Re: Panopticon Poll
 

There is something not quite right about this. In her previous comments on the level of support for the proposal, gleaned from public meetings, Gayle said that the results showed a level of support of 75%. She did not qualify this statement in any way.
Now it seems that since the poll she held on this site does not show the same 75% support, all of a sudden qualifications and quibbles abound - anything it seems can be stretched and manipulated to achieve the desired result.

This is exactly the way that quango's operate. How could we have imagined that NWRDA's mouthpiece would act any differently?

Welcome to the New Democracy - you can vote as many times as you like but, we will only count the votes that agree with us.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

How many times have you actually voted? I'm sure you've voted here so have you voted at the consultations too? I hope no one is attempting to skew the figures by voting more than once! Or is it ok if the people who are objecting get more than one vote as you seem to imply?

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

I thought you did`nt want to work Sunday night Gayle, you are missing Heartbeat!!

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Thank you for pointing that out but I've been missing Heartbeat since the first episode, I think I can miss one more.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

I know, it`s never been the same since Nick Berry left!!

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Nick Berry was in it - if I'd known I might have considered watching it - NOT!

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Well Gayle, on here you can only vote once......unless of course you have more that one identity. When I come on here to check how things are going.......it tells me that i have already voted in this poll.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Very sensible and it was not me that first suggested that anyone would vote more than once. All I was meaning was that to vote 'no' here then going to the public exhibitions and voting 'no' could be construed as voting more than once.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Oh I thought that you meant on here Gayle.....sorry, my misunderstanding.
But then maybe if there are other polls being conducted it should be made clear that if you have voted on here that you are ineligible to vote again.

I certainly did not expect anyone to take notice of our threads and posts......but I am glad that they did!

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

I can assure you people definitely do pay attention to the things on here. Also, I didn't say that people who'd already voted couldn't vote again because I did want to get the general opinion of users of this site. And there's always the possibility that some of the 'yes' voters voted here and at the public exhibitions too.

Anyway, I will keep you all informed of things that are going on.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Post 17>> I hope no one is attempting to skew the figures by voting more than once!<<

Post 25>> Also, I didn't say that people who'd already voted couldn't vote again <<

Selective memory too!

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Isn't it interesting that there are five options in the poll and that only one of those options is an actual "Yes" vote which at this point in time has 13.64% of the vote.

The "No" vote has been split between 4 different options of "No" by choosing 4 different possible alternative reasons for voting "No" and I for one felt I was in a bit of a dilemma because I have more than one objection but couldn't decide which was the most important so eventually chose the first one, although I feel equally strongly on the second point also. I wouldn't like the present design even if it were located elsewhere.

I know where you're coming from A-b. Gayle Knight's interpretation of the vote is that only 27.27% of the people object the the entire rationale behind the project so theoretically that can be made to say that the other 72.73% of us are in favour. On the other hand the way I see it is that only 13.64% of the voters are actually in favour and even if you add that to the 25% who do not object to the overall rationale but still feel we have a long way to go (or in Gayle's words it still needs further development) that still only gives a total of 38.64% which is hardly a majority.

Makes you wonder how the other 75% figure (quoted) was arrived at doesn't it?

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

It is clear that the poll options are the same questions which were asked at the public meetings. Thus alllowing MidPennine Arts to claim the same level of support as deduced from the poll held here. If you ask leading questions, you get the answers you want, which is why leading questions are not allowed in courts of law.

For all the pretence of public consultation MidPennine and NWRDA are not in the least bit interested in what we have to say, unless of course we happen to agree with the proposal. This has been just one more of the procedural hoops through which they have to jump and as such, it is about as meaningless and vapid as the second-hand design they are eager to foist on us.

If this proposal is given planning permission we will, sooner or later, regret it. But by then it will be too late to do anything about it and a valuable and intrinsic part of Accrington's history will have been damaged beyond repair. I agree that the Coppice is in need of attention but, this sort of attention it can well do without.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

i voted on another location although i was thinking of france but it didnt let me suggest the new location lol

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

It has gone suspiciously quiet on this front - makes you wonder what they are up to, doesn't it?