Quality of CIPD online discussions

Not so Mark: You just climbed out of the trap and then fell back in there! 8/10 cat owners (say) their cats prefer Whiskas (how do they know, did they ask them or ask them to fill out a questionnaire?) and you correctly therefore note that we have no data on the other two... but not having that data means we cannot judge whether the cats (allegedly) didn't like; didn't taste ....or died.

By the same criteria we cannot know whether either all the activists and extremists are contributing, nor whether all those who do contribute are activists/extremists; or indeed, if they are, whether they want change: One can be actively and extremely opposed to change: Look at the RC Church on homosexuality, women priests or contraception for instance!.

Does the lack of comment from the RC faithful mean there are no homosexuals, women or families overburdened with children within the Church who would like there to be change? Of course there it doesn't! It means that they simply do not feel empowered to comment given the church's implacable opposition!

The argument that all comment is dissent and/or that all comment (and/or dissent) comes from activists or extremists has historically also had some terrifying implications, for this is the argument which justifies and underpins oppression, be it the religious oppression of the inquisition; or the political repression of the Stalinist Soviet Union.

I am sure this is a road none of us would wish to tread and thus "only activists comment" (etc.) an assumption none of us would make about our colleagues!

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" is a key truth of any statistic and of any debate. "No comment" does not mean "No" any more than it means "Yes",

...And thus colleagues' disinclination to accept "....................." as being a valid attitude or opinion rather than "I am unbiased" or some other possible interpretation is, surely, not a jibe but respect of your right to be assumed to give no information from what you have given; which is: No comment. 

"No comment" as a position or opinion cannot be built upon (except by the press) and thus is indeed literally "not constructive" {:-)

Peter 

Not so Mark: You just climbed out of the trap and then fell back in there! 8/10 cat owners (say) their cats prefer Whiskas (how do they know, did they ask them or ask them to fill out a questionnaire?) and you correctly therefore note that we have no data on the other two... but not having that data means we cannot judge whether the cats (allegedly) didn't like; didn't taste ....or died.

By the same criteria we cannot know whether either all the activists and extremists are contributing, nor whether all those who do contribute are activists/extremists; or indeed, if they are, whether they want change: One can be actively and extremely opposed to change: Look at the RC Church on homosexuality, women priests or contraception for instance!.

Does the lack of comment from the RC faithful mean there are no homosexuals, women or families overburdened with children within the Church who would like there to be change? Of course there it doesn't! It means that they simply do not feel empowered to comment given the church's implacable opposition!

The argument that all comment is dissent and/or that all comment (and/or dissent) comes from activists or extremists has historically also had some terrifying implications, for this is the argument which justifies and underpins oppression, be it the religious oppression of the inquisition; or the political repression of the Stalinist Soviet Union.

I am sure this is a road none of us would wish to tread and thus "only activists comment" (etc.) an assumption none of us would make about our colleagues!

"Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence" is a key truth of any statistic and of any debate. "No comment" does not mean "No" any more than it means "Yes",

...And thus colleagues' disinclination to accept "....................." as being a valid attitude or opinion rather than "I am unbiased" or some other possible interpretation is, surely, not a jibe but respect of your right to be assumed to give no information from what you have given; which is: No comment. 

"No comment" as a position or opinion cannot be built upon (except by the press) and thus is indeed literally "not constructive" {:-)

Peter