two in the public's eyes since the glory days.

These forums didnt exist at one time, and few old line party supporters knew anything other than what old line party bosses and party drones fed them. They are running scared now and fearful of losing their parties' strangleholds on power. And they know that day will arrive. They still have many advantages over the NDP wrt news media and funding from banks and the well-heeled. And I think that it is a fine tribute the NDP here with babble that there are very few self-described old line party supporters who will openly declare their political allegiance much less try to defend the status quo with the handful of openly NDP posters there are here. Gone are those days when the arrogant ones looked down on us enough to flaunt their old line party credentials. Today it's them who are so embarrassed to admit their political allegiance that they not only hide behind anonymity, they also shy away from being labelled Liberal and Tory as if those are dirty words. All we can really say about that is, good work NDPers! Because where ever there is one good NDPer, the old line partiers will always be outnumbered. cheers BA

Wilf Day

rural - Francesca wrote:
questions sometimes are really just questions but for others, they are a statement of cause.

My favourite beef: when someone asks a question, the odd babbler attacks the question or the questioner's motives, rather than answer the question.

Michelle wrote:
I wonder if it would be possible for people who have fallen into a pattern of really not being able to stand each other and constantly bickering to try to ignore each other. Might be something a lot of us (including me!) could work on, and it would probably go a long way to improving the tone here.

Worth a try.

Coyote wrote:
On the partisan issue, I think people need to step back and consider this equation:

Just because some IS a New Democrat, does not mean they are not progressive; just because someone is NOT a New Democrat, does not mean they are not progressive.

I think it would help if we'd all remind ourselves to avoid blanket statements about each other, and for god's sake give each other the benefit of the doubt. I'm guilty of jumping in too hot and fast, believe me. But maybe we can all start to think of this as a place to share, not do battle.

Very wise words.

Cueball Cueball's picture

Fidel wrote:

That's okay, because not for a moment did I believe that anyone should be forced to declare their political allegiance. That would represent a kind of Hitlerization of babble, or a bottom-up McCarthyization of things.

Well, let me put it to you this way then. I am hardly annonymous to all Babblers. I am actually know a few of them, past and present. I just don't choose to be know to all of them. Why should I? For one thing. most of you (you included) I would not mind having you know who I am. There are some people who read this site who I definitely do not want to know, or have them know me.

Is that clear?

Fidel

Cueball wrote:

Fidel wrote:

That's okay, because not for a moment did I believe that anyone should be forced to declare their political allegiance. That would represent a kind of Hitlerization of babble, or a bottom-up McCarthyization of things.

Well, let me put it to you this way then. I am hardly annonymous to all Babblers. I am actually know a few of them, past and present. I just don't choose to be know to all of them. Why should I? For one thing. most of you (you included) I would not mind having you know who I am. There are some people who read this site who I definitely do not want to know, or have them know me.

Is that clear?

 

As an unmuddied lake?  Clear as an azure sky in the deepest of summer? And I recommend that no one reveal their real identity. It's not a safe thing to be doing no matter what the public forum happens to be. It's risky. But I can't  see the harm for someone like myself to declare political persuasion, because I've never met any other babblers. And if I was to meet with you people in Toronto some day, I still wouldnt care that my politics are out in the open. I have nothing to hide wrt my political convictions. And if my real name is on a blacklist somewhere, then I think we've all lost the game some time ago

 

Michelle

The thing is, Fidel, lots of people don't HAVE political parties they're aligned with.  There are lots of people who have given up on electoral politics and channel their activism elsewhere.  Or people who vote NDP but are very critical of the party.  It happens.  Constantly accusing them of being Liberals, or telling them that they have to affiliate themselves with some fringe party (or assuming that they are affiliated with a fringe party or secretly a Conservative or Liberal operative, or whatever), is often inaccurate, and off-topic.

That said, I also agree with Bookish Agrarian, that it's possible that people who are involved with the NDP suffer a number of "cheap shots" from those who are critical of the NDP.  But I've seen enough cheap shots from some of the NDP true believers on the site towards those who are critical to know that it isn't just a one-way street.

Caissa

I've just read the thread from top to bottom. Thank you to everyone for your contributions. Are we any closer to identifying what needs to be done to make Babble a more civil society?

Slumberjack

This is one of the most civil political discussions we've had in awhile.

Lard Tunderin Jeezus Lard Tunderin Jeezus's picture

jrootham wrote:

Declaring political alignment is irrelevant.  Posting under your own name is not.

Once upon a time, when the internet was as young and foolish as I, I posted regularly under my own name in a political forum. As time went on, someone became obsessed with me. He began threatening me frequently with vivid descriptions of the violent acts he had in store. He even involved my children, threatening them.

That forum was shut down around that time. BTW, the above-mentioned violent troll has appeared several times here under a variety of monikers. 

I don't think anyone should have to re-live my experience in order to serve someone's sense of decorum.

edited for factual correctness

Diogenes Diogenes's picture

One of my favorite sites is StackOverflow.com

It's a Question/Answer site for programmers that harnesses the 'wisdom-of-the-crowd' model most beautifully.

The idea is that you can ask a question or answer a question. You must register (become a member) to ask or answer a question. This can be quite anonymous.

Every member has a reputation score.  You earn reputation points (or lose them) when other members vote your answer up or down.

Not all members are equal.  You have to earn reputation points before you can even vote the posts of others up or down (or even comment).

