Sheffield Forum

Latest Tree Felling, Sandford Grove Rd etc .

Home > Sheffield > Sheffield News & Discussions

Reply To Topic
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread
17-09-2018, 20:57   #2181
hackey lad
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2011
Total Posts: 4,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Longcol View Post
And presumably the council had to use "The Occupier" due to the constraints of the Data Protection Act.
If a brown envelope marked "the Occupier" came to my address it would go straight in the bin . Had them before , I cant remember what for but it was just bumf . I think the point that Cyclone was making was that these Brown envelopes were delivered by council employees not the post office and with no address on them
  Reply With Quote
17-09-2018, 21:58   #2182
dave_the_m
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2017
Total Posts: 138
Note also that the "survey" was incredibly biased. It actually stated in the letter that SCC only cut trees down as a last resort, and that the tree programme was necessary to prevent "a catastrophic decline in tree numbers".

Just imagine if the Brexit referendum ballot paper had stated that leaving the EU would result in a catastrophic decline in the economy.
  Reply With Quote
17-09-2018, 22:12   #2183
Longcol
Registered User
Longcol's Avatar
 
Joined: Sep 2003
Location: Perigord Noir
Total Posts: 15,056
Quote:
Originally Posted by hackey lad View Post
I think the point that Cyclone was making was that these Brown envelopes were delivered by council employees not the post office and with no address on them
A point he failed to make despite a number of posts on the subject.

First time I've heard that there was no address - a number of posts on the STAG website stated they were addressed to "The Occupier".
_______
Living the dream.
  Reply With Quote
17-09-2018, 22:40   #2184
hackey lad
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2011
Total Posts: 4,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by Longcol View Post
A point he failed to make despite a number of posts on the subject.

First time I've heard that there was no address - a number of posts on the STAG website stated they were addressed to "The Occupier".
Yes "the Occupier" but no house address on them
  Reply With Quote
17-09-2018, 22:59   #2185
makapaka
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Total Posts: 3,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_the_m View Post
Note also that the "survey" was incredibly biased. It actually stated in the letter that SCC only cut trees down as a last resort, and that the tree programme was necessary to prevent "a catastrophic decline in tree numbers".

Just imagine if the Brexit referendum ballot paper had stated that leaving the EU would result in a catastrophic decline in the economy.
So how come so few didn’t vote in favour?
  Reply With Quote
17-09-2018, 23:04   #2186
Phanerothyme
Psychenaut
Phanerothyme's Avatar
 
Joined: Mar 2003
Location: The Here And Now
Total Posts: 16,692
Quote:
Originally Posted by Longcol View Post
Can't remember the last time I had junk mail in a plain brown envelope - junk mail envelopes are always covered in ads, logos etc
Get real, you know as well as I do that "consultation exercises" are, and have always been, a sham.

Quote:
“But the plans were on display…”
“On display? I eventually had to go down to the cellar to find them.”
“That’s the display department.”
“With a flashlight.”
“Ah, well, the lights had probably gone.”
“So had the stairs.”
“But look, you found the notice, didn’t you?”
“Yes,” said Arthur, “yes I did. It was on display in the bottom of a locked filing cabinet stuck in a disused lavatory with a sign on the door saying ‘Beware of the Leopard.”
_______
SWYgeW91IGNvdWxkIGhlYXIsIGF0IGV2ZXJ5IGpvbHQsIHRoZS BibG9vZA0KQ29tZSBnYXJnbGluZyBmcm9tIHRoZSBmcm90aC1j b3JydXB0ZWQgbHVuZ3MsDQpPYnNjZW5lIGFzIGNhbmNlciwgYm l0dGVyIGFzIHRoZSBjdWQNCk9mIHZpbGUsIGluY3VyYWJsZSBz b3JlcyBvbiBpbm5vY2VudCB0b25ndWVzLOKAlA==
  Reply With Quote
17-09-2018, 23:04   #2187
hackey lad
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2011
Total Posts: 4,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by makapaka View Post
So how come so few didn’t vote in favour?
In favour of what ?
  Reply With Quote
17-09-2018, 23:08   #2188
dave_the_m
Registered User
 
Joined: Feb 2017
Total Posts: 138
Quote:
Originally Posted by makapaka View Post
So how come so few didn’t vote in favour?
Well technically speaking you'd have to ask them. However, when presented with a survey which seemed a fait accompli, I would guess that most people didn't see the point in voting, in a similar way that most people don't vote in local elections because they think the incumbents will get in anyway.
  Reply With Quote
17-09-2018, 23:39   #2189
makapaka
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Total Posts: 3,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by dave_the_m View Post
Well technically speaking you'd have to ask them. However, when presented with a survey which seemed a fait accompli, I would guess that most people didn't see the point in voting, in a similar way that most people don't vote in local elections because they think the incumbents will get in anyway.
So based on yours and cyclones posts - on sheldon road - 83% of the households either didn’t read the letter - or read it and decided not to bother doing anything about it.

And that reinforces the fact that a silent majority was against the felling?

---------- Post added 17-09-2018 at 23:45 ----------

Here’s another example

https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/content...%20Results.pdf


986 households
57 approve
27 disapprove
902 didn’t respond

Approval?
Disapproval?
Or apathy?

Last edited by makapaka; 17-09-2018 at 23:46.
  Reply With Quote
17-09-2018, 23:46   #2190
hackey lad
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2011
Total Posts: 4,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by makapaka View Post
So based on yours and cyclones posts - on sheldon road - 83% of the households either didn’t read the letter - or read it and decided not to bother doing anything about it.

