Elk Konnected Survey

[flintauqua]

Ross, the circles of chairs is actually a different technique called Nominal Group Process

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nominal_group_technique

"One major advantage of NGT is that it avoids two problems caused by group interaction. First, some members are reluctant to suggest ideas because they are concerned about being criticized. Second, some members are reluctant to create conflict in groups. (Many people want to maintain a pleasant climate.) NGT overcomes these problems. NGT has the clear advantage of minimizing differences and ensuring relatively equal participation. It may also, in many cases be a time-saving technique. Other advantages include producing a large number of ideas and providing a sense of closure that is often not found in less-structured group methods.

Major disadvantage of NGT is that the method lacks flexibility by being able to deal with only one problem at a time. Also, there must be a certain amount of conformity on the part of the members involved in NGT. Everyone must feel comfortable with the amount of structure involved. Another disadvantage is the amount of time needed to prepare for the activity. There is no spontaneity involved with this method. Facilities must be arranged and carefully planned. Opinions may not converge in the voting process, cross-fertilization of ideas may be constrained, and the process may appear to be too mechanical."

-----------------------------------------------------------------------

Also, you might want to read what George Mason University has to say about "Process Improvement"

http://gunston.doit.gmu.edu/healthscience/708/teamwork.asp

[Ross]

It's all about control and manipulation no matter how you cut it.

[Patriot]

All of the analysis, theory & 'good intent' behind these techniques, and their variants,  makes for interesting reading.  However, in practice, the methods being employed by Elk Konnected/Public Square Community have resulted in the following realities:  

1.  At the outset, the facilitator 'works' the crowd to identify any who might oppose or resist method being used.  

2.  The facilitator wastes no time in creating a controlled 'them and us' atmosphere, isolating, minimizing and/or dehumanizing those who oppose, resist or challenge the process ("Where's the sheriff" is a bit extreme in the 1st three minutes of dialogue with an individual).  Ultimately, the facilitator creates a facade portraying himself/herself as the 'good guy' and opponents as the 'bad guys'.  

3.  Attendees broken into multiple groups of 6 - 10 have no benefit or even knowledge of discussions and ideas in the dozen or more other small groups.

4.  The written input of attendees is 'compiled' by the very group who are attempting to achieve consensus.  Hardly an unbiased approach.

5.  Attendees have no way to be assured that their individual inputs were even included in the 'compiled' results.   They also are unlikely to openly challenge the end results, even if there was a means by which to do so.  Facilitators can easily rely on group dynamics & the dynamics of individual restraint in group settings to be relatively sure that those who might question the outcomes will not do so, especially in light of the negative consequences to be expected as demonstrated in 2 above.  Who wants to be a questioning  individual when they already know they'll likely be ostracized in public?

6.  When results using these techniques are used to report to or influence public officials, the democratic processes of representative government are easily usurped by special interests.

7.  When government officials are also involved in the facilitating organization, red flags should be flying everywhere.


All based on the Hegelian Principle:   Thesis/Antithesis/Synthesis.  Controlled friction.  And let's not forget that wonder of American virtue, Saul Alinsky, who adapted these processes to advance his anti-capitalist/anti-American constitutional form of government agendas.  All with the intent of one day completely undermining the American way of life that was to be based on the rule of law and individual exceptionalism by using his 'community organization' processes.  The process was even named The Alinsky Method.  ( http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/2131343/posts )

Thanks, I'll stick to meetings where ideas are presented openly, debated vigorously, and voted on deliberately.  Let good parliamentary procedure and Robert's Rules determine order.

[srkruzich]

Why is a method that is used extensively to seek consensus about the future direction of a company or organization so scary to certain individuals?

http://www.rand.org/international_programs/pardee/pubs/futures_method/delphi.html

"Many factors discourage effective due diligence, from people's psychological tendency to misestimate novel risks to political and institutional pressures that favor short-term results. Long-term policy analysis, however, can help overcome these barriers by identifying these key actions, communicating their importance to diverse audiences, and suggesting the policies and incentives needed to encourage these actions and sustain them over time."

Lets see....I'm kinda dumb here but let me see if i get it right..... Politician wants to push agenda A but is afraid that will anger the people that voted them in. So in comes IGOTTASOLUTION LLC and says work hand in hand with me and i'll get the Agenda passed without angering your voters.  LLC goes out selectively targets 150 voters,narros them down to 5. Goes out with a Agenda solution in mind and has meetings to solicit ideas knowing some would submit Agenda as idea.  LLC distributes collaged copied papers to participants and they are none the wiser that it was pre done prior to their arrival.  

LLC goes back to politician and delivers the news that 150 will support their agenda.  Knowing that the voters would come out and shoot down the agenda in a vote, the politican enlists the help of the LLC to implement the agenda.  Now LLC goes and starts implementing agenda with government money to bypass the voting process set in place.   Once it is in place and the few supporters are happy with what is in place, the rest of the voter base goes, WTFH.  I didn't hear about this.  There was no public comment. no meeting.  

What has just happened is, the politician has found a way, to violate the civil rights of every citizen in the county by violating their right to hear public business and vote on said business.   IF the politician had of held a town meeting which is required to discuss public business, then they would have had to hear public comment and the public could call for a ballot inititive and the politician would have no choice but to place it on a ballot or risk their job.  But if a PRIVATE LLC handled the meeting, the PRIVATE LLC is under no obligation to honor such a pain in the ass law like the constitution so they can say shut up sit down or get out!  After all it is a private corp not a public meeting.  

