posted by Mike Madison at 2:05 PM /
Discussions of the Mt. Lebanon School Board sometimes seem to bring out the worst in blog comments, especially among those who choose to remain anonymous. Please remember that Joe and I moderate comments. I just rejected a comment, submitted on the post regarding televising board meetings, that made a very pointed personal claim regarding a member of the School Board. Anonymity may provide a shield from retaliation (I remain skeptical of that claim, but I'll accept it for now), but anonymity should not be a sword for personal attacks.
If you want to discuss whether or not the School District should have broadcast the meeting video as a matter of course, that's fine.
If you want to discuss whether the School Board should have voted to renew the Athletic Director's contract on the cusp of a new Superintendent's assuming office, that's fine.
If you want to discuss the stresses of parenting or coaching a student athlete in a high profile, high pressure school district, that's fine.
If you want to beat up on the integrity of a member of the Board or administration, that's pushing the limits of my patience, at least if you're posting anonymously. There has been some of that here over the last few weeks, and probably a little too much. (If you hold public office or hold an appointment of public significance, you have to expect that some criticism goes with the territory.) Going forward, I'm going to review anonymous comments more carefully. I'll still approve anonymous comments, but I will be more generous with anonymous comments about policies and programs and a lot less generous with anonymous comments about character and personality. Save those for your favorite coffee shop or jogging or walking route. Comments with real names attached, on all topics, will get more generous treatment, though I'll still be reading carefully.
If you want to discuss whether or not the School District should have broadcast the meeting video as a matter of course, that's fine.
If you want to discuss whether the School Board should have voted to renew the Athletic Director's contract on the cusp of a new Superintendent's assuming office, that's fine.
If you want to discuss the stresses of parenting or coaching a student athlete in a high profile, high pressure school district, that's fine.
If you want to beat up on the integrity of a member of the Board or administration, that's pushing the limits of my patience, at least if you're posting anonymously. There has been some of that here over the last few weeks, and probably a little too much. (If you hold public office or hold an appointment of public significance, you have to expect that some criticism goes with the territory.) Going forward, I'm going to review anonymous comments more carefully. I'll still approve anonymous comments, but I will be more generous with anonymous comments about policies and programs and a lot less generous with anonymous comments about character and personality. Save those for your favorite coffee shop or jogging or walking route. Comments with real names attached, on all topics, will get more generous treatment, though I'll still be reading carefully.
Labels: blog administration
7 Comments:
I always assumed that you didn't post things that had no merit (personal attacks with named individuals)
Did this just start happening?
It doesn't happen a lot, but it happens more often with School Board-related posts, and Joe and I have always tried to keep things clean, as it were, when it comes to personal attacks.
The difficulty is that policing the line doesn't involve a rule that's black-and-white, easy-to-see-and-follow. Comments can be mean-spirited and not constructive even if they don't name names, and comments that name names can sometimes be helpful. I think that we haven't been as active as we might be in filtering out unhelpful, potentially damaging whining. Undoubtedly, some of that will continue to appear, but we'll be reading more skeptically. Every comment will be read on its own merits.
Of course, when I discourage anonymity I'm hoping to *elevate* the tone of the comments. Obviously, I can't control how people take the hint. This morning I rejected a signed comment that took aim at a specific school official. Maybe the insult was justified. Maybe not. But neither I nor any casual reader of the blog has any way to evaluate the issue.
Poor air quality had long plagued the indoor Swim Center causing severe discomfort for competitors and spectators alike and resulting in the facility being routinely shut out of hosting major swim meets. For many years, the center waged a losing battle brought on by problems associated with undesirable chlorine by-products. The center, training ground for the highly-ranked swim teams, suffered from high levels of chloramines in its indoor 333,000-gallon, 10-lane pool, which caused irritated eyes, skin and sinuses, and foul-smelling air inside the facility.
The 25-yard by 25-meter competitive pool, is used by 600 to 800 swimmers every day The center recently completed a $2.5 million renovation that added additional bleachers, offices, classrooms and weight rooms. Long before renovations began, center management had been struggling to find a permanent solution to chlorine-based odors and corrosion.
An overwhelming chlorine smell had plagued the center since it opened. Initially, bromine was used for water sanitation in the pool, but center staff found the chemical sanitizer could not keep up with bather loads. A switch to calcium hypochlorite improved water quality and clarity, but air-quality problems associated with undesirable by-products of chlorine persisted.
"Air quality was so poor that during workouts our swimmers had to walk outside for fresh air, in fact, our own athletic director could only stay in the pool area for 10 to 15 minutes at a time."
