Panopticon Poll
 

This is the final thread that I will start on this subject - promise.

I'm having to start in a new thread as technically, I didn't start the main thread last night Busman747 did by transferring my original letter over from a different area.

Anyway, thanks for all the debate it was useful. Could I ask that you please don't use this thread for any more questions, just for filling in the poll. Keep posting questions in the thread A message from Gayle Knight. Thanks.

By the way, that last poll question should read objections - not objects.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

I've posted this just to raise it in the message list again. It would be unfortunate for it to be ignored as some people have been very vocal on the subject.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Why not ask one of the mods to pin it?

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Don't forget to vote.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

In case anybody has just seen this vote, it is in relation to this thread here:
http://www.accringtonweb.com/forum/t...yle-night.html
Which contains a Question and Answer session with the Panopticon Press Officer Gayle Knight (I'm not sure if that is your correct title :))

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Actual title is Marketing Officer for Mid Pennine Arts but Panopticon Press Officer does kind of explain it, so doesn't really matter. Thanks for spelling my name right though, most people haven't.

Yes, could I stress that it would be useful for people to read the other thread first before responding to this poll.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Only 41 votes, come on any more ?

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Just to let you all know, I'm going to a meeting on Monday so I need to write a report before I go. I'll feed the results from the poll into the report but that means that I'll have to draw a line on voting at around about 3pm tomorrow. I know technically the poll will be open longer than that but I don't want to be working on Sunday night. Hope that's ok with you all - voting seems to have slowed down a bit anyway.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

May I put a couple of points forward here? As someone who no longer lives in the area I cannot see that an earthwork on top of the Coppice which would be invisible from ground level would encourage any future visitors to go up there as they probably wouldn't be aware of it once the novelty had worn off and it no longer featured in local press.

Having said that, if you are trying to attract people to the area would it not make more sense to have something which can be seen and which people would notice and hopefully subsequently talk about? (Like the Angel of the North which has been mentioned elsewhere.) Even a piece of modern sculpture at the front of the Coppice on a level with the monument would seem more sensible than mounds or circles of earth visible only from above.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

I've had to call a halt to the poll now so that I can write a report for a meeting tomorrow. Whilst I thoroughly appreciate that there is still work to be done to get the project right, I am heartened by the fact that only 28% objected to the project in its entirity. This number does concur with all other polls and comments forms that we have collected. I realise that 43 voters is not a huge amount but added to other figures that we have the numbers are starting to add up (plus I know that some of the objectors have voted here and have voted by completing comments forms at the exhibitions which does skew the figures a little).

I want to get the right design for Hyndburn, I live here and I have to live with whatever happens. So, thank you all for taking the time to talk to me the other night and please be assured that all your comments are being taken into consideration.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

I have no objections to the Panopticon project, 13%, be a better indication as it was the only stright out and out question?

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

A rather selective interpretation of the figures there I think Gayle.

From my reading of the results 13.64% had no objection to the project. Everyone else had some form of reservation or other, that is 38 out of a total of 44, or 86.36%.

I fail to see how this supports your claim that the project has 75% support.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

As is yours. I didn't say that there was 75% support - I said that there were 28% objecting all out to the project and the principles behind it. The remainder, whilst having issues and reservations, did not object outright. Therefore, we need to do more work to ensure that the 72% were happy in the end.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

In the words of Benjamin Disraeli:

"There are three kinds of lies: lies, damned lies, and statistics."

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?

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

A-B, I was only thinking that last night.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

while we are all kept occupied with meetings and polls they are moving the diggers into position as we debate it lol

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

He's Joking willow. What ever happens you have to remember that the Coppice was given to the town. You could keep HBC in court for years if they try to do this without the consent of the town’s people. You need an official objection put in place and push for a public enquiry to establish if HBC have the right to do this. Think on nothing as happened up there for near on 100 years?

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

I meant on a localised structural level. The trees are a mistake there is no doubt about that, but they only cling to the side of the hill willow and remain superfical, they aren’t changing the shape or nature of the plateau, the Panopticon will be a construction and will change the surface?

The road skirts the lower reaches of the landscape and is not actually on the coppice. I went up Fern Gore today to get a perspective on the view point of the coppice that I grew up with. All I could see was bloody trees. When I grew up in Accrington the coppice was almost barren moorland, it’s still very much untouched on top. What I always remembered and was disappointed not to be able to see was what we called her scar. That in itself was like a beacon whatever the weather.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

when you say her scar do you mean what i know as teh spread eagle shape formed from where the clay soil is exposed..?

i sugested restoring that but it fell on deaf ears lol

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

the coppice already had a natural feature that could be seen for miles they should have left it alone and saved thousands

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Nothing can go on the Coppice until it has been approved by planning permission - so please don't go scare mongering and saying the diggers are already up there because they aren't.

There has been nothing said about this subject for a week or so because an embargo has been put on it all until after the elections. A certain politician, who it must be said, is not wholeheartedly in favour of the idea, doesn't want it to become a political issue in the run up to the elections.

Finally, I just want to dispute the fact that nothing has been done up there for the last 100 years. The trenches were built during the second world war which is around 65 years ago. I know people have argued that they were built as training trenches for the Accrington Pals but enough people have come forward to dispute that and to say that there was actually a football pitch up there in between the wars.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

i took it as a joke gayle,should imagine so did most.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

the diggers comment was a joke although i have seen aliens up there :eek:

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Out of curiosity and because I thought you probably could, we went up the A56 as far as the roundabout in order to come back down again and look at the Coppice from the road. Apart from a stretch where there are a few sad bushes by the roadshire you get quite a good view of "Panopticonland" as you drive by without having to go to all the trouble of climbing up hills you might not be able to see it from.

Not that this means I'm in favour of the thing you understand, it just means that at least it could be seen from somewhere accessible to disabled people with vehicles.

At this point we began to muse that as there is already a gentle slope and a fair bit of land doing not-a-lot at the bottom it could theoretically be possible to have a "Panopticon Car Park" there and if the path was improved it might even, just might, be possible to push a wheelchair or pram up the slope, maybe. Don't know how they'd get on when they get to the top though because it's still very wild rough grass up there.

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

how they got the idea that a structure or pile of dirt would attract people to accrington in the first place i have no idea and even if it did the novelty would wear off after a week and we would be left with an eyesore and a huge maintinence bill each year which would get stuck on our council tax bills most likely

to prove my point Darwen has the darwen tower yet that does not attract huge amounts of tourism to darwen although people do run up to it who live in darwen to keep fit but people run up our coppice already so we dont need anything for that purpous

when i go to darwen on a saturday afternoon it is very busy but i put this down to iceland having a weekly £5 meal deal and not because darwen tower attracted people ( i go to visit family not the tower incase anyone was wondering)

no one will to come to accrington to look at a piece of so called art stuck on the coppice and the few that are stupid enough to wont be bringing buckets full of money to spend in our town to justify the money spent

lets spend £50.000 on a piece of art in the hope that some sad idiot forgets to pack his lunch and nips to the newsagents on avenue parade for a bag of crisps and a can of coke

we got almost a full pound from that tourist the moneys rolling into accrington now


you awant to attract people to acccrington cleaning it up would be a good start


sorry but i simply cant get my head around how piece of art on coppice = loads of money for accrington the idea alone is sheer lunarcy

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

And I am told the Coppice was Accy Golf Club until 1914. Making an issue non political because of the elections. Is that devious or honest politics?

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

Re: Panopticon Poll
 

well well what a surprise eh graham