The Delphi Technique: Let’s Stop Being Manipulated!

[InterestedParticipant]

Sound familiar....???


The Delphi Technique: Let’s Stop Being Manipulated!

http://etherzone.com/2002/burn092302.shtml
By Albert V. Burns

More and more, we are seeing citizens being invited to “participate” in various forms of meetings, councils, or boards to “help determine” public policy in one field or another. They are supposedly being included to get ”input” from the public to help officials make final decisions on taxes, education, community growth or whatever the particular subject matter might be.

Sounds great, doesn’t it? Unfortunately, surface appearances are often deceiving.

You, Mr. or Mrs. Citizen, decide to take part in one of these meetings.

Generally, you will find that there is already someone designated to lead or “facilitate” the meeting. Supposedly, the job of the facilitator is to be a neutral, non-directing helper to see that the meeting flows smoothly.

Actually, he or she is there for exactly the opposite reason: to see that the conclusions reached during the meeting are in accord with a plan already decided upon by those who called the meeting.

The process used to “facilitate” the meeting is called the Delphi Technique. This Delphi Technique was developed by the RAND Corporation for the U.S. Department of Defense back in the 1950s. It was originally intended for use as a psychological weapon during the cold war.

However, it was soon recognized that the steps of Delphi could be very valuable in manipulating ANY meeting toward a predetermined end.

How does the process take place? The techniques are well developed and well defined.

First, the person who will be leading the meeting, the facilitator or Change Agent must be a likable person with whom those participating in the meeting can agree or sympathize.

It is, therefore, the job of the facilitator to find a way to cause a split in the audience, to establish one or a few of the people as “bad guys” while the facilitator is perceived as the “good guy.”

Facilitators are trained to recognize potential opponents and how to make such people appear aggressive, foolish, extremist, etc. Once this is done, the facilitator establishes himself or herself as the “friend” of the rest of the audience.

The stage is now set for the rest of the agenda to take place.

At this point, the audience is generally broken up into “discussion—or ‘breakout’—groups” of seven or eight people each. Each of these groups is to be led by a subordinate facilitator.

Within each group, discussion takes place of issues, already decided upon by the leadership of the meeting. Here, too, the facilitator manipulates the discussion in the desired direction, isolating and demeaning opposing viewpoints.

Generally, participants are asked to write down their ideas and disagreements with the papers to be turned in and “compiled” for general discussion after the general meeting is reconvened.

This is the weak link in the chain, which you are not supposed to recognize. Who compiles the various notes into the final agenda for discussion? Ahhhh! Well, it is those who are running the meeting.

How do you know that the ideas on your notes were included in the final result? You Don’t! You may realize that your idea was not included and come to the conclusion that you were probably in the minority. Recognize that every other citizen member of this meeting has written his or her likes or dislikes on a similar sheet of paper and they, too, have no idea whether their ideas were “compiled” into the final result! You don’t even know if anyone’s ideas are part of the final “conclusions” presented to the reassembled group as the “consensus” of public opinion.

Rarely does anyone challenge the process, since each concludes that he or she was in the minority and different from all the others.

So, now, those who organized the meeting in the first place are able to tell the participants and the rest of the community that the conclusions, reached at the meeting, are the result of public participation.

Actually, the desired conclusions had been established, in the back room, long before the meeting ever took place. There are variations in the technique to fit special situations but, in general, the procedure outlined above takes place.

The natural question to ask here is: If the outcome was preordained before the meeting took place, why have the meeting? Herein lies the genius of this Delphi Technique.

It is imperative that the general public believe that this program is theirs! They thought it up! They took part in its development! Their input was recognized!

If people believe that the program is theirs, they will support it.

If they get the slightest hint that the program is being imposed upon them, they will resist.

This very effective technique is being used, over and over and over, to change our form of government from the representative republic, intended by the Founding Fathers, into a “participatory democracy." Now, citizens chosen at large are manipulated into accepting preset outcomes while they believe that the input they provided produced the outcomes which are now theirs! The reality is that the final outcome was already determined long before any public meetings took place, determined by individuals unknown to the public. Can you say “Conspiracy?”

These “Change Agents” or “Facilitators” can be beaten! They may be beaten using their own methods against them.