Why are people scared of this process?  BECAUSE IT VIOLATES OUR FREEDOM AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS YOU DUMBASS

[Patriot]

Lets see....I'm kinda dumb here but let me see if i get it right.....

...Why are people scared of this process?  BECAUSE IT VIOLATES OUR FREEDOM AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS YOU DUMBASS

B I N G O

[flintauqua]

Lets see....I'm kinda dumb here but let me see if i get it right..... Politician wants to push agenda A but is afraid that will anger the people that voted them in. So in comes IGOTTASOLUTION LLC and says work hand in hand with me and i'll get the Agenda passed without angering your voters.  LLC goes out selectively targets 150 voters,narros them down to 5. Goes out with a Agenda solution in mind and has meetings to solicit ideas knowing some would submit Agenda as idea.  LLC distributes collaged copied papers to participants and they are none the wiser that it was pre done prior to their arrival.  

LLC goes back to politician and delivers the news that 150 will support their agenda.  Knowing that the voters would come out and shoot down the agenda in a vote, the politican enlists the help of the LLC to implement the agenda.  Now LLC goes and starts implementing agenda with government money to bypass the voting process set in place.   Once it is in place and the few supporters are happy with what is in place, the rest of the voter base goes, WTFH.  I didn't hear about this.  There was no public comment. no meeting.  

What has just happened is, the politician has found a way, to violate the civil rights of every citizen in the county by violating their right to hear public business and vote on said business.   IF the politician had of held a town meeting which is required to discuss public business, then they would have had to hear public comment and the public could call for a ballot inititive and the politician would have no choice but to place it on a ballot or risk their job.  But if a PRIVATE LLC handled the meeting, the PRIVATE LLC is under no obligation to honor such a pain in the ass law like the constitution so they can say shut up sit down or get out!  After all it is a private corp not a public meeting.  

Why are people scared of this process?  BECAUSE IT VIOLATES OUR FREEDOM AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS YOU DUMBASS

You know, one of those wonderful unalienable rights that we all have as Americans is the right to see things from our own point-of-view, even if it is diametrically opposite to someone else's viewpoint.

Steve has told us on this Forum multiple times how much he abhors anyone with the audacity to be a politician, because he feels ALL politicians are corrupt.  And in his mind, if no corruption is evident, then it's only because it's been covered up.  If this isn't a pre-judgement, I don't know what is.

I, on the other hand, am much more open-minded about a persons character, including that of anyone who decides to step up to the leadership plate by applying for and attaining public office.  To me, my personal interactions with, and/or personal research about, the individual is going to determine my opinion of the person in question.  Guilt by association and statements from people who hold personal grudges against any and all politicians, singularly or as a group, receive little if any consideration in my assessment of those who aspire to be our elected or appointed leaders.

Charles M. Durbin

[Diane Amberg]

What makes you think Roberts Rules wasn't used? Nobody has to be bound to it, but none the less, it would be common .Did they say they would follow Robert's rules?
 As far as parsing words....you have got to be kidding! Do you really know what the word means? Shoot, I can still even diagram sentences! As far as taking a person's post apart line by line and word by word critiquing it as you go... Well...separate rules for you and then comes everyone else? That's actually funny. Goose and gander come to mind.
As far as Robert's Rules, Ross, for all his good intentions, would have been out of order to ask, demand or otherwise expect to speak to the group in the beginning of the meeting.That would have been handled in the proper order, possibly during communications or most likely under new business.  Since they were just forming up as a group I can see where it might have still been rather loosely organized at that time. There have also been several different versions of that incident involving the sheriff. (From people who were there.) I wasn't there so I'll have no opinion on that.
How about sending out your own survey and asking a random sample what they think?"


1. How do you know that happened? Who verified that "someone' worked the crowd?
2. Who was the facilitator at that meeting. Who were listed as good guys? Bad guys? How do you know that happened?
 3. Why do you think that? They made reports to the whole.
 4. How do you know who compiled what? I heard it was the committee members themselves, not the facilitator.
 5.The list was read to the attendees. If something was missing, the writer would have noticed. The rest is pure speculation.(You show me your degree in human behavior and I'll show you mine. ) I can assure you there are spark plugs in that group, just as there are on this forum that would not be cowed, just respectful.
 6. Doesn't have to be .There are checks and balances.
  7. There are simple procedures for handling that. Conflict of interest is very specific and can usually be handled with a legal opinion. It is very common for Mayors and council members to be active in many community groups. The whole idea is to have cross pollination and be able to tap into people's personal talents.   For example, it's not unusual for people who are good grant writers to help other organizations write their grants. The fire service does that here.There is one fellow from another company who really know how, and has helped other companies. Why shouldn't it happen where you are?
Is there any real proof of any wrong doing?
 Whew! I don't usually go for this line by line business. Please forgive my typing. Off to help at Bingo. Stay cool. We're baking here too.

[Ross]

Why are people scared of this process?

BECAUSE IT VIOLATES OUR FREEDOM AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS YOU DUMBASS

It's not rocket science is it Mr. srkruzich.
I'd say anyone in their right mind would be opposed to the process.

BECAUSE IT VIOLATES OUR FREEDOM AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

[srkruzich]

It's not rocket science is it Mr. srkruzich.
I'd say anyone in their right mind would be opposed to the process.

BECAUSE IT VIOLATES OUR FREEDOM AND CONSTITUTIONAL RIGHTS

You forgot DUMBASS!

[sodbuster]

Vote Warph\ Slappy for President 2012
If nothing else you will be able to laugh again.
"The Audacity to Laugh!"
Ad paid for by Peet's Coffee Co. Berkeley, CA and The 19th Hole Bar and Bar Suprise, AZ.