Bill Gilman
-
The Basics
-
Bill on Patch
-
More Stuff
Comments
-
On the blog post 19,388 cable TV Subscribers in Medford in 2012, and their rights...Your Rights
-
On the blog post 19,388 cable TV Subscribers in Medford in 2012, and their rights...Your Rights
-
On the blog post 19,388 cable TV Subscribers in Medford in 2012, and their rights...Your Rights
Bill Gilman
2:47 pm on Monday, June 17, 2013
Sam, same rules apply to you. Stop with the name-calling. Several posts have been deleted from this thread.
-
On the blog post 19,388 cable TV Subscribers in Medford in 2012, and their rights...Your Rights
Bill Gilman
12:51 pm on Monday, June 17, 2013
Both of you ... you are grown men ... you can make your points without name calling. And you can make your points on their merits without trying to discredit the integrity of the other person. I have faith in both of you.
-
On the blog post 19,388 cable TV Subscribers in Medford in 2012, and their rights...Your Rights
Bill Gilman
12:15 pm on Monday, June 17, 2013
Arthur, I just wanted to clarify a point you made in your comment. While cable companies can, as you say, pass along the cost of doing business to the consumers. A savvy bargaining team can, in practical terms, prevent that from happening. They can make sure that the rate payers are not absorbing the costs the cable company agrees to pay out. If that were not the case, a cable company would be willing to any terms, knowing they didnt really have to foot the bill.
Of course, this can only take place during contract negotiations. As you've pointed out, the city is bound by whatever the present contract terms are. -
On the blog post Building an Access Television Station for the city of Medford
Bill Gilman
9:10 am on Monday, June 17, 2013
OK guys let's tone down the rhetoric. You've been going around and around here, pretty much rehashing the same points. Enough. You don't like each other and you clearly disagree on the issues relating to public access TV in Medford. But you guys just slamming each other back and forth does not further the debate.
The salient point is not who is honorable or who is truthful. The point is how can the people have the best public access TV possible. -
On the blog post Building an Access Television Station for the city of Medford
Bill Gilman
1:38 pm on Sunday, June 16, 2013
Arthur, Local Voices is an open forum for the free exchange of opinions. It is not for any publication to make judgement values, nor to decide who is right and who is wrong.
-
On the article Former Gov. Paul Cellucci Dies
Bill Gilman
8:40 am on Sunday, June 9, 2013
Rachel, just to correct you on the doctrines the Christian faith. We are not judged by how "good" or "bad" we are. In point of fact, no one is "good" enough to earn a place in heaven. But if we have accepted Jesus Christ as Lord and Savior we are forgiven for any sins we have committed and are welcomed into heaven. Again, just clarifying what we, as Christians, believe.
-
On the blog post Gun Owners Action League Supports Bill To Remove License For Pepper Spray
Bill Gilman
4:53 pm on Friday, June 7, 2013
Actually Philip, by instructing to turn the other cheek, walk a second mile, give your shirt and well as your cloak, etc. he is saying don't defend yourself. Certainly don't strike back. It's hard to love your enemy while throwing a punch, firing a gun or dropping a bomb. But as I said before, you are well within your rights as an American to defend yourself with a gun.
-
On the blog post Gun Owners Action League Supports Bill To Remove License For Pepper Spray
Bill Gilman
4:50 pm on Friday, June 7, 2013
I'll grant you that Bob. I certainly concede I was speaking only for myself and my faith.
Bill Gilman
6:44 pm on Monday, June 17, 2013
Just deleted it, as well as Arthur's response (since it was affiliated with the original comment and would look odd by itself).
No Joe, it is not a problem to threaten a lawsuit but it's bad form.
It is a problem to allege criminal conduct. Can't be doing that here.