Quote:
Originally Posted by ceedee
Like hell I am!
All I've done is ask that people consider the implications of wildly (by which I mean, in an exaggerated, unwarranted or unreasonable manner) criticising the report, the methodology or the authors before publication because that will surely be used to denigrate it's conclusions.
(The quoted post suggested that the PIA would be of little or no value and that 80/20's ethics weren't "worth the pixels its written in" (that I presumed to be black humour) hence my description of it as derision.)
If I suggested that it's not a good idea to shoot the messenger or declare that the message has no value before you find out if it's good news, would it make more sense?
|
Now I am insulted. And I mean really insulted.
At first I was going to correct your misunderstanding of my posts but now I am wild and unreasonable?
At no point recently have I derided Simon Davies or 80/20 thinking. Nowhere have I suggested that their reputation is anything less than it is.
At no point have I speculated on the contents of the upcoming PIA and then discussed content I could not possibly know anything about.
I have simply stated my view that given there is a specific framework in place for the management of such tasks I fail to see how certain areas of the process could have been followed and that
If upon publication of that PIA it proves to be the case that certain criteria have not been met ( and given the subsequent information posted it would appear this will be the case ) then questions should be asked about the whole of the document regarding the screening process, the criteria followed and the people who have authored the document and their qualifications for doing such a task.
I was pointing out areas that may need to be questioned so that anyone concerned about it might know where to look to start that questioning.
And yes. I did use the term "not worth the paper it is printed upon" but if you bother to understand the context I said that I would suggest that in response to R Jones pointing out that 80/20 had already stated that the PIA was started too late and they were disappointed with that. If you can't do it properly then what value does it hold? I think that is a valid question.
Seriously I just raised questions about something that I feel I have every right to question and to be accused of making wild accusations against people and their reputation just won't do.