Because it is so important, I will repeat the suggestions I gave in the last previous column. One: Never, never lose your temper! Lose your temper and lose the battle, it is that simple! Smile, if it kills you to do so. Be courteous at all times. Speak in a normal tone of voice.

Two: Stay focused! Always write your question or statement down in advance to help you remember the exact manner in which your question or statement was made.

These agents are trained to twist things to make anyone not acceding to their agenda look silly or aggressive. Smile, wait till the change agent gets done speaking and then bring them back to your question. If they distort what you said, simply remind those in the group that what he or she is saying is not what you asked or said and then repeat, verbatim, from your notes the original objection.

Three: Be persistent! Wait through any harangues and then repeat the original question. (Go back and reread the previous column.)

Four: (I wish to thank a reader of the previous column for some EXCELLENT suggestions.) Don’t go alone! Get as many friends or relatives who think as you do, to go along with you to the meeting. Have each person ”armed” with questions or statements which all generally support your central viewpoint. Don’t sit together as a group! Spread out through the audience so that your group does not seem to be a group.

When the facilitator or change agent avoids answering your question and insists that he must move on so everyone may have a chance to speak, your own agents in the audience can then ask questions, worded differently, but still with the same meaning as yours. They can bring the discussion back to your original point.

They could even point out, in a friendly manner, that the agent did not really answer your question. The more the agent avoids your question, and the more your friends bring that to the attention of the group, the more the audience will shift in your favor.

To quote my informant: “Turn the technique back on them and isolate the change agent as the kook. I’ve done it and seen steam come out of the ears of those power brokers in the wings who are trying to shove something down the citizen’s throats. And it’s so much fun to watch the moderator squirm and lose his cool, all while trying to keep a smile on his face.”

Now that you understand how meetings are manipulated, let’s show them up for the charlatans which they are.

[InterestedParticipant]

Here's a summary version of the key points, for those not wishing to read the entire article. These techniuqes are being used here, do you recognize them?



The Delphi Technique: Let’s Stop Being Manipulated!

....developed by the RAND Corporation for the U.S. Department of Defense back in the 1950s. It was originally intended for use as a psychological weapon during the cold war.

However, it was soon recognized that the steps of Delphi could be very valuable in manipulating ANY meeting toward a predetermined end.

...the job of the "Change Agent" [is] to find a way to cause a split in the audience, to establish one or a few of the people as “bad guys” while the Change Agentis perceived as the “good guy.”

Change Agents are trained to recognize potential opponents and how to make such people appear aggressive, foolish, extremist, etc. Once this is done, the Change Agent establishes himself or herself as the “friend” of the rest of the audience.

[LibertyEagle]

What technique were you using when you used a 2nd account here, for whatever it was that you were trying to do?
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=231218

[TruckinMike]

Good for defeating Glenn Beck. Saul Alinsky reincarnate.

TMike

[InterestedParticipant]

What technique were you using when you used a 2nd account here, for whatever it was that you were trying to do?
http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=231218
I was actually attempting to migrate to a new username, unless you guys are willing to change this one for me, but no one ever gave me the chance to explain anything, I was just slammed AFTER being banned.

Now, to get back on to the topic of this OP. You're post wasn't attempting to do the following, was it?




...the job of the "Change Agent" [is] to find a way to cause a split in the audience, to establish one or a few of the people as “bad guys” while the Change Agentis perceived as the “good guy.”

Change Agents are trained to recognize potential opponents and how to make such people appear aggressive, foolish, extremist, etc.

[teacherone]

IP is a simulcrum-- where do you buy all your sock puppets?

[LibertyEagle]

Why did you want to "migrate to a new username", rather than continue posting under Interested Participant? Since you are the self-professed guru of manipulation techniques on this board, perhaps you should explain yourself.

Info. on changing names, here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=157603

[InterestedParticipant]

IP is a simulcrum-- where do you buy all your sock puppets?
Was this just an ad hominem, or are you attempting to "recognize potential opponents and make such people appear aggressive, foolish, extremist, etc."???


Propaganda techniques: Ad hominem

A Latin phrase which has come to mean attacking your opponent, as opposed to attacking their arguments.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Propaganda_techniques




Change Agents are trained to recognize potential opponents and make such people appear aggressive, foolish, extremist, etc.




