There is this fancy survey, where we can choose some questions, which will be presented to the Leadership Circle. Maybe they even answer to it. I don’t count on it. And I don’t want even think about it, but as this posting shows: I failt. But:
- Why limit the number of questions at all?
- A leadership circle of 13 people plus 3 paid employees plus tons of volunteers should be able to answer 10times so many questions.
- Some of the answers should have been published anyway (yes, without being asked).
- While the most of the Leadership Circle plays “dead man”, Jim gets paid to spent time for complaining about not having time, blocking people from the wiki and developing the cs-haters conspiracy theory. I guess, simply answering questions would need less time.
- Statistics? wouldn’t be the first time someone lies about numbers at cs (funny enough: Mikky says so). So even if there is a reaction it would be easy to call it a minority issue. (In my opinion some of the questions really are, but that’s not a reason not to answer them.)
It’s not a matter of choosing the right questions or limiting them to a smaller number. Or presenting them from a Survey. Again it’s a matter of the Leadersship Circle’s will to communicate with the users and if they want to make their work transparent (or at least visible).
To me the survey is completely ridiculous.
midsch that was good analysis. Donna and therachel seem to have mastered the art to deception.
How do you avoid answering questions you do not want answered?
Create a survey.
How do you move posts the LT does not like to another group ?
Make a false statement that people are complaining in the CUQ’s.
the first deceptive act started with the sob letter after the crash (not written by casey but signed by him).
The art of deceptions continues…
I agree with your analysis, Midsch, but what’s the alternative? If everyone would check the questions about organisation, we might at least finally get some clarity about Casey’s plans with the NDA, 501c3, and his own role in the corporation in conjunction with his other business.
And, as I posted elsewhere, I for one will not take this questionnaire as a hint that we shouldn’t ask further questions afterwards. Nor should anyone else.
Hello! (To my favourite midch, too
)
I agree on some point but i strongly disagree to another!
I agree that those questions can be very easily manipulated/ twisted/ answered by marketing replies etc, by the LT.
I agree that the survey hasn’t been organised in the right order:
-There’s not time/ space to add more questions,
-It hasn’t been promoted to the vast majority of csers through other groups while beeing constructed,
-Even the people from Opencs haven’t participated enough (beside Anu, us, Roy and Pickwick) contributing with their questions although even Mikky did!!!
What do you expect guys? Positive results? You already have condempt this survey way before it was built! It started with Torsten’s idea and i think that we haven’t been supportive at all.
Of course the LT people would try to make their own rouls, but were is your try to prevent it?
-Why is it not built as a poll?
Donna claimed “lack of time” (once again).Why not handle the survey on our own when Torsten withdrawned instead of letting it go?
And if you thought that the survey was not a good idea from the beggining why didn’t you opposed to that idea from the start?
Is it easier to pose one question after another on the “Brainstorm” and be ignored and mocked by them? Sorry, i’ve done this for quite a long time and nothing came out. I’ve got a bigger ego than that.
What i’m saying is:
This survey -IF it was done right- could be a very useful tool to prove our points. We could have promoted it all over cs and attract many people to fill it in. Don’t forget! We’ve formed the questions ourselves, not the LT. Even if the LT answers b*#**t, with the statistics showing how many csers care to get some answers about the issues raised, we would get a very serious outcome after all!
Personnaly, that was my last try before givving up on cs completely.
I never understood the need for that survey – why screen the questions (I’d call this censorship, especially when done by Donna who’s too close to the LT to be objective at all of what’s just criticism and fair question to be asked). Why not just have the LT answer questions posted right there in the group (with 3 paid employees they can no longer claim lack of human resources), or else give reasons why they are not answering certain questions.