2 thoughts on “A Nicely Balanced Letter to Editor”
R.T.O.
There is nothing balanced about this letter.
When the author wrote
“I will resist the urge to take sides in Sam and Maria Farran’s Pyrrhic victory over their homeowners association because both sides showed a lack of judgment.”
“Some would say that hydrogen cyanide is a delicious and necessary part of the human diet, but others claim it is a toxic and dangerous substance. The truth must therefore be somewhere in between.”
“Bob says we should buy a computer. Sue says we shouldn’t. Therefore, the best solution is to compromise and buy half a computer.”
“Should array indices start at 0 or 1? My compromise of 0.5 was rejected without, I thought, proper consideration.” — Stan Kelly-Bootle
“The choice of 48 bytes as the ATM cell payload size, as a compromise between the 64 bytes proposed by parties from the United States and the 32 bytes proposed by European parties; the compromise was made for entirely political reasons, since it did not technically favor either of the parties.”
“The fact that one is confronted with an individual who strongly argues that slavery is wrong and another who argues equally strongly that slavery is perfectly legitimate in no way suggests that the truth must be somewhere in the middle.”
But the rest of his letter is the usual ad nauseam talking points of the H.O.A. industry; that things would be better if only the homeowners would Get Involved™ and Become Informed™, which is the last thing the H.O.A. industry really wants.
But I realized the author was full of ***t when he wrote
“Fortunately, with the number of law firms specializing in homeowner association law increasing, more community-centric lawyers are beginning to appear on the scene.”
There is nothing “community-centric” about the H.O.A. attorney industry, which is concerned with creating billable hours and foreclosing on homeowners so the H.O.A. attorney’s can get rich at the expense of everyone else. H.O.A. attorneys are some of the most sociopathic people in America today, making other parasitic attorneys look good by comparison.
I’m disappointed that you were fooled into believing that Ed Mulrenin wrote a “balanced” letter. The reason the homeowners’ victory was Pyrrhic was not because of a lack of judgment on the part of the Farrans (as Mulrenin claims), but because as a corporation H.O.A.s are a defective product.
Like the face-hugging parasite from the movie Alien, it’s impossible to take action against an H.O.A. corporation without harming the host.
Actually, I’m going to agree with you on just about every point. I probably charged out of the gate using the word, ‘balance’, because so many reporters (and letters to the editor) refuse to dig into what’s really going on in some of these hell holes.
There is nothing balanced about this letter.
When the author wrote
he committed the logical fallacy of “argument to moderation”
Actually, I’m going to agree with you on just about every point. I probably charged out of the gate using the word, ‘balance’, because so many reporters (and letters to the editor) refuse to dig into what’s really going on in some of these hell holes.