Why did you want to "migrate to a new username", rather than continue posting under Interested Participant? Since you are the self-professed guru of manipulation techniques on this board, perhaps you should explain yourself.

Info. on changing names, here: http://www.ronpaulforums.com/showthread.php?t=157603
Thank you for the information on changing ones username. Please take this other matter to another thread, or handle it via PM, as this is way off-topic from the OP.

[moostraks]

Amusing turn of events since IP has been slamming the boards lately with a particular flavor of apathy as brilliant strategic policy.

Intriguing that IP uses the policy of dismissing those in disagreement by telling them to get of the thread or ignoring them as if they are a pariah, therefore silencing any attempts to counterbalance any arguments being posed.

[torchbearer]

Amusing turn of events since IP has been slamming the boards lately with a particular flavor of apathy as brilliant strategic policy.

Intriguing that IP uses the policy of dismissing those in disagreement by telling them to get of the thread or ignoring them as if they are a pariah, therefore silencing any attempts to counterbalance any arguments being posed.

that is what the power elite do to us to not engage us in a true debate on the issue.

[adamant]

I see what's going on here.

[moostraks]

that is what the power elite do to us to not engage us in a true debate on the issue.

agreed...

nice new avatar btw...

[torchbearer]

agreed...

nice new avatar btw...

just trying to represent.
did you notice the lizard people in the "for liberty" movement?

[moostraks]

just trying to represent.
did you notice the lizard people in the "for liberty" movement?

yep...LOL!!!:D

[ARealConservative]

I was actually attempting to migrate to a new username, unless you guys are willing to change this one for me, but no one ever gave me the chance to explain anything, I was just slammed AFTER being banned.

Now, to get back on to the topic of this OP. You're post wasn't attempting to do the following, was it?

we totally believe that too!

[CapitalistRadical]

Well that's a very interesting article. Thank you for posting it. However, it seems that the Delphi Technique was originally created (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphi_method)to extract predictions from experts, not for manipulating fraudulent town hall meetings.

[Peace&Freedom]

Actually this was a very good post by InterestedParticipant, which brought some light instead the unfortunate "I'm the only one here aware of cointelpro methods being used against us" tone seen in other threads.

The delphi approach is most commonly seen locally in so-called 'interactive' public hearings where the community's input is supposedly being asked for, but the actual agenda is a dog and pony show where the anointed "experts" on the panel get most of the real speaking time from their podium chairs, while those opposed to the board/agency proposed action have to line up and give rushed comments, often after the main decision makers have already left. The real purpose was merely to legitimize the course the administrators were already set on, by showing they had gone through the motions of getting public feedback. The hearing audience merely participated in facilitating the action go forward, while being conditioned by the hearing format to accept the decision makers were competent and well-intentioned.

It's only when the playing field gets leveled by NOT legitimizing the public overlords, where change or reversal of policy becomes possible---e.g., the at times raucus town halls last year. There the politicians were not treated like demi-gods or positions treated as informed or reached in good faith. Because the pols/pundits were not able to foster a Delphi glow of self-evident superiority on those occasions, they complained about how 'angry' or wild the town halls had become (or, how the serfs had got uppity).

Another example is found in you tube videos of verbal exchanges between We Are Change groups and pols, where the pols are often shown to be rattled after facing real questions and issues not spun by a Luntz or a fawning news anchor. The lawmakers have apparently been insulated for so long from people who do not exalt them, that they virtually shrink before our eyes when honestly confronted. It's one of the only effective forms of street activism left, precisely because it directly fights back against the Delphi massaging of public opinion.

[someperson]

Good to be aware of. Thanks IP

[InterestedParticipant]

Amusing turn of events since IP has been slamming the boards lately with a particular flavor of apathy as brilliant strategic policy.

Intriguing that IP uses the policy of dismissing those in disagreement by telling them to get of the thread or ignoring them as if they are a pariah, therefore silencing any attempts to counterbalance any arguments being posed.
Prove your assertion with specific support by quote material in this thread where I have done what you accuse me of. I posted an article. How is that some attempt at dismissing others? Don't throw ad hominems and then run away, support your accusations!