Reputation has its privileges. Earn enough reputation points and you can edit the question (to make it clearer),  or even delete the post (always with a comment).

A brilliant nuance is that if YOU vote someone down, it costs you a reputation point along with the loss in reputation the poster suffers. Praise is always more difficult to come by than scorn in forums like these, so putting a small price on scorn beside the premium on praise, and a very interesting model emerges.  Few are willing to sacrifice reputation except those that have enough and are willing to say "enough-is-enough".

People love praise and reputation.  The best answers are the ones that have the most thought, effort and insight attached. Posters fiercely compete for the most votes. Ask a stupid question, one that has been asked and answered many times before?  You find youself sinking.  Trash talking an innocent answer or opposing point of view?  Just ask Winnifred in Wonderland.

I would love to see some kind of similar voting/member reputation system implemented in in Babble.  It would change the dynamics entirely.

 

martin dufresne

BA: ...many of the most virtiolic against the NDP rarely ever mention the Liberals or Greens

This seems normal since we have less expectations of them.

 

Diogenes Diogenes's picture

Caissa wrote:

I've just read the thread from top to bottom. Thank you to everyone for your contributions. Are we any closer to identifying what needs to be done to make Babble a more civil society?

A voting system thumbs-up/thumbs down.

A member reputation system, reputation earned or lost by other members voting.

Voting thumbs-up on a post or topic earns you nothing (0).

Voting a post down cost both you (-1) and the offending poster (-2). A reason must be given with a thumbs-down vote.

Privileges are conferred on members according to the reputation they have earned.

Reputation points are earned (+3) or lost (-2) by others voting on your contributions.

A minimum reputation must be earned before a member can vote.

The numbers in parentheses are point values for simplicity's sake.  They may not work in practise for maximum audience participation, which is one of the goals, but a variation of this works really well for StackOverflow.com.

-Looking for an honest man

Bookish Agrarian

Michelle wrote:

That said, I also agree with Bookish Agrarian, that it's possible that people who are involved with the NDP suffer a number of "cheap shots" from those who are critical of the NDP.  But I've seen enough cheap shots from some of the NDP true believers on the site towards those who are critical to know that it isn't just a one-way street.

I wouldn't suggest it is a one way street.  I would suggest that one is far more tolerated than the other.

Weltschmerz

I will criticize ideas and behaviours, but unless you continually post things anathemic to me, I will not make any assumptions about you as a person.  I can disagree with you and still respect you.

melovesproles

Quote:
I wouldn't suggest it is a one way street.  I would suggest that one is far more tolerated than the other.

I can't think of an example where putting down the Liberal or Conservative parties wasn't tolerated on babble.  The Greens more often than not have "the so called" preceding them when they are mentioned by regular posters.  Criticism of political parties(including 'cheap shots') is and should be tolerated.  The only difference is that there are a lot of NDPers on this board and they often take it personally.  Its unfortunate that feelings have to be hurt but I don't see what could be done about it without sacrificing the integrity of the board.

Bookish Agrarian

That is one poster- who has been taken to task, including by NDP babblers, for doing so.

Question someones obvious affliation, but unclaimed, to another party and you get chastized for doing so.  Dismiss someone as just an NDP partisan and that's okay.

I am not blaming anyone.  I think it is just human nature for the following to happen.  People act like this is some sort of NDP board, or I am an NDP supporter.  I will show we are not- knock it off ______(NDP babbler).  All of which I think is totally unconscious.  We are all human and it would be hard to check that at the door.

It doesn't help that some of the NDP posters - like some of the constant NDP bashers are sort of broken records.  But what happens is we all get tarred with their behaviour when they are only acting as individiuals.  And because they behave badly sometimes it is seen as permission to treat others poorly.

Personally I think short lock outs all around- regardless of who started it - would be an effective tool.

Boom Boom Boom Boom's picture

My good friend Caissa mentioned on Facebook that my name came up in this discussion, so I read this thread, and the previous one, just now. It was ungracious of me to leave in such a pissed-off fashion, so I apologise for that.

Secondly, regarding the NDP, the reality that this is not an NDP board has finally sunk in, but could we at least acknowledge that the NDP is not our common enemy?

Thirdly, I'd like to thank George for his kind comments - I think today is the first time in quite a while that I've had to blush!Embarassed

 

As George mentioned in the previous thread, I'm extremely busy - I had to replant most of my veggie garden, because our terrible (cold) weather for most of the summer ruined my crops, and I'm fighting a never-ending war against weeds (and blackflies!). Finally, I'm starting some minor renovations to the house, so I'll continue to be busy for a while. Oh - and I have to be airlifted out soon out for hospital treatment, as I have a serious medical emergency (throat spasms that make swallowing extremely difficult - the specialist in Sept-Iles wants to stick a tube down my throat to see what the problem is). I'll consider coming back on a regular basis perhaps in the fall.

Locally, there was a serious accident on the new wharf project, and a good friend is hospitalized with his leg broken in three places - ouch! But the wharf project remains on schedule, and it's gorgeous.

Atik Construction finally got the contract for Route #138 - they're building a road outside this tiny, isolated community that one day in the future will connect us to the Quebec provincial road network - but not the rest of the Lower North Shore, for now.

I love this place, how could I stay away for long? Innocent See you in the fall.

writer writer's picture

Yay Boom Boom! Good luck with how your garden grows.

Pages

Topic locked