My god damned city west cell phone is pooched AGAIN…30min delays on the delivery of texts and no calling ability.
Am I expierincing this on my own or is anyone else having issues?
now my freaking HD channels are poooched also…WTF>>>
I noticed this weekend past that the internet service seemed particularly slow as well (again), made watching Netflix all but impossible.
Though if we take the advice of the Northern View that’s just the way it has to be.
“So when people ask why the City hasn’t sold CityWest, my answer is ‘why would they?’ Why put dozens of people out on the street in a tough economy simply so people may be able browse or text faster?”
Sorry to hear that, mcsash! It is exactly for your stated reasons that I switched to Rogers over two years ago. My smart phone has very few issues (only once has it dropped a few texts). I was an early adopter with Star Choice (now Shaw), my signal is always clear with good HD.
[quote=“mcsash”]My god damned city west cell phone is pooched AGAIN…30min delays on the delivery of texts and no calling ability.
Am I expierincing this on my own or is anyone else having issues?
now my freaking HD channels are poooched also…WTF>>>[/quote]
Blame it on the wife, she probably dropped it 
It’s not just you. I get Rogers and Citywest customers texts either a half hour later or the next day.
At least I got a to the point comment in before they closed the comments section at Northern View…
x
[quote=“DHCollins”]At least I got a to the point comment in before they closed the comments section at Northern View…
x[/quote]
What the hell kind of newspaper closes off the comments on what should be a controversial topic?
Surprised they let you In at all!
[quote=“Smurfette”]
[quote=“DHCollins”]At least I got a to the point comment in before they closed the comments section at Northern View…
x[/quote]
What the hell kind of newspaper closes off the comments on what should be a controversial topic?
Surprised they let you In at all![/quote]
This editorial just goes to prove the old saying “There is no cure for stupidity”.
This editor would have felt right at home sitting around with the good ole boys as they talked about supporting their local buggy whip factory against them new fangled loud and smell horseless carriages. The reason this keeps coming up every election is that a growing number of taxpayers are saying that using municipal assets for a make work project is not the role of our city government. Maybe someday our elected officials will get that memo.
[quote=“Speakuppr”]
What the hell kind of newspaper closes off the comments on what should be a controversial topic?
Surprised they let you In at all!
This editorial just goes to prove the old saying “There is no cure for stupidity”.
This editor would have felt right at home sitting around with the good ole boys as they talked about supporting their local buggy whip factory against them new fangled loud and smell horseless carriages. The reason this keeps coming up every election is that a growing number of taxpayers are saying that using municipal assets for a make work project is not the role of our city government. Maybe someday our elected officials will get that memo.[/quote]
The Northern View should go back through the Daily News Archives they inherited upon the purchase of the Daily, Leanne Ritchie did some very good reporting on the trials and tribulations of CityWest, during her time at the paper.
For those looking to see if we’re any better off today than three or four years ago her past work is required reading.
If nothing else it might help the Northern View adopt something other than the hey we’re with you CityWest approach to (ahem) journalism.
[quote=“Smurfette”]
The Northern View should go back through the Daily News Archives they inherited upon the purchase of the Daily, Leanne Ritchie did some very good reporting on the trials and tribulations of CityWest, during her time at the paper.
For those looking to see if we’re any better off today than three or four years ago her past work is required reading.
If nothing else it might help the Northern View adopt something other than the hey we’re with you CityWest approach to (ahem) journalism.[/quote]
Maybe this is a sequel to the old series…“Citizens get the politicians they deserve” only it’s been updated to “Readers get the journalism they deserve”.
I agree that it’s interesting that a newspaper that uses the social media like Hacking the Main Frame to promote itself but doesn’t have the cojones to keep the comment section on this editorial open for public comment.
Pretty weak Knees for an editor… but than maybe they’re worried Mad Jack may take offense…
CityWest is looking for feedback on the quality of their service and all that.
citywest.ca/latest_news/cust … ion_survey
Ready, Set, Go.
Hi guys, Shaun here.
Turning off the commenting wasn’t something done on this end, and not something I’m that keen on. Was a bit choked it was turned of to be honest. Talked to our tech guys down south and it’s a default in the website programming where comments are disabled on stories five days after their posted. That has changed for future stories on the web, unfortunately too late for this one but a learning experience for sure, as I’m not a fan of closing off discussion on any discussion on the website.
As for the editorial, I personally stand by it as it is my opinion on the matter. I don’t see faster browsing speeds as justification for losing dozens of well paying jobs in a community that is still economically rebounding. And having lived in Fort St. John and Terrace, I don’t see Telus or Bell as having better customer service by any means. If you saw me on the streets I’d tell you the same thing.
I also think there’s a difference between an opinion piece, such as an editorial, and journalism, such as an article. An opinion piece reflects one person’s opinion, journalism is fact based. This wasn’t an article, it was an opinion.
