ShareThis Page

Pittsburgh Laurels & Lances

| Thursday, Jan. 15, 2015, 8:55 p.m.

Laurel: To Point Park University. Despite what two preservation groups say, the Downtown school's plan to incorporate a number of old building facades into its new Pittsburgh Playhouse complex is the perfect tribute to the city's past. Indeed, preservation of those facades — as is — would be striking. But, in this case, it would not be practical, neither architecturally nor financially. Point Park has found the best alternative.

Lance: To the Greater Pittsburgh Police Federal Credit Union. Two cleaning women have been charged with stealing the personal information of more than 30 credit union members. They contemplated using it to open fraudulent credit card accounts though told police they never did. But here's an important question: Why wasn't this information under lock and key? (It now is, officials say.) Members should not tolerate such disregard for their privacy.

Laurel: To the Pittsburgh Steelers. This spring, they'll return to public view the portal sculpture from the south end of the old Manchester Bridge. The 13-by-37-foot sculpture will be erected near Stage AE, adjacent to Heinz Field. And the Steelers will pay the $1 million cost. It will be a wonderful addition to the North Shore.

That said, we can only wonder how long it takes some sensitive, politically correct type to complain that the sculpture somehow is “un-American.” After all, one of the figures depicted — Seneca Indian tribe leader Guyasuta — sided with the British in the American Revolution. Ahem.

TribLIVE commenting policy

You are solely responsible for your comments and by using TribLive.com you agree to our Terms of Service.

We moderate comments. Our goal is to provide substantive commentary for a general readership. By screening submissions, we provide a space where readers can share intelligent and informed commentary that enhances the quality of our news and information.

While most comments will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive, moderating decisions are subjective. We will make them as carefully and consistently as we can. Because of the volume of reader comments, we cannot review individual moderation decisions with readers.

We value thoughtful comments representing a range of views that make their point quickly and politely. We make an effort to protect discussions from repeated comments either by the same reader or different readers

We follow the same standards for taste as the daily newspaper. A few things we won't tolerate: personal attacks, obscenity, vulgarity, profanity (including expletives and letters followed by dashes), commercial promotion, impersonations, incoherence, proselytizing and SHOUTING. Don't include URLs to Web sites.

We do not edit comments. They are either approved or deleted. We reserve the right to edit a comment that is quoted or excerpted in an article. In this case, we may fix spelling and punctuation.

We welcome strong opinions and criticism of our work, but we don't want comments to become bogged down with discussions of our policies and we will moderate accordingly.

We appreciate it when readers and people quoted in articles or blog posts point out errors of fact or emphasis and will investigate all assertions. But these suggestions should be sent via e-mail. To avoid distracting other readers, we won't publish comments that suggest a correction. Instead, corrections will be made in a blog post or in an article.