Further, I am not censoring conversation, I'm merely attempting to keep conversation focused. I do not move threads to private 'off-topic' regions of this forum after they have had hundreds of posts and thousands of views, that is done by others. These techniques are done by others, ever after multiple attempts by forum posters to bring issues up for discussion.


just trying to represent.
did you notice the lizard people in the "for liberty" movement?
Irrelevant Ad hominem. Grow up.


Well that's a very interesting article. Thank you for posting it. However, it seems that the Delphi Technique was originally created (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Delphi_method)to extract predictions from experts, not for manipulating fraudulent town hall meetings.
It was adopted for use by the Dept of Education to manipulate PTA groups and the like. More recently, it has been adapted to online forums and blog commenting engines. I think everyone has witnessed this technique in use at this forum.


Actually this was a very good post by InterestedParticipant, which brought some light instead the unfortunate "I'm the only one here aware of cointelpro methods being used against us" tone seen in other threads.

The delphi approach is most commonly seen locally in so-called 'interactive' public hearings where the community's input is supposedly being asked for, but the actual agenda is a dog and pony show where the anointed "experts" on the panel get most of the real speaking time from their podium chairs, while those opposed to the board/agency proposed action have to line up and give rushed comments, often after the main decision makers have already left. The real purpose was merely to legitimize the course the administrators were already set on, by showing they had gone through the motions of getting public feedback. The hearing audience merely participated in facilitating the action go forward, while being conditioned by the hearing format to accept the decision makers were competent and well-intentioned.

It's only when the playing field gets leveled by NOT legitimizing the public overlords, where change or reversal of policy becomes possible---e.g., the at times raucus town halls last year. There the politicians were not treated like demi-gods or positions treated as informed or reached in good faith. Because the pols/pundits were not able to foster a Delphi glow of self-evident superiority on those occasions, they complained about how 'angry' or wild the town halls had become (or, how the serfs had got uppity).

Another example is found in you tube videos of verbal exchanges between We Are Change groups and pols, where the pols are often shown to be rattled after facing real questions and issues not spun by a Luntz or a fawning news anchor. The lawmakers have apparently been insulated for so long from people who do not exalt them, that they virtually shrink before our eyes when honestly confronted. It's one of the only effective forms of street activism left, precisely because it directly fights back against the Delphi massaging of public opinion.
Again, prove your assertion that a particular tone is being used in this thread.

What is horribly ironic, is that the Delphi Technique is being used in this thread in an attempt to isolate the OP from the rest of the group, by implementing ridicule, disdain, mockery and claiming that the OP has a politically incorrect delivery. See this for what it is. This is exactly how it works, right here right now. Instead of focusing on the message and its importance, extraneous and irrelevant matters are brought to the forefront in an attempt to isolate the messenger.

Do you see it?

[ARealConservative]

What is horribly ironic, is that the Delphi Technique is being used in this thread in an attempt to isolate the OP from the rest of the group, by implementing ridicule, disdain, mockery and claiming that the OP has a politically incorrect delivery. See this for what it is. This is exactly how it works, right here right now. Instead of focusing on the message and its importance, extraneous and irrelevant matters are brought to the forefront in an attempt to isolate the messenger.

Do you see it?

I see it alright.

"this elevator only goes to the basement. And someone made an awful mess down there"

[heavenlyboy34]

Interesting stuff, OP. Thanks.

[torchbearer]

Irrelevant Ad hominem. Grow up.

there were lizard people in the For Liberty movement, and you do avoid honest debate with "Ad Hominems". the very thing you acuse others of.
maybe you are just illustrating controlled vectors with your lulz control vector debate style.
maybe you don't realize it at all.

[torchbearer]

in this one shot- how many lizard people do you see?
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2621/4017802233_0caa4d38ed_b.jpg

[InterestedParticipant]

Wow, turning the lights-on really scares some people here. Why?

[heavenlyboy34]

Wow, turning the lights-on really scares some people here. Why?


I suspect that they're afraid of the psychic pain that would ensue from objectively questioning the "official" story. JMHO

[torchbearer]

Wow, turning the lights-on really scares some people here. Why?

Fear is the mind killer. I do not fear.
I'm just stating fact.
People watch without seeing. It is just fact.

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Sound familiar....???


