Replies

Very timely and topical and deserves loads more discussion and exposure than ‘What Newt said about Mitt after Mitt said something about Newt.’

This sort of thing is the primary method used to ram home everything from zoning variances to school levies to nonsensical transportation expenditures. It’s also used in schools to pressure kids/parents into whatever social engineering issue is in vogue at that particular time.

Nothing aggravates me more than someone putting words in my mouth and/or insulting my intelligence. I hate to use the term ‘it OFFENDS me’ but it applies here.

A ‘facilitator’ who shows up with prefab handouts or PowerPoint slides is not to be trusted especially when they are a poor public speaker and end up reading (ugh) the information verbatim as they do their clockwork soldier routine.

It all sounds and looks rather innocuous even when watching only a few bits of it on public access channels but the result is always the same: more creeping statism.

Whatever one feels about this kind of manipulation of meetings - and for sure it does take place, and whatever opinion one has about the “Delphi Technique” and it to does exist, the two things are quite different.

To the point, what the author describes here as the Delphi Technique is not. There isn’t a single point in common between this manipulative management of meetings and the anonymous blind delphi technique which does not ordinarily even make use of meetings at all.

For a reason I don’t understand the author has rightly objected to the covert manipulation of a public meeting (no problem - a common leftist/greenie/progressive tactic) and incorrectly labeled it as using the Delphi Technique. Why slur the delphi technique in this way?

I attended a couple of meetings held by the BLM to invite public comment on some of their plans. I attended them in two different locations, and my wife and I made it a point to be in separate groups both times.

The stated intent was to get comments from the local residents, but there were very few residents in the meetings. A few, but many people there were from various activist groups who had driven in from out of the area to take part. And a few people in the groups were BLM “interns” in plain clothes. They didn’t really hide who they were, but didn’t advertise it either.

They didn’t try to intimidate anyone at all. They didn’t need to. Most of the comments were of the feel-good type that everyone would agree with. The few comments that went against the grain, such as comments that favored ranchers for example, were accepted with good grace... but they were swamped in the midst of other comments.

Because of the nature of the people showing up at the meeting, the immediate bias was toward greater BLM control. The results from every group and every meeting was exactly what BLM wanted to hear.

At the end of the meetings, both times, once all the groups were brought together to display their comments, there was a surprising uniformity. All groups, both meetings, both locations. So I can attest that the method makes it easy for the people leading the meeting to guide and get the results they want. And, done right, no one realizes they’ve been manipulated unless, like us, you show up at more than one meeting and see just how uniform are the results.

This is being used in Northern California today as liberals are holding public sessions on the Bay Area 2050 plan.

The good news is that people are onto the technique and are fighting back at the public meetings, refusing to be separated into smaller groups, refusing to be screened beforehand by "registering" to attend, etc.

-PJ

The Delphi Technique, what it is and how to counter it
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-news/2200642/posts

Thank you for your comments. While I agree that the purity of a blind Delphi technique can be used without manipulative intent, there is no way that either the Diamond or Delphi technique are used without intent to control outcomes at any public event, especially political.

We can no longer afford to believe in any good will or decency in any public meeting that includes opponents or agitators. We shall not sway opinions with strongly worded letters.