Why the Sounder policy on letters to the editor is not carried over to the online comments on the Sounder’s Web site? In order to have a letter published in the paper, one must include both a name and an address. Online, comments can be made under an online nickname, allowing the author a cloak of anonymity. This has allowed some folks to cast aspersions that are both baseless and disturbing.

Such was the case this week, when “Bela8ted” began what has become a long and troubling discourse on the validity of the “Getting to Yes” meetings (called to identify possible solutions to support our school facility needs). “Bela8ted” lambasted the meetings as secret,  and accused the process of being another School Board attempt to ignore the will of the voters.

Would “Bela8ted” have been so brutal in his condemnation if his identity was attached to his commentary? Would readers have had a different opinion if they recognized him and knew of his history as a former school employee?

One of the challenges of living in a small community is that, while we all may not share political or religious beliefs, we all share the same small island.  The diversity of our opinions and our experiences can be an extraordinary benefit to the health of our community if we share them respectfully. But when we anonymously snipe and spew, it degrades our discourse. I encourage the Sounder to instate the same policies it follows in print for their online content as well. It would help us all to maintain our civility.

And, for the record, I am attending the “Getting to Yes” meetings, even though I can think of many more enjoyable ways to spend a couple spring Saturdays. The voters did vote a bond down twice. But that did not resolve the very real, structural issues facing our schools.  The School Board was taken to task for not maintaining the high school building well. They now have a $900,000 matching grant to complete the much needed maintenance, plumbing, and HVAC replacement for the elementary school building.  Unfortunately, because of the no vote, they do not have the funding to match the grant. As a community member, I am concerned that we not hamstring the folks we elected to do a job.  We owe it to the community, and to our children, to find a solution. Voting no did not resolve the issues, it just postponed a resolution.

Hilary Canty

Olga