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
From: Seaintonln(--nospam--at)aol.com <Seaintonln(--nospam--at)aol.com>
To: seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org <seaint(--nospam--at)seaint.org>
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
> vicpeng(--nospam--at)vtcg.com >>
>Thor, first of you are not a "Lurker" and the ton of posts under your name
>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