4 ms·

Sure, and that makes total sense when you're talking to someone who doesn't know the area. But disagreeing with me when I say that Bellevue isn't part of the Ci

by hobls 9y ago

Sure, and that makes total sense when you're talking to someone who doesn't know the area. But disagreeing with me when I say that Bellevue isn't part of the City of Seattle is just weird.

mikestew 9y ago
But disagreeing with me when I say that Bellevue isn't part of the City of Seattle is just weird. Fair enough, and assuming that you've met such folks, that is weird...and kind of stupid. Me, I'm content with a certain sense of smugness about living in Redmond and not Seattle. :-)
- mulmen 9y ago
  That's a mischaracterization of my words. I don't consider myself particularly stupid or weird but I do admit to bias on that topic.
  - mikestew 9y ago
    Wasn’t talking about you specifically (or at all, truth be told), and I thought that was pretty clear.
    - mulmen 9y ago
      That was my misunderstanding then.
- hobls 9y ago
  >Me, I'm content with a certain sense of smugness about living in Redmond and not Seattle. :-) See this is the great part about our little rivalry! Everyone gets to feel smug. :) (No sarcasm, I really think it's a pro.)
mulmen 9y ago
You're twisting my words. Of course Bellevue is not part of the City of Seattle but they are very much codependent. The obsession over the city line is pointless here. This is important in a conversation about office space. The obsessive focus on a subset of the City of Seattle's office space serves to advance a specific narrative and ignores the reality of the situation.
- hobls 9y ago
  I think the place we're missing each other here is that people who literally live in Seattle care about Seattle as a separate entity from the metropolitan area.
  - mulmen 9y ago
    Yes, that is where we are missing each other because fixating on some subset of the office space in the area ignores the reality both for the metro area and Seattle proper. The metro area is what matters economically and office space should be evaluated in that context. We can discuss the impact to the city itself of its share of office space in the metro area but focusing on this little piece of the puzzle is a distraction.
    - hobls 9y ago
      Well... a Seattle city newspaper wrote an article about the city of Seattle. It's a valid lens to examine Amazon's impact to Seattle. Your insistence on being included in a conversation about a city you don't live in is kinda weird. Also note that I agreed with your post above, and just pointed out that Bellevue is "not part of the city." It literally is not. That's all I said.
      - mulmen 9y ago
        How do you know where I live? Not that it matters but I moved to Seattle in 2011 and I have lived and worked in both Bellevue and Seattle. ST is fixating on one aspect of Amazon's impact to the city of Seattle to advance their desired narrative. They use a hyperbolic headline to perpetuate a negative image of Amazon then correlate office space with economic contribution. Nothing in the article convinces me that Amazon has turned Seattle into a "company town'. You response to my post was literally (emphasis mine): > I agree. But they're not at all part of the city. My point is that Belleuve and the rest of the eastside is much more closely related to Seattle than a place like Everett or Tacoma and so a conversation about office space should acknowledge that. People and companies are mobile between the eastside and Seattle much more than they are to the north and south. This is relevant in a conversation about office space, even if you are evaluating it from a position of what's best for Seattle itself.

by hobls 9y ago

Sure, and that makes total sense when you're talking to someone who doesn't know the area. But disagreeing with me when I say that Bellevue isn't part of the City of Seattle is just weird.

mikestew 9y ago

But disagreeing with me when I say that Bellevue isn't part of the City of Seattle is just weird. Fair enough, and assuming that you've met such folks, that is weird...and kind of stupid. Me, I'm content with a certain sense of smugness about living in Redmond and not Seattle. :-)

mulmen 9y ago
That's a mischaracterization of my words. I don't consider myself particularly stupid or weird but I do admit to bias on that topic.
- mikestew 9y ago
  Wasn’t talking about you specifically (or at all, truth be told), and I thought that was pretty clear.
  - mulmen 9y ago
    That was my misunderstanding then.
hobls 9y ago
>Me, I'm content with a certain sense of smugness about living in Redmond and not Seattle. :-) See this is the great part about our little rivalry! Everyone gets to feel smug. :) (No sarcasm, I really think it's a pro.)

mulmen 9y ago

You're twisting my words. Of course Bellevue is not part of the City of Seattle but they are very much codependent. The obsession over the city line is pointless here. This is important in a conversation about office space. The obsessive focus on a subset of the City of Seattle's office space serves to advance a specific narrative and ignores the reality of the situation.

hobls 9y ago
I think the place we're missing each other here is that people who literally live in Seattle care about Seattle as a separate entity from the metropolitan area.
- mulmen 9y ago
  Yes, that is where we are missing each other because fixating on some subset of the office space in the area ignores the reality both for the metro area and Seattle proper. The metro area is what matters economically and office space should be evaluated in that context. We can discuss the impact to the city itself of its share of office space in the metro area but focusing on this little piece of the puzzle is a distraction.
  - hobls 9y ago
    Well... a Seattle city newspaper wrote an article about the city of Seattle. It's a valid lens to examine Amazon's impact to Seattle. Your insistence on being included in a conversation about a city you don't live in is kinda weird. Also note that I agreed with your post above, and just pointed out that Bellevue is "not part of the city." It literally is not. That's all I said.
    - mulmen 9y ago
      How do you know where I live? Not that it matters but I moved to Seattle in 2011 and I have lived and worked in both Bellevue and Seattle. ST is fixating on one aspect of Amazon's impact to the city of Seattle to advance their desired narrative. They use a hyperbolic headline to perpetuate a negative image of Amazon then correlate office space with economic contribution. Nothing in the article convinces me that Amazon has turned Seattle into a "company town'. You response to my post was literally (emphasis mine): > I agree. But they're not at all part of the city. My point is that Belleuve and the rest of the eastside is much more closely related to Seattle than a place like Everett or Tacoma and so a conversation about office space should acknowledge that. People and companies are mobile between the eastside and Seattle much more than they are to the north and south. This is relevant in a conversation about office space, even if you are evaluating it from a position of what's best for Seattle itself.