The Feb. 1 item, “Golf course survey puts spotlight on trails,” errs in describing the informal poll as “official” and as a “vote” — a word used four …
This item is available in full to subscribers.
We have recently launched a new and improved website. To continue reading, you will need to either log into your subscriber account, or purchase a new subscription.
If you had an active account on our previous website, then you have an account here. Simply reset your password to regain access to your account.
If you did not have an account on our previous website, but are a current print subscriber, click here to set up your website account.
Otherwise, click here to view your options for subscribing.
* Having trouble? Call our circulation department at 360-385-2900, or email our support.
Please log in to continue |
|
The Feb. 1 item, “Golf course survey puts spotlight on trails,” errs in describing the informal poll as “official” and as a “vote” — a word used four times in the short article.
The responses were either collected online, or via colored stickers placed on nearly 20 suggested alternative options displayed at the Open House on Jan. 11. It was not possible to prevent individuals from placing multiple stickers on just one or two choices, nor possible to prevent someone from using the online poll multiple times, for example by using multiple email addresses.
Real “votes” involve registration and are not limited to just those who can attend an evening public meeting or who have some internet technical skill.
The only thing “official” about this polling is that it was directed by persons employed by the city. The ultimate outcome of the golf course/Mountain View process will be influenced, but not dictated by the results of the informal polling you reported.
Forest Shomer
PORT TOWNSEND