Anywho, enjoy the conversation and the feedback and apologize for the commenting snafu.
Can you not just repost the story on your website and allow comments, would be interesting to see if the topic attracts attention among your readers?
While I understand the difference between editorial and reporting, unless you follow up the editorial with a journalistic piece that explores all aspects of the CityWest story (see Leanne Ritchies work of past) then the editorial, while reflecting your opinion, deflects more into cheerleading.
While we’re at it, I note that on the skeena.org discussion board that a few of the would be councillors are reflecting on a recent information session hosted by CityWest, does the paper have any plans to outline the discussion at those sessions?
disqus.com/guest/60f61d7536d6922 … a164b4680/
disqus.com/guest/7f40922f98c1545 … 9c39ef73a/
skeena.org/2011/10/christo-holmes/
Seems like the folks at CityWest were rather successful at pushing their talking points to the would be councillors, many of whom seem inclined to share your editorial option.
Yet the folks that still in the end pay the CityWest bills and subscribe to their various services still don’t really have an open and balanced look at the issue.
Thanks for replying on the topic, always good to hear back from those observe the community.
[quote=“Smurfette”]The Northern View should go back through the Daily News Archives they inherited upon the purchase of the Daily, Leanne Ritchie did some very good reporting on the trials and tribulations of CityWest, during her time at the paper.
For those looking to see if we’re any better off today than three or four years ago her past work is required reading.
If nothing else it might help the Northern View adopt something other than the hey we’re with you CityWest approach to (ahem) journalism.[/quote]
FYI, when Leanne wrote her last story on the CityWest situation, she was asked to rewrite it six times. Realizing she would not be able to get the story into print, Leanne quit in frustration.
Good call on reposting the editorial Smurfette. It can now be found at
thenorthernview.com/opinion/133450683.html
I didn’t archive the other one as it would then lose the comment posted on it.
As for the meeting with the councillor candidates, we weren’t invited as media but it’s something we’ll be following up on this week. Also imagine CityWest will be a topic of discussion/contention at tonight’s all-candidates forum (subtle reminder).
[quote=“TheNorthernView”]Good call on reposting the editorial Smurfette. It can now be found at
thenorthernview.com/opinion/133450683.html
I didn’t archive the other one as it would then lose the comment posted on it.
As for the meeting with the councillor candidates, we weren’t invited as media but it’s something we’ll be following up on this week. Also imagine CityWest will be a topic of discussion/contention at tonight’s all-candidates forum (subtle reminder).[/quote]
Thank you for reposting that, it will be interesting to see if it generates any discussion on the topic (unless of course folks here are just plain tired of it all)
For those that want to find more information on the CityWest debate, I’m sure that somewhere in the archives, at the library etc, are back issues or links to past articles of the Leanne Ritchie era of the Daily News, finding those items might be beneficial to the discussion.
Especially in the context of Soggy’s comments above.
[quote=“S_Thomas”]Hi guys, Shaun here.
Turning off the commenting wasn’t something done on this end, and not something I’m that keen on. Was a bit choked it was turned of to be honest. Talked to our tech guys down south and it’s a default in the website programming where comments are disabled on stories five days after their posted. That has changed for future stories on the web, unfortunately too late for this one but a learning experience for sure, as I’m not a fan of closing off discussion on any discussion on the website.
As for the editorial, I personally stand by it as it is my opinion on the matter. I don’t see faster browsing speeds as justification for losing dozens of well paying jobs in a community that is still economically rebounding. And having lived in Fort St. John and Terrace, I don’t see Telus or Bell as having better customer service by any means. If you saw me on the streets I’d tell you the same thing.
I also think there’s a difference between an opinion piece, such as an editorial, and journalism, such as an article. An opinion piece reflects one person’s opinion, journalism is fact based. This wasn’t an article, it was an opi,nion.
Anywho, enjoy the conversation and the feedback and apologize for the commenting snafu.[/quote]
So just to be clear it is your opinion that the many lower income residents of rupert (lets call them i dunno the 99%) should all be forced to sacrifice quality service so that they can subsidise a few high paying jobs for well lets call them the 1%
[quote=“jesus”]
So just to be clear it is your opinion that the many lower income residents of rupert (lets call them i dunno the 99%) should all be forced to sacrifice quality service so that they can subsidise a few high paying jobs for well lets call them the 1%[/quote]
I don’t think I’d call the people working at CityWest the 1 per cent, given the number of people making over $100,000 at other entities in town. Also don’t think you’re going to get better customer service with a Telus or a Bell based on past experience. I had Telus DSL before, and I had a Bell cell phone before. The difference, in my opinion, is pretty negligable (although I admittedly don’t game online or download that much).