The Delphi Technique: Let’s Stop Being Manipulated!

http://etherzone.com/2002/burn092302.shtml
By Albert V. Burns

More and more, we are seeing citizens being invited to “participate” in various forms of meetings, councils, or boards to “help determine” public policy in one field or another. They are supposedly being included to get ”input” from the public to help officials make final decisions on taxes, education, community growth or whatever the particular subject matter might be.

Sounds great, doesn’t it? Unfortunately, surface appearances are often deceiving.

You, Mr. or Mrs. Citizen, decide to take part in one of these meetings.

Generally, you will find that there is already someone designated to lead or “facilitate” the meeting. Supposedly, the job of the facilitator is to be a neutral, non-directing helper to see that the meeting flows smoothly.

Actually, he or she is there for exactly the opposite reason: to see that the conclusions reached during the meeting are in accord with a plan already decided upon by those who called the meeting.

The process used to “facilitate” the meeting is called the Delphi Technique. This Delphi Technique was developed by the RAND Corporation for the U.S. Department of Defense back in the 1950s. It was originally intended for use as a psychological weapon during the cold war.

However, it was soon recognized that the steps of Delphi could be very valuable in manipulating ANY meeting toward a predetermined end.

How does the process take place? The techniques are well developed and well defined.

First, the person who will be leading the meeting, the facilitator or Change Agent must be a likable person with whom those participating in the meeting can agree or sympathize.

It is, therefore, the job of the facilitator to find a way to cause a split in the audience, to establish one or a few of the people as “bad guys” while the facilitator is perceived as the “good guy.”

Facilitators are trained to recognize potential opponents and how to make such people appear aggressive, foolish, extremist, etc. Once this is done, the facilitator establishes himself or herself as the “friend” of the rest of the audience.

The stage is now set for the rest of the agenda to take place.

At this point, the audience is generally broken up into “discussion—or ‘breakout’—groups” of seven or eight people each. Each of these groups is to be led by a subordinate facilitator.

Within each group, discussion takes place of issues, already decided upon by the leadership of the meeting. Here, too, the facilitator manipulates the discussion in the desired direction, isolating and demeaning opposing viewpoints.

Generally, participants are asked to write down their ideas and disagreements with the papers to be turned in and “compiled” for general discussion after the general meeting is reconvened.

This is the weak link in the chain, which you are not supposed to recognize. Who compiles the various notes into the final agenda for discussion? Ahhhh! Well, it is those who are running the meeting.

How do you know that the ideas on your notes were included in the final result? You Don’t! You may realize that your idea was not included and come to the conclusion that you were probably in the minority. Recognize that every other citizen member of this meeting has written his or her likes or dislikes on a similar sheet of paper and they, too, have no idea whether their ideas were “compiled” into the final result! You don’t even know if anyone’s ideas are part of the final “conclusions” presented to the reassembled group as the “consensus” of public opinion.

Rarely does anyone challenge the process, since each concludes that he or she was in the minority and different from all the others.

So, now, those who organized the meeting in the first place are able to tell the participants and the rest of the community that the conclusions, reached at the meeting, are the result of public participation.

Actually, the desired conclusions had been established, in the back room, long before the meeting ever took place. There are variations in the technique to fit special situations but, in general, the procedure outlined above takes place.

The natural question to ask here is: If the outcome was preordained before the meeting took place, why have the meeting? Herein lies the genius of this Delphi Technique.

It is imperative that the general public believe that this program is theirs! They thought it up! They took part in its development! Their input was recognized!

If people believe that the program is theirs, they will support it.

If they get the slightest hint that the program is being imposed upon them, they will resist.

This very effective technique is being used, over and over and over, to change our form of government from the representative republic, intended by the Founding Fathers, into a “participatory democracy." Now, citizens chosen at large are manipulated into accepting preset outcomes while they believe that the input they provided produced the outcomes which are now theirs! The reality is that the final outcome was already determined long before any public meetings took place, determined by individuals unknown to the public. Can you say “Conspiracy?”

These “Change Agents” or “Facilitators” can be beaten! They may be beaten using their own methods against them.

Because it is so important, I will repeat the suggestions I gave in the last previous column. One: Never, never lose your temper! Lose your temper and lose the battle, it is that simple! Smile, if it kills you to do so. Be courteous at all times. Speak in a normal tone of voice.

