Return to index: [Subject] [Thread] [Date] [Author]

Re: Special message for Lurker's

[Subject Prev][Subject Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Agreed.  In fact I recall a number of minor surveys that did attract a bit
of movement and I see that there are honest suggestions as to how to monitor
the important issues.

Is there evidence at your end that the influential are paying heed to the
threads herein?  I do read the postings from various people who are involved
but does their participation lead to significant changes?

Thor Tandy  P.Eng  MCSCE
Victoria BC

-----Original Message-----
From: Seaintonln(--nospam--at) <Seaintonln(--nospam--at)>
To: seaint(--nospam--at) <seaint(--nospam--at)>
Date: Monday, June 14, 1999 2:25 PM
Subject: Re: Special message for Lurker's

>In a message dated 6/13/99 3:20:51 PM Pacific Daylight Time,
><< If the list was in jeopardy of apparent low participation, threat of
> would surely bring all lurkers forward.  Me?  Well about all I'm good for
> lurking and fishing anyway.
> Thor Tandy  P.Eng  MCSCE
> Victoria BC
> Canada
> vicpeng(--nospam--at) >>
>Thor, first of you are not a "Lurker" and the ton of posts under your name
>indicates that.
>Second, I think you missed the point - it's the numbers that help to sway
>opinions and motivate those who are in a position to create codes, to
>the time to reevaluate or change the direction of the work they are doing.
>All professional organizations are political and are influenced by hard
>numbers - SEA is not different. A few outspoken members does not
>the opinions of the majority when there are 15,000 known subscribers.
>Therefore, the boards and chairs are more apt to respond to the majority
>concensus rather than a few outspoken "zealots" such as myself.
>Logic and reason are only the mechanics to register numbers - in
>historically, they accomplish very little. This is why it is so important
>the majority who Lurk to do the easiest thing possible - post either an
>affirmation or rejection of the opinions stated.
>Dennis Wish PE