And regardless which carrier you’re with your payments are still going to cover other people’s jobs. The CityWest jobs are local and the money they generate stays in the community/region and helps support other jobs.
The argument I’m making is that potentially being able to download files faster or play games faster or get the scores from the game on your cell phone faster isn’t worth the loss of dozens of good paying and steady jobs in the community and the million dollar annual payment into city coffers, particularly since CityWest is still an expanding company (entering new markets where other competitors exist, digital cable etc…) and isn’t teetering on the verge of failure.
In my opinion at least.
[quote=“S_Thomas”]
[quote=“jesus”]
So just to be clear it is your opinion that the many lower income residents of rupert (lets call them i dunno the 99%) should all be forced to sacrifice quality service so that they can subsidise a few high paying jobs for well lets call them the 1%[/quote]
I don’t think I’d call the people working at CityWest the 1 per cent, given the number of people making over $100,000 at other entities in town. Also don’t think you’re going to get better customer service with a Telus or a Bell based on past experience. I had Telus DSL before, and I had a Bell cell phone before. The difference, in my opinion, is pretty negligable (although I admittedly don’t game online or download that much).
And regardless which carrier you’re with your payments are still going to cover other people’s jobs. The CityWest jobs are local and the money they generate stays in the community/region and helps support other jobs.
The argument I’m making is that potentially being able to download files faster or play games faster or get the scores from the game on your cell phone faster isn’t worth the loss of dozens of good paying and steady jobs in the community and the million dollar annual payment into city coffers, particularly since CityWest is still an expanding company (entering new markets where other competitors exist, digital cable etc…) and isn’t teetering on the verge of failure.
In my opinion at least.[/quote]
So following this theme of civic intervention in economic matters, with the fish sector struggling in the community will we see an editorial suggesting that the city should invest in the local fishing industry?
Those are jobs at risk it would seem, perhaps not as good paying and steady as CityWest but are they not worth protecting?
Along the same theme, the reduction plant is soon to be mothballed, it’s a generator of the economy, should the city purchase and operate that as an economic engine for the community?
I’m not sure when the civic charter became a full employment agenda, shouldn’t the city really be directed to just provide the services that we require, roads, sewers, police and fire protection.
The argument you make for CityWest seems to come out of a blue print of state intervention into economic matters, including the kind of thing you might see in a five year plan.
The dialogue should be what do the residents of Prince Rupert really believe that the city should offer them in the way of services I think that would be an interesting discussion.
[quote=“S_Thomas”]The argument I’m making is that potentially being able to download files faster or play games faster or get the scores from the game on your cell phone faster isn’t worth the loss of dozens of good paying and steady jobs in the community and the million dollar annual payment into city coffers, particularly since CityWest is still an expanding company (entering new markets where other competitors exist, digital cable etc…) and isn’t teetering on the verge of failure.
In my opinion at least.[/quote]
Right, so you only see two options: 1. Sell Citywest and get rid of jobs, or 2. Keep Citywest and keep jobs.
Why do you think a company needs to be city-owned to keep jobs? If Citywest is “still an expanding company” and doing so well, why would it need to be owned by the City? Does the City own other private ventures that gamble taxpayer assets in the open marketplace?
Does the City own a chain of restaurants across the Northwest? Why doesn’t it?
Those are not the only two options. Why can’t Citywest be a locally-owned and operated company, like many other successful local businesses? Would you stop being a Citywest customer if it weren’t owned by Prince Rupert taxpayers? Neither would I.
What I’m worried about is the volatility of the marketplace. How much did the “We asked around and nobody wanted it” moment cost Prince Rupert in a ‘write-down of assets’? ie: how much did taxpayers lose because they gambled in the marketplace and lost the cellular market?
The city has no business in operating a private venture if there are alternatives. Sell Citywest. Make it a coop, I’d buy in. Make it a worker-owned business, I know a lot of Citywest employees would buy in. Sell shares on the open market. I’d buy them.
But if you argue that the City of Prince Rupert needs to keep operating a cable and telephone company across the Northwest BC, then you’ll also have to agree that it would be a good idea for the City of Prince Rupert to open a chain of restaurants across the Northwest, right?
Why doesn’t the City of Prince Rupert open a chain of KFCs in Prince Rupert, Terrace, Kitimat and Hazelton? It would be a license to print money! Sure, they’d be competing with private enterprise, but that’s ok, right? Why didn’t the City buy the Daily News and keep those jobs? Why didn’t the City buy a video rental store and earn revenue that way? How about a fish processor?
Whatever you believe, City Council better not approach taxpayers for another record tax increase, while holding on to such a risky asset.
tl;dr version: Whenever you’re thinking about Prince Rupert owning Citywest, just replace “KFC” for Citywest and see if it still makes sense.