Two: Stay focused! Always write your question or statement down in advance to help you remember the exact manner in which your question or statement was made.

These agents are trained to twist things to make anyone not acceding to their agenda look silly or aggressive. Smile, wait till the change agent gets done speaking and then bring them back to your question. If they distort what you said, simply remind those in the group that what he or she is saying is not what you asked or said and then repeat, verbatim, from your notes the original objection.

Three: Be persistent! Wait through any harangues and then repeat the original question. (Go back and reread the previous column.)

Four: (I wish to thank a reader of the previous column for some EXCELLENT suggestions.) Don’t go alone! Get as many friends or relatives who think as you do, to go along with you to the meeting. Have each person ”armed” with questions or statements which all generally support your central viewpoint. Don’t sit together as a group! Spread out through the audience so that your group does not seem to be a group.

When the facilitator or change agent avoids answering your question and insists that he must move on so everyone may have a chance to speak, your own agents in the audience can then ask questions, worded differently, but still with the same meaning as yours. They can bring the discussion back to your original point.

They could even point out, in a friendly manner, that the agent did not really answer your question. The more the agent avoids your question, and the more your friends bring that to the attention of the group, the more the audience will shift in your favor.

To quote my informant: “Turn the technique back on them and isolate the change agent as the kook. I’ve done it and seen steam come out of the ears of those power brokers in the wings who are trying to shove something down the citizen’s throats. And it’s so much fun to watch the moderator squirm and lose his cool, all while trying to keep a smile on his face.”

Now that you understand how meetings are manipulated, let’s show them up for the charlatans which they are.

Juxtapositionally speaking, as the high king owns all things, the inverse prostitute owns nothing. Yet, as a face represents authority, consider the expression "to lose face," she chooses not to hide her shame behind the veil of a concubine. So, the prostitute welds authority.
As she represents the people, the multitudes seeking after the salvation of the Almighty as a nation, she is the body. As the body, she owns all property as the people own all property, she owns the purse as the people should own the economy, and she has the right to divorce tyranny as the people have that right.
As the people have anguished forever building a car to travel around in, tyranny with just the snap of a finger can have a safer, faster, and more comfortable one customized for them. With just the wave of a hand, they pass legislation that fits them into suits, polishes their nails, and shines their shoes.
So, it is the people who need an economy as they are at a severe disadvantage. This means it needs to be controlled.
Therefore, the self evident and unalienable Truth empowers the people with all property, the purse, and the right to divorce tyranny. This is the limit to their power. Any diviance away from this limited power by pundits, extremists and political zealots will usurp them of their power.

[Flash]

in this one shot- how many lizard people do you see?
http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2621/4017802233_0caa4d38ed_b.jpg

14.

[InterestedParticipant]

Moderators, can you please help keep this thread on-topic!

[Uncle Emanuel Watkins]

Moderators, can you please help keep this thread on-topic!

The Freeth will not set you true for such is only babbling, emotional madness. Once again, liberty for the sake of liberty is no better than slavery. Such things as liberty and equality are only prerequisites necessary for a higher Civil Purpose.

[moostraks]

Prove your assertion with specific support by quote material in this thread where I have done what you accuse me of. I posted an article. How is that some attempt at dismissing others? Don't throw ad hominems and then run away, support your accusations!

Although I can sometimes be here extensively when I am trapped in the schoolroom near the 'puter, today was not such a day. So lay off the running away accusation...

All you have to do is look at the quote at the bottom of your posts:

"* * * Saboteurs and Dupes are on my Ignore List. My non-response means they're included. * * *"

Or how about your slant regarding LE implying they are a "change agent" in yet another paranoid the world is controlled on every level thread.


Originally Posted by LibertyEagle
What technique were you using when you used a 2nd account here, for whatever it was that you were trying to do?

Quote:
Originally Posted by InterestedParticipant
Now, to get back on to the topic of this OP. You're post wasn't attempting to do the following, was it?

Quote:
Originally Posted by InterestedParticipant

...the job of the "Change Agent" [is] to find a way to cause a split in the audience, to establish one or a few of the people as “bad guys” while the Change Agentis perceived as the “good guy.”

