Re: Moderation, Deming Management Philosophy, Resistance to Change

[Kromkowski@aol.com]

I hope there are some specific response to my last post "Re: Moderation", but 
I'd also like to clarify and press forward.

1.  Re: Dowd's statement about misunderstand Deming with respect to 
inspection.

Here, is a classic case of the post-office game.  While there are, no doubt, 
misunderstandings about what Deming wrote about dependence on mass inspection 
and the choice between no inspection and 100% inspection, I don't think I 
made those errors.  We could tell if we would go back to my wording of the 
first post on the subject.  However, that is a bit difficult with an e-mail 
list format, but would not be with a Web based forum.

2.   "Moderation is the _only_ way to ensure high signal/low noise".

First, are we in the business of building carburetors or devices to mix air 
and fuel for combustion?  If an E-mail list is the business then I suppose we 
can't ever move to a Web based forum or anything else, right.

Spam is a function of e-mail.  A web based forum (e.g., the shareware to 
which I directed the DEN) is not an e-mail based forum; therefore the Spam 
which makes up noise is really eliminated.  Now, if the noise is something 
else, well what is it; what are the origins; what's the method and plan for 
improvement?

I will also note that the Web forum shareware I suggested (there are others) 
also allows for moderation.

3.   Resistance to change and personalization

Mr. X is in charge of the carburetor division; he is a great guy and does a 
great job.  Any attempt to move from carburetor building to fuel injector 
building is met with: Mr. X is a great guy and does a great job, quit picking 
on him.

4.  "We won't move to a true and good Web based forum because we'd close off 
people without browsers."

The assertion that there really are people out there with e-mail but no 
access to a browser strikes me as a 1995 answer to a 2001 question. I don't 
believe it!

5.  How much is Jim's desire for control/moderation motivated by the 
following vigorously disputed assertion on the D.E.N Web pages:  "By 
communicating with the DEN or participating in any forum in the site you 
grant the DEN an irrevocable, transferable and worldwide right to use, 
reproduce, display, distribute, sublicense, any information, suggestions, 
ideas, drawings or concepts communicated to the DEN for any purpose the DEN 
chooses, commercial, public or otherwise, without any compensation to you 
whatsoever." 

What exacting is the "DEN" anyway? Is it incorporated, is it a front for 
something else, is it a nonprofit or a for profit entity?  Does "the DEN" = 
Jim or does "the DEN" = everyone who participates, or is "the DEN" something 
totally different?  Total transparency please?

John David Kromkowski
Kromkowski@aol.com