A bit of a brouhaha going on in the comment section of one of Wordbones's posts. My opinion is that Mr. Howard is being attacked unfairly for his voluntary role in a development dispute. The Redevelopment opponents are, rightly, annoyed at being constantly referred to as "nuts" and "yahoos," and appear to be taking it out on a convenient target. It is amazing how virulent this discussion has become. An interesting observation that is secondary to the heart of that discussion is whether the so-called "nuts" are outliers, or whether the promoters "doth protest too much" as far as this opposition is concerned. As I've noted before, I don't get why proponents of a 30 year plan would find the need to ridicule the referendum effort if they are sure that most people agree with them and are enthusiastic about the project. The only thing I can think of is that they think these opponents can mobilize better than they can, and therefore have a non-representative body of voters shoot this plan down.
All I do know is that Civility appears to be the goal, unless you fail to agree.