Change Agents are trained to recognize potential opponents and how to make such people appear aggressive, foolish, extremist, etc

Is that specific enough for ya???:)


Further, I am not censoring conversation, I'm merely attempting to keep conversation focused. I do not move threads to private 'off-topic' regions of this forum after they have had hundreds of posts and thousands of views, that is done by others. These techniques are done by others, ever after multiple attempts by forum posters to bring issues up for discussion.

It appears you are quite the narcissist. Don't be so paranoid. They move posts as they see fit and you have been flooding general politics with philosophy topics or similar vein threads. Stop acting as if the mods are at your disposal and command.

Even more amusing is your paranoia towards TB as I did not take it to be referencing you per say but the general tone here has been reptillian in nature. Go breath some fresh air. Quit demanding people comply with your commands. Your demeanor makes one question your sincerity.


What is horribly ironic, is that the Delphi Technique is being used in this thread in an attempt to isolate the OP from the rest of the group, by implementing ridicule, disdain, mockery and claiming that the OP has a politically incorrect delivery. See this for what it is. This is exactly how it works, right here right now. Instead of focusing on the message and its importance, extraneous and irrelevant matters are brought to the forefront in an attempt to isolate the messenger.

Do you see it?

You are internalizing your paranoid fascinations to presume you are being targeted. Your delivery sucks and more than one of us has told you not to be patronizing, it insults our intelligence. You have made numerous threads lately upon which more than once I asked you what your suggestions were that would combat the intense infrastructure you feel controls the entirety of the grid. I am still waiting...

Should I assume your previous non-answers mean I am a saboteur or a dupe?

[torchbearer]

14.

I only saw 5. you got better eyes than i do.
there is also one mossad agent in the photo. not sure about the tie between the two.

[Peace&Freedom]

Again, prove your assertion that a particular tone is being used in this thread.

Do you see it?

I didn't assert you had that tone in this thread, but in many other threads.

[InterestedParticipant]

Should I assume your previous non-answers mean I am a saboteur or a dupe?
Adding to my ignore list

[moostraks]

Adding to my ignore list

I'm crying :rolleyes: You demanded the response and then prove my point...

Guess nothing is to be said when the facts speak for themselves. :D

[tangent4ronpaul]

The original post is a conspiracy piece that gets reposted periodically. It's not the "Delphi Technique" - This is:

a qualitative forecasting method in which a panel of experts respond individually to a questionnaire or series of questionnaires, before reaching a consensus. The Delphi technique requires individual submission of, and response to, the questionnaire on the topic under investigation, in order to avoid the effect of a dominant personality influencing a group discussion. A summary of the written replies is then distributed so that responses can be revised in the light of the views expressed. This cycle is repeated until the coordinator of the group is satisfied that the best possible consensus has been reached. The Delphi technique was developed at the Rand Corporation during the late 1940s and 1950s and owes its name to the Greek oracle at Delphi, which was believed to make predictions about the future.

-t

[InterestedParticipant]

The original post is a conspiracy piece that gets reposted periodically. It's not the "Delphi Technique" - This is:

a qualitative forecasting method in which a panel of experts respond individually to a questionnaire or series of questionnaires, before reaching a consensus. The Delphi technique requires individual submission of, and response to, the questionnaire on the topic under investigation, in order to avoid the effect of a dominant personality influencing a group discussion. A summary of the written replies is then distributed so that responses can be revised in the light of the views expressed. This cycle is repeated until the coordinator of the group is satisfied that the best possible consensus has been reached. The Delphi technique was developed at the Rand Corporation during the late 1940s and 1950s and owes its name to the Greek oracle at Delphi, which was believed to make predictions about the future.

-t
More use of labels in an attempt to discredit something. This time it is the used of the dreaded word "Conspiracy" to define the piece. In short, I'm not even sure how that applies here, other than to try and scare others away from reading the material and thinking on their own. Wow, this OP has really frightened some here... why?


DELPHI TECHNIQUE: Communication technique used to manipulate a diverse group toward a consensus position through circulating information for comment in several rounds synthesizing the responses until all agree. If a participant's view cannot be synthesized with the groups after repeated rounds, then the premise must be declared invalid and abandoned. Breaks down moral barriers and shifts students world view from the old to the new paradigm.

from...
GLOSSARY of Education Terms
http://www.crossroad.to/glossary/education.html

[CapitalistRadical]

More use of labels in an attempt to discredit something. This time it is the used of the dreaded word "Conspiracy" to define the piece. In short, I'm not even sure how that applies here, other than to try and scare others away from reading the material and thinking on their own. Wow, this OP has really frightened some here... why?

