Kai Chang 
Member since Oct 15, 2009


Favorite Places

  • None.
Find places »

Saved Events

  • Nada.
Find events »

Saved Stories

  • Nope.
Find stories »

Custom Lists

  • Zip.

Recent Comments

Re: “Poll: White, Affluent Oaklanders Happiest. Black Residents Least Happy. And Everyone's Freaked Out By Housing Crisis.

It's great how the East Bay Express publishes articles like this that dive deep into the topic of the rich diversity in Oakland... by only talking about its Black and White residents.

Posted by Kai Chang on 01/28/2017 at 10:13 AM

Re: “Protest Trump's Inauguration in Oakland, But Please Don't Be Violent

Well, golly. If only we knew all it took was a nicely worded editorial to stop vandals from using well-meaning protests as cover for their crimes.

The really simple thing for protest organizers to do is to set a concrete end time for a protest/rally in the late afternoon, about an hour before sunset. By doing so, you'll have had the publicity you wanted: During the day you do have that impact of a civic action stopping business as usual. By being during the day, you can have more people participate, like seniors and children. You'll have finished in time to make the national news on the east coast. You'll give local west coast stations plenty of time to organize a report, for papers to cover it for the morning news. You'll have well-lit images for the cover stories and news leads.

Nothing good happens when protests go into the night -- it's too dark to get a good picture for the news, you won't get into the news until tomorrow, by which time the narrative from the vandalism may become the focus. Less regular citizens can participate (work/school/child obligations the next day). The only thing it does is give vandals and looters both crowds and the cover of darkness to perpetrate their crimes.

Posted by Kai Chang on 01/12/2017 at 2:04 PM

Re: “Stop Blaming Artists and Musicians for the Ghost Ship Fire. Blame People In Power Who Screwed Up.

Really sounds like you're talking out of both sides of your mouth here.

You can't in one furtive sentence refer to "underfunded government agencies" to balance out an article that generally casts calls for stronger enforcement and reports from concerned neighbors as so me kind of gestapo-style crackdown. This has really been the most hysterical editorial I've read on this. It doesn't make me confident in the least that the Express will be the reporting I can look to for a calm, fair look at this issue.

Posted by Kai Chang on 12/07/2016 at 12:28 PM

Re: “Oakland Mayor Libby Schaaf Institutes Ban On Nighttime Street Protests

When riots started up at night after legitimate demonstrations, I think everybody on all sides agreed that it was the opportunistic criminal element that used night time to vandalize and loot.

I think the main fault here is trying to legislate what would generally be a good idea anyway: To set a start and end time for a demonstration or rally so that it ends early enough that vandals and looters can't use darkness and the crowds from a peaceful demonstration as a cover for their own crimes.

I just really don't see what's gained by letting protests linger until well past dark. All the people with familial, academic, and professional responsibilities the next day can't participate that late. You won't be able to make the evening news cycle. Your civil disobedience isn't as impactful because the downtown areas you rally in will have shut down by then. And of course the criminal element emerges the later you go into the night.

17 likes, 5 dislikes
Posted by Kai Chang on 05/25/2015 at 1:02 AM

Re: “It’s Time to Call Lew Wolff’s Bluff

I realize this is an opinion column, but I don't think you can make a case for how fair or unfair the deal is without a sense of how this compares to what's commonly done for stadium leases in baseball. This just adds another opinion but doesn't advance the discussion.

The fiscal benefit of pro sports to a community is negligible -- there's no argument there. But you could say the same thing about art and music programs (I work in film and hear a fair amount of this about the arts). Clearly this is something that enriches a lot of people's lives and may inspire many to do remarkable, positive things (even if it's just being more physically active).

Though I'm a fan of the team, I really am concerned about how fair of a deal it is. I assume most of the sporting press has a certain slant, so I was hoping for something more fair-minded from the local muckraker!

Posted by Kai Chang on 07/17/2014 at 2:59 AM

Re: “The Warriors Aren’t Gone Yet

As a long-time A's fan and having gone to many events at the current Coliseum/Arena complex, I've never had much of a problem with the Stadium/Arena facilities themselves. It really is the location, which is not so much a bash on Oakland (which I love), but that particular part of Oakland. It's possibly the least appealing part of the city, far from the downtown, far from any cultural centers, far from any scenic cityscapes. It's surrounded by gritty industry, railroad tracks, office parks, bland strip malls, and unfortunately, one of the most crime-ridden areas of the city.

It's hard to get to. I take BART, as we're encouraged to do, and it's the most aggravating part of the experience, be it the perilously narrow Coliseum station platform or the 12 ft. wide (I think) bottleneck of a land bridge through which as many as 60,000 people must squeeze through after a game/event to get into the station.

It may help to build this 'Coliseum City' to add a few standard-issue mid-scale restaurants and attractions, but I can't imagine any businesses like that sustaining themselves because there is so little to draw people to that area outside of concerts and ball games.

It just seems like there are so many other areas in the city closer to the downtown and public transit corridors and cultural centers that could accomplish what Mayor Quan and the developers want (i.e. commercial/residential real estate and convention business). Why have we abandoned the really popular idea of building such a complex in the Jack London Square area?

1 like, 1 dislike
Posted by Kai Chang on 05/29/2012 at 11:31 PM

Re: “AC Transit's Duplication of Service

I used to take BART until somebody finally convinced me to try AC Transit, and I have never looked back, and won't until I see some pretty radical improvements to the 'Regional' rail system that's trying to serve an area that desperately needs a Metro rail system. (That's the excuse I always hear -- BART can't be like NYC's MTA because it's a 'regional' system.)

I did indeed start with the fancy WiFi coaches and have moved and am now mainly taking the workhorse F-line to SF, and I'd still say I'd prefer it to BART. There's the reliability. Traffic is bad, but if you actually watch the time, it's rarely much longer than a 15-minute trip across the bridge. Toll booths aren't an issue -- you'd be in the carpool lanes. I've also never had a bus stop and sit for 10 minutes because the station up ahead is having some kind of emergency or because the bus ahead of me on some unrelated line broke down.

I like Gammon's articles because they're generally great reality-checks, but I think this particular piece was a tad half-baked. Maybe a 7-9am commute via BART from the Berkeley, or better yet, the Macarthur station would show you how woefully unprepared BART is to take the capacity if half the Transbay lines just dumped their passengers there. Having been on BART during shocks like the bridge closures or Spare-the-Air, I really don't get the sense that it's ready to take more people than it currently does. And, seriously -- characterizing a commute through fancy train stations on plush (though often soiled) seats with a generally well-to-do crowd as slumming it with the masses in comparison to the F-line? Are you kidding?

Posted by burnowt on 06/03/2010 at 2:09 AM

All Comments »

Readers' Favorites

Most Popular Stories

Best of the East Bay

© 2017 East Bay Express    All Rights Reserved
Powered by Foundation