This attempt to evoke lowbrow emotional responses isn't working on me. And the statement in the daily edhat, "A reader shares a photo of a sign the California Coastal Commission has posted notifying the public of its intention to install signs" is simply false: the CCC is not the applicant wishing to put up signs.
10 Comments
-
-
-
Aug 27, 2017 10:12 AMPicture please!
-
-
-
Aug 27, 2017 12:38 PMIt's a picture of a tiny question mark?
-
-
-
Aug 27, 2017 04:04 PMAnd the photo is ???
-
-
-
Aug 28, 2017 10:10 AMEd: please post the photo I sent with the submittal. Thx.
-
-
-
Aug 29, 2017 10:00 AMAnd the point is?
-
-
-
Aug 29, 2017 10:44 AMTo alert us that they are planning to put up signs, I suppose. Is that bad or good? Someone please tell me how to feel about this....lol
-
-
-
Aug 29, 2017 11:32 AMI suppose it is good. Too many signs already. Maybe we could oppose these? But my first comment was directed at the reason for this post at all.
-
-
-
Aug 29, 2017 11:33 AMI suppose it is good. Too many signs already. Maybe we could oppose these? But my first comment was directed at the reason for this post at all.
-
-
-
Aug 29, 2017 01:52 PMHold me David, I'm frightened.
-
-
-
Aug 29, 2017 03:46 PMThis attempt to evoke lowbrow emotional responses isn't working on me. And the statement in the daily edhat, "A reader shares a photo of a sign the California Coastal Commission has posted notifying the public of its intention to install signs" is simply false: the CCC is not the applicant wishing to put up signs.