It's somewhat tedious to continually openly wonder if posters here are members of a shadowy conspiracy to silence you. Questioning them is moot, since obviously, conspirators will deny.

I think it is called a “conspiracy” article because a moment of research shows the actual Delphi Technique is totally inapplicable to fixing town hall meetings. This is exactly the sort of gray propaganda technique used to discredit decent work. Sort of like the documents that ruined Dan Rather.

[InterestedParticipant]

It's somewhat tedious to continually openly wonder if posters here are members of a shadowy conspiracy to silence you. Questioning them is moot, since obviously, conspirators will deny.

I think it is called a “conspiracy” article because a moment of research shows the actual Delphi Technique is totally inapplicable to fixing town hall meetings. This is exactly the sort of gray propaganda technique used to discredit decent work. Sort of like the documents that ruined Dan Rather.
Please explain how it is not appropriate for "fixing" townhall meetings. As part of that proof, please also to explain to us why the Department of Education trained Change Agents in Delphi in order to visit Parents, Teachers and Boards of Education in order to introduce new standards and systems into the educational system.

Further, how is this gray propaganda. Please explain what gray propaganda is (another label) and explain how calling "this" gray propaganda should alter our view of the OP.

Again, a tremendous amount of bullets are being shot at the OP, but I have yet to hear anything tangible.

[adamant]

The Delphi Method: An Experimental Study of Group Opinion http://www.rand.org/pubs/research_memoranda/2005/RM5888.pdf

[amonasro]

Wow, turning the lights-on really scares some people here. Why?

I think it's that we just don't trust you after posting under a different username. Your posts I always find interesting and provocative, but you come off as incredibly paranoid if you don't mind me saying so. Life is about the journey; get out there and enjoy it!

[Lisle16]

Excellent analysis, I agree that this is the major problem facing us.

[CapitalistRadical]

Please explain how it is not appropriate for "fixing" townhall meetings.

Read that PDF and you'll see for yourself. Perhaps there are two different Delphi Methods, but this one is not what is described by the original post.

Also tired is any complaints about labeling. Every single noun and verb is a label.

[InterestedParticipant]

I think it's that we just don't trust you after posting under a different username. Your posts I always find interesting and provocative, but you come off as incredibly paranoid if you don't mind me saying so. Life is about the journey; get out there and enjoy it!
I call baloney on your statement. Give me a break, I posted under a username that I didn't have a chance to use more than one day, and you're going to now use that to label a poster (use of more labels again) who has consistently posted some of the most original and insightful work on this forum.

But hey, don't trust me. That's actually a positive development. In fact, you shouldn't trust any of the people here on this forum. You should do your own research, use your own experience, and make up your own mind through true independent thinking. I think that would be a marvelous idea, actually.

As far as the Delphi Techniques is concerned, I'm not sure how anyone can deny its use on these forums on a frequent basis in order to marginalize various posters and/or messages.

As far as life is concerned, thanks for your input. I'm sure I still have quite a bit to learn.

As far as your comments on being paranoid, I will defer to other great thinkers to provide a response...



Paranoia

“Sometimes paranoia's just having all the facts.”
- William S. Burroughs


"No matter how paranoid or conspiracy-minded you are, what the government is actually doing is worse than you imagine."
-- William Blum

[InterestedParticipant]

Read that PDF and you'll see for yourself. Perhaps there are two different Delphi Methods, but this one is not what is described by the original post.

Also tired is any complaints about labeling. Every single noun and verb is a label.
May I suggest you go back and read Plato to better understand what is meant by the term "expert" as referred to in that report. Plato argued for a society managed by "experts" rather than manged through self-rule, as the Athenian were already doing.

Hence, the entire system design of Delphi was to insert "experts" into the decision making process in order to "guide" and "control" the decision making process.

This is precisely the point that I am making in this thread.

Finally, do you deny that techniques of manipulation are employed on this forum in order to marginalize some members and some messages?