And that reinforces the fact that a silent majority was against the felling?
Using facts that You posted , more people were against the tree felling , than for it . What else do you need to know ? Stop trying to twist facts

---------- Post added 17-09-2018 at 23:50 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by makapaka View Post
So based on yours and cyclones posts - on sheldon road - 83% of the households either didn’t read the letter - or read it and decided not to bother doing anything about it.

And that reinforces the fact that a silent majority was against the felling?

---------- Post added 17-09-2018 at 23:45 ----------

Here’s another example

https://www.sheffield.gov.uk/content...%20Results.pdf


986 households
57 approve
27 disapprove
902 didn’t respond

Approval?
Disapproval?
Or apathy?
Approve , obviously
  Reply With Quote
17-09-2018, 23:50   #2191
makapaka
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Total Posts: 3,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by hackey lad View Post
Using facts that You posted , more people were against the tree felling , than for it . What else do you need to know ? Stop trying to twist facts
Ok well what about the post above - more were for felling than against.

But the massive majority didn’t bother to respond.

I’ve never argued more are for - ive only argues the majority weren’t really bothered - so it is probably wrong to say that the “silent majority” is against tree felling.

I’m not twisting anything - im not “for” felling myself. I’m posting statistics and you can form your own view.
  Reply With Quote
17-09-2018, 23:56   #2192
hackey lad
Registered User
 
Joined: May 2011
Total Posts: 4,320
Quote:
Originally Posted by makapaka View Post
Ok well what about the post above - more were for felling than against.

But the massive majority didn’t bother to respond.

I’ve never argued more are for - ive only argues the majority weren’t really bothered - so it is probably wrong to say that the “silent majority” is against tree felling.

I’m not twisting anything - im not “for” felling myself. I’m posting statistics and you can form your own view.
I replied to that post . I have formed my own view from statistics provided by you . Then you argue the majority weren't bothered , how do you come to that view . Lets just go with the statistics
  Reply With Quote
18-09-2018, 10:00   #2193
makapaka
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Total Posts: 3,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by hackey lad View Post
I replied to that post . I have formed my own view from statistics provided by you . Then you argue the majority weren't bothered , how do you come to that view . Lets just go with the statistics
Because don't you think they would have voted for or against if they were bothered?

Cyclone earlier said the silent majority was against tree removal - there's no evidence to suggest that - nor is there that the silent majority were for.

There's no point having a dig at me - why do you think 83% of people on Sheldon Road didn't bother to respond? Or the 91% at Walkley Bank who didn't bother to respond either?

Saying not bothered doesn't mean for - I'm just saying in my view the majority of people were indifferent / apathetic / disinterested in the issue.

As I said earlier - if you only had a 10% turnout for something like a local election - you would definitely say there was voter apathy - and most people wouldn't disagree.

Last edited by makapaka; 18-09-2018 at 10:06.
  Reply With Quote
18-09-2018, 10:23   #2194
Cyclone
Registered User
Cyclone's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: Wadlsey
Total Posts: 71,743
Status: Online
I actually said that in direct response to someone claiming the opposite and I noted at the time that it was anecdotal.
I didn't see you arguing against the poster claiming that the silent majority were actually in favour of trees being removed...
_______
Ask yourself, what would Chuck Norris do?
Youtube videos, snowboarding, climbing, bad drivers.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmn...qpXEZMGnJHf3Wg
  Reply With Quote
18-09-2018, 10:28   #2195
Mr Bloke
Registered User
Mr Bloke's Avatar
 
Joined: Aug 2010
Total Posts: 4,300
Quote:
Originally Posted by makapaka View Post
Because don't you think they would have voted for or against if they were bothered?

Cyclone earlier said the silent majority was against tree removal - there's no evidence to suggest that - nor is there that the silent majority were for.

There's no point having a dig at me - why do you think 83% of people on Sheldon Road didn't bother to respond? Or the 91% at Walkley Bank who didn't bother to respond either?

Saying not bothered doesn't mean for - I'm just saying in my view the majority of people were indifferent / apathetic / disinterested in the issue.

As I said earlier - if you only had a 10% turnout for something like a local election - you would definitely say there was voter apathy - and most people wouldn't disagree.
Hmmm...

... maybe the people who were 'not bothered' foolishly trusted the council to do the 'right thing' and only remove those trees that really needed to be removed on safety grounds, and never considered the fact that they might lose their healthy trees purely for financial reasons?

Maybe there should be a second vote now that all the implications are known... it seems to be the thing to do these days if you don't get the result you want first time.
_______
"We Didn't Kill The Forum" - witness my latest cinematographic masterpiece on YouTube...
  Reply With Quote
18-09-2018, 10:29   #2196
Cyclone
Registered User
Cyclone's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: Wadlsey
Total Posts: 71,743
Status: Online
Quote:
Originally Posted by Longcol View Post
A point he failed to make despite a number of posts on the subject.

First time I've heard that there was no address - a number of posts on the STAG website stated they were addressed to "The Occupier".
The point was made about 100 pages ago, I didn't realise I needed to rehash the entire thing because you're not bothering to keep up.

---------- Post added 18-09-2018 at 10:30 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Longcol View Post
And presumably the council had to use "The Occupier" due to the constraints of the Data Protection Act.
Don't be ridiculous.

Sending addressed letters to people is clearly not a breach of the DPA or the now GDPR.

---------- Post added 18-09-2018 at 10:32 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by makapaka View Post
I’ve never said it was support - I said it was apathy. They’re not bothered.

You equally can’t have it both ways - you can’t raise the issue that the envelope was not clear as to what it contained as a factor and then back track as to what extent it impacted the vote.
I didn't state a specific level of impact, you argued against a point I hadn't made.

Given the unaddressed brown envelope delivered without postage mark or stamp, do you now believe that it's likely that quite a few people just binned it without looking? You won't of course believe that the council did it like that deliberately to minimise the number