| Author | Post |
|---|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 12:04 am |
|
| Well; that leaves me out and STH, as we are under the Queen Creek zip code 85142, so we either post on Pinal's site or QC's site. Last edited on Thu Jun 25th, 2009 12:14 am by Bambi2
|
nunya
Member
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 12:02 am |
|
Whoa you're right
http://www.newszapforums.com/forum240/
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Thu Jun 25th, 2009 12:01 am |
|
pcresident wrote: It seems like we, also, now have our own forum to discuss this- separate from the pinal county forum...
What do you mean?
|
pcresident
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 |
| Location: | San Tan Valley |
| Posts: | 178 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:59 pm |
|
| It seems like we, also, now have our own forum to discuss this- separate from the pinal county forum...
|
pcresident
Member
| Joined: | Thu Jan 22nd, 2009 |
| Location: | San Tan Valley |
| Posts: | 178 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:59 pm |
|
| She also publicly stated that she didn't think a name change was in order at all.
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:54 pm |
|
I still think that as long as she didn't "push" it on anyone or rig/add to the following votes that were publicaly stated.........
"Of the more than 1700 votes that were e-mailed, submitted as online ballots or
turned in as paper ballots, 17 percent picked San Tan Valley, ..."
.....then she has done nothing wrong imo.
Last edited on Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:55 pm by Bambi2
|
BryanMartyn
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:45 pm |
|
Fellow bloggers,
Although it would have been best to disclose this information that I was unaware of, I believe Tisha's intentions were completly above board.
The name San Tan Valley was floated a couple years ago on a prior naming movement. As a member/leader of the Chamber of Commerce it would seem prudent to purchase the domain of a popular/possible choice. All businesses would be best served by a Chamber with the domain name.
Additionally, every vote cast in this process has a name and address attached to it.
Following the release of the complete results, I will ask the Pinal County Elections Department to conduct an independent evaluation of the entire process to ensure there were no irregularities.
Continue to ask questions. But, I believe the process will show that everything was on the up and up.
Bryan
|
brennanbolger
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 24th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 5 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:40 pm |
|
| Bryan Martyn was motivated for the community and he came under attack. She is obviously also motivated for some reason. After what she did to Supervisor Martin, she should reap the same wrath as he did. Maybe she should turn the domain name over to him or the county. Last edited on Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:40 pm by brennanbolger
|
brennanbolger
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 24th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 5 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:37 pm |
|
| It's all about morality. She should have said something up front. She should not profit from her use of the domain name. If she donates it or sells it for what she paid, no harm-no foul, however; I still think it was dirty pool.
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:35 pm |
|
| I agree that it's ok to register those names. She didn't do anything wrong by registering them. It would only be wrong in my eyes, if she "pushed" that name on the people thru any means or "stacked the deck" with votes for that name. In other words, "steered" people towards the name thru her direct involvment and influence as organizer of this naming process.
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:29 pm |
|
.....it's all about "motivation"
Wouldn't the city use http://www.SanTanValley.gov?
Last edited on Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:31 pm by Bambi2
|
bobthebuilder
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:15 pm |
|
I'm sure she'll be more than happy to donate it to the city when it is incorporated or use it for the public good without making advertising income on it.
If so, I wouldn't have a problem with her having it.
|
brennanbolger
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 24th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 5 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 11:02 pm |
|
| Not sure, but if she is all about morality and ethics, she should have said something.
|
azcats_01
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 08:17 pm |
|
I wonder what other domain names she owns?
http://www.mybiznow.com/index.php/contactmybiznow
Customer Support Address:
530 E Hunt Hwy #103-262
San Tan Valley, AZ 85143
Telephone: 602-443-0073
Fax: 602-325-4018
|
nunya
Member
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 07:54 pm |
|
Well she does own a computer/internet business. It doesn't surprise me that she scooped up that name. She probably bought the rights to a bunch of names trying to end up with the one that stuck. Just a smart business move in my opinion. I wish I would have done it.
If she was already in a political position then maybe it would be a conflict of interest.
I for one am not looking at her or Bryan Martyn as a savior...
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 07:51 pm |
|
brennanbolger wrote: They have owned the domain name since November 2007.
Ooops. Not good.
Dang. Now what? No recourse as I see it at this point. Nothing was really official when overseen by private enterprize as this was. Did she disclose this to Bryan or others? Did she "push" the name San Tan Valley and did she have others present that knew of this and supported her? Like other GSTAC members?
Last edited on Wed Jun 24th, 2009 07:51 pm by Bambi2
|
brennanbolger
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 24th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 5 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 07:39 pm |
|
| They have owned the domain name since November 2007.
|
Bambi2
Member
| Joined: | Tue Apr 7th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 336 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 07:27 pm |
|
| When did she purchase the domain rights? Before or after the name was chosen? That makes a big difference imo.
|
brennanbolger
Member
| Joined: | Wed Jun 24th, 2009 |
| Location: | |
| Posts: | 5 |
| Status: |
Offline
|
|
Posted: Wed Jun 24th, 2009 07:21 pm |
|
For those of you who may think that Trish Castillo saved you from an unwanted name change, you may want to consider that the reason she rallied to oppose the name Bella Vista was because she had a vested interest in the name San Tan Valley, which was ultimately chosen. The Castillo's business, MyBizNow.com just so happens to own the domain rights to santanvalley.com A coincidence - I think not!
Shortly after Pinal County Supervisor Bryan Martyn suggested Bella Vista as a name option, Castillo mounted a vigilent campaign against it and accused him of "shoving the name down resident's throats". While resident's looked at her as their savior for keeping them from being manipulated by a politician, it appears she was working behind the scenes to promote a name that would be beneficial to her - all under the guise of political correctness. Can residents say "used"? It seems so.
In addition to getting the name connected to a domain she has a vested interest in, she has set herself up as the area savior and has spoken about a political career. Hmmm, how serendipitous. This angel of mercy may not be so lilly white after all.
|
Current time is 05:01 am | Page:   1 2 |
|