High combined chlorine levels in the pool water was the source of the problem, and fluctuating bather loadings made it difficult to maintain balanced water chemistry in the pool.
"When you walked out on deck in the morning, within three steps beyond the door you knew what kind of day it was going to be air quality-wise: bad or real bad, And I'm probably as much or more immune to chlorine irritation than many people because I've been around it for so long—being a competitive swimmer and being a competitive swim coach for almost 20 years. But this was very intense. Lifeguards at times could not perform a rotation because their eyes were watering badly. Parents came in and sat in the bleachers for a few minutes and then had to leave and sit out in the lobby because they could not handle the chloramines in the air."
Center management took a number of steps to try to alleviate the problem, including a regimen of shocking the pool (superchlorination) as well as increasing air flow inside the facility in an attempt to dilute the bad air. During the center's hours of operation of 6 a.m. to 9 p.m., the double doors leading to the outside remained open and fans blew air straight out, causing excessive energy consumption. Despite these efforts, air quality inside the facility remained poor.
The maintenance manager for the center sums up the problem as one of ultra-wide swings in water chemistry.
"Pool water chemistry always seemed to be either just right or in real bad shape and needed to be shocked immediately," he says. "There really never seemed to be any middle ground between those two conditions."
Even the dehumidification system's condensate displayed high levels of combined chlorine. Continued chloramine-saturated air was translating into shortened equipment life and higher maintenance inside the center due to corrosion of pool and facility hardware.
"High corrosion rates, due to the high chloramines in the air, demanded a lot of work," Our stainless-steel components were rusting and had to be cleaned daily. Even the metal frames that hold the filters for our air handling system were corroding out."
Another casualty brought about by the poor air quality was that the center was routinely shut out of hosting major swim meets. Teams training at the facility had won three state team championships in the past four years, even though the center ran its swim meets in 10 lanes (rather than in six or eight lanes) and was an attractive, new facility, it hosted no meets the first year it was open, due to the poor air quality inside the facility.
In all pool environments, swimmers bring organic-based nitrogen substances to the water, and these contain complex substances that release by-products into the water as they oxidize. These by-products impose a demand on chlorine. Conventional chlorine control systems typically respond slowly to sudden changes in demand, bringing about under- or over-chlorination and prompting the formation of chloramines that can bring poor air quality in indoor pool environments.
"When a new system was first proposed, I thought no way, For one thing, it sounded too good to be true. Also, we would be the first facility in Texas to install this new technology, which made me that much more apprehensive."
The water balance was optimized at startup of the new system, and within a week and a half of operating (and after years of almost never experiencing chloramine-free air), the Swim Center's air-quality problems were solved.
The new system controls the rate of oxidation and also the types of oxidation reactions that take place in pool water. In doing so, the system is designed to feed the optimum concentration of oxidizer in order to prevent the formation of volatile chloramines.
The system also calculates the Index, which indicates the corrosive tendencies of the water and computes the required chemical addition needed to properly balance pool water. The benefits of maintaining the proper Index include reduced maintenance costs associated with extending equipment life, cleaning pool surfaces and resurfacing of the pool.
In addition, combined chlorine levels in the dehumidification system's condensate are now undetectable, translating to less problems with corrosion. The new system consistently maintains combined chlorine levels in the pool water. The improvement in water and air quality has eliminated the need for superchlorination.
Now that the air has cleared, the Grapevine-Colleyville Swim Center is getting the respect it deserves as a first-class site for regional swim meets.
"We bid to host seven meets in 2000 and were awarded all seven, we had no opposition," he says. "We're now running great meets here."
If anonymous signatures were not allowed, the blog civility would be considerably higher. Since anonymity is permitted (kudos to you, Mike, for allowing it) then you, Mike, have the right and obligation to weed out personal attacks, slanderous statements, etc.
Being a public official in this community is tough enough - anonymous emails, phone calls and blogs are maddening because you can't respond on a one on one basis. Every official has a published email address and telephone number. They are not in hiding. Give them the courtesy of a dialogue with you when you are upset.
Ask yourself how you would prefer to engage in debate if you held public office.
Mike, I sent a blog on Wednesday,6/20. it dealt with the AD and ASS't AD, salaries and the position in general, anh how it is handled in other districts. All of the contents are factual and I have the documentation to support the contents. is there a reason why it isn't on Blog-Lebo. I signed my name and address.
W.C. Schmeltzer
721 Brafferton Drive
15228
W.C.,
I don't recall seeing that comment. Do you know which post you were commenting on? It would be fine to post it again. Or, you can email it directly to me, and I'll post it on your behalf.
Mike
Post a Comment
<< Home