Our Comment of the Week this week is nice and simple: it’s just one resident communicating to another and the rest of us, of course while recalling a special moment.
And it’s all in the context of a story about a calendar created to preserve a bit of Red Bank history while raising a few bucks for a local charity.
That’s community, right?
Some weeks, the pickings are better than others, and this past week saw a good number of posts that might merit the Comment of the Week spotlight.
A couple of commenters, for example, made a strong case in calling on the borough of Red Bank to change the name of Drs. James Parker Boulevard back to West Bergen Place, seeing as how the borough government itself isn’t consistent in using the current name. Those appeared beneath our article about a detour on what even redbankgreen called “West Bergen Place” instead of Drs. James Parker Boulevard.
This week’s Comment of the Week was posted last Tuesday by “Pat.”
Pat’s comment was part of an exchange about a photo redbangkreeen ran from the wedding of a couple who are members of the Lincroft fire and first aid squads.
The headline over the photo was “LINCROFT PAIR START A FIRE.” Did they ever.
What a pleasure it is to have so many choices for this week’s Comment of the Week.
Among other places, we found posts to admire beneath our articles on the possible Shrewsbury deer hunt, the feature on the return of Red Bank Pizza after two years’ absence, and the Rumson trash-pickup coverage.
The very publication of the article, which included three photographs from the funeral, miffed a couple of readers, while others saw it as as respectful.
But a reader who identified herself as Claudia stayed away from that debate. Instead, she took the opportunity provided by the comments to deliver an overdue thank-you to Lehnert, who served as a Fair Haven police officer for 14 years before retiring in 2006.
This week’s spotlight comment comes from Jen Gallagher, posted under an article about the proposed Fair Haven ordinance that would have required property owners who are denied tree-removal permits by the borough arborist to notify their neighbors when an appeal is filed with to the town council.
Hopeless idealists that we are, redbankgreen today brings out of mothballs an effort to encourage civil discourse in its reader comments.
Comment of the Week, which we stopped running after three months a little more than a year ago, is back.
Why did we stop? Not sure, really. Perhaps because it seemed to attract very little attention, and did nothing to stop the nearly incessant flow of the kind of comments we hate to read. It fell through the cracks one week, and the idea of bringing it back generated nothing more than a shrug here.
So why bring it back now?
The national debate on healthcare insurance flooded redbankgreen‘s comments section last week, providing an abundance of strong candidates for this week’s spotlight.
The back-and-forth was spirited and civil, and perhaps surprisingly, not completely partisan. But there was no mistaking the passions on the various sides, including several commenters who called for less partisanship.
We’re splitting the ideological baby by making two selections for this edition of Comment of the Week.
Once again, we’re glad to see so many good candidates for Comment of the Week in our files from last week. Thanks to everyone who posted something.
The comments we highlight here need not be shining examples of argument and the art of persuasion. Spelling, grammar and punctuation aren’t all that important, either. What we’re looking for is civility and a sincere interest in contributing to discussion of public issues.
The comment below was posted by “Lesley” beneath our article about the Cedar Crossing affordable-housing project getting $400,000 in a construction grant from the Federal Home Loan Bank of New York.
We had at least three spirited debates running simultaneously on redbankgreen last week. It was good to see this site being utilized in that way.
The issues included the question, posed by a reader, of whether there should be speed bumps/speed humps on Waverly Place (this debate actually carried over from the prior week); the wisdom of Red Bank having allowed a photo shoot of a staged accident to slow traffic on Broad Street for most of a day; and whether Fair Haven should pay $1.2 million for a piece of waterfront property and turn it into a small park.
In all the back and forth there were at least five or six comments that might have been spotlighted in this space, which is dedicated to calling out thoughtful and civil commentary. So a big thanks is in order to all those readers who contributed in that vein.
The comment below stands out, we thought, for the sense of history and emotion it evoked.
Last week’s article about a plan by Red Bank to install more 4-way stops took a detour.
The discussion in the redbankgreen comments area turned to speed bumps and speed humps apparently, there’s a difference and their impacts on the values of nearby properties.
From a reader who identifies himself or herself as ‘Newcomer,” here’s this week’s selection as comment of the week: