Somebody needs to fix the LGO website

Update 8:54 PM – Doug Boxer sent me a note saying that the Let’s Go Oakland website is now back up properly with the graphics and style sheets in tow. Apparently some servers were moved recently and… you know what can happen when you move servers.

Friday while I was doing some site maintenance, I did my occasional check of the links in the sidebar. When I clicked on the Let’s Go Oakland website I saw this:

Something's missing here.

What happened to the colorful background graphic? The Facebook link? The petition form still seems to work, so it’s not as if the site is broken. I don’t get it. Can someone explain what happened?

33 thoughts on “Somebody needs to fix the LGO website

  1. The site administrator and graphics were paid for by redevelopment funds.

  2. 2009

  3. If they’re committed to keeping the A’s in Oakland, then they must have $500 million available for a new ballpark and $250 million for site acquisitions, infrastructure, etc. Do they have it?…Oakland had to already have known what a catalyst for revitalization that ATT Park has been. Oakland’s course of action for the A’s in response to ATT Park? Do nothing.

  4. Pjk you say the same things on every comment box is it getting boring just repeating the same old Oakland is trash stuff?

  5. @pjk – Please have something original to say.

  6. Their CSS definitions point to another server in a different domain ( The entire contents of that web site seem to have been removed or deleted.

    Having your CSS live on a different domain from your web site is always a bad idea.

  7. Maybe the LGO site was funded with Oakland’s Redevelopment money?

  8. hecanfoos-it might be funded by redevelopment funds.

  9. Maybe Mayor Quan joined? That’s a sure fire way to screw the site up.

  10. Also, if you go to the ‘Who We Are’ page, the names are still there, just white-text on white-background.

  11. It is because of the missing CSS. That is called Cascading Style SheetS. it is a web development tool that allows one to quickly make sure that all pages on particular web presence are similarly themed.

  12. “SOMEBODY NEEDS TO FIX THE LGO WEBSITE” – so it redirects to the Baseball SJ site instead? :X

  13. I don’t know what’s going to happen, but it does seem that the Pro-Oakland movement is slowly fading a bit. I’ve been looking at their facebook page, and while the numbers of people who like the page are going up a little, people talking about the page have gone way, way down. They spend a lot more time talking about the magic of water now that they’ve banned Richard. Oh, and how much they hate this site. And how New York Times is amazing, but every other national publication that says the A’s should go to San Jose are stupid. And how the new stadium pics are ugly.
    And the current home is not? I long often for the park of my youth with views of the hills from my $5 third deck seat and actual bleachers, even that horrid cyclone fence for a year or two!
    SJ or Oak, I just really, really wish, like everyone else, that all the uncertainty is over. When is this front burner going to heat up?

  14. Matier and Ross don’t seem to know San Jose doesn’t need a financing plan for a ballpark. It’s going to be done privately.

  15. That was my understanding as well. Just thought I would share the link.

  16. That was quick. The website is fixed now. Is this the same graphic as before?
    Maybe they were performing an upgrade. I was updating some sites myself today, I usually do that work on weekends or holidays when traffic is low.
    I find it rather petty attacking another site’s admins in such a fashion. Their site had a glitch – stuff happens – no big deal. If one of my sites hit a glitch, I’d appreciate if a concerned reader sent me an email rather than posting it as front page news on their blog.
    I get the feeling you’d rather pick on them. This exposes the bias of this site and detracts from its credibility. Friendly advice: if you want to build a better argument, don’t stoop so low.

  17. @Freddy – Every site, every writer has a perspective. To assume we don’t is naive at best. I present information as best as I can. Based on your comment history you’re an Oakland-firster. I get that. You also have a perspective. I accept that, even if I disagree with some of it. I have and always will stand by this blog and every word in every post. The attaboys I get far outnumber the criticisms. That tells me I’m doing a good job. I’ll continue that, thank you very much.

    One other thing, Freddy. This is not the first time you’ve attacked the site’s credibility. You’ve done it twice in the last two years. If we lack credibility, why do you still read the site? You don’t have to do that. Your choice.

  18. @Freddy- Really…?

  19. @Freddy..WOW!

  20. By the way, M&R are so full of shit it’s pathetic. They obviously didn’t pay any attention to the news eminating from last weeks owners meeting. San Jose’s financing plan? Oh boy!

  21. Like it or not what Freddy said is TRUE I come here to see what the SJ crowd has to say your crazy and at least ignorant if you think this site gives “perspective” its a SJ only site and look over two article you get that. Attacking your opponent in any argument is a fallacy. This is a textbook sample of a fallacy. Translated from Latin to English, “Ad Hominem” means “against the man” or “against the person.”

    An Ad Hominem is a general category of fallacies in which a claim or argument is rejected on the basis of some irrelevant fact about the author of or the person presenting the claim or argument.
    Just FYI

  22. Right Jake, that’s why I spent a few days getting the background info right before writing about Oakland’s EB-5 strategy. Seriously, read it and tell me where it’s wrong, fallacious, or even biased against Oakland. Please.

    You know what’s funny? All these claims of bias on this site, instead of actually refuting the points, are themselves ad hominem attacks.

  23. What Victory Court and JLS west have in common? We profiled them and created the only “renderings” that exist, as far as we know. That’s cause we hate Oakland.

  24. I can’t for the life of me understand how anyone can read the content on this site (especially if you’ve read from the very beginning) and come away thinking it’s written from a pro-SJ perspective. If it seems that way, it only means that things are pointing SJ’s way right now. There was a time it pointed toward Fremont, but I don’t recall complaints that this is a pro-Fremont blog. I think a certain community’s emotions are interfering with its ability to reason. Or maybe we’re just witnessing the anger stage of grief. We’ve certainly seen plenty of denial, so maybe it’s just that time.
    Note: I am of course talking about ML’s and Jeffrey’s incredible work, not the comments which are often dominated by a few pro-SJ folks.

  25. Well said Dude…

  26. And well said Jeffrey. And great work as always ML.

  27. Not sure if anyone noticed or cares but F. Delvin Washington (Manager of the planning department for the City of San Francisco) is a founder/supporter of the LGO organization. Interesting. I guess he could be an Oakland A’s fan or Oakland native.

  28. The Matier and Ross thing has me thinking: Now what? It seemed like when we last tuned in 5 days ago, the Giants and A’s were supposed to settle this so MLB could come back and vote on the t rights. But if the Giants still refuse to negotiate, what happens next? Another full year in limbo? Maybe a t rights vote in the A’s favor and then the Giants still gumming it up with lawsuits? Can Selig bring the hammer down on the Giants after they built a ballpark in Frisco with their own money? The deal MLB made with the Giants – giving them San Jose – is coming back to haunt the A’s big time…If the A’s are forced to rot in the Coliseum for many many more years, what happens to that revenue-sharing provision that seemed squarely aimed at them – as in no more revenue-sharing after 2015 or something like that?

  29. Pointing out that this post is needlessly critical of an irrelevant aspect of the Oakland-onlyers’ movement (the LGO web hosting woes) has nothing to do with what one thinks of this blog in general, or its bias or analysis, or whatever. It’s just saying “hey man, not cool”. It’s not an indictment.

    I come to this blog for the excellent analysis and I am definitely pro-SJ. However, I would just like to add to Freddy’s and Jake’s take that ML should remain above the fray, by not posting irrelevant digs at LGO or similar Oakland-only people, as delusional as they are at this time.

    A similar situation occurred some days ago. We all get carried away sometimes… no biggies. We’re just giving you our feedback as to what we like to read on this blog. You don’t have to incorporate our feedback, but no need to get defensive about it either.

  30. @Al – If I ever write a book, the original post is not going to end up in the book. I’m going to end the thread on that note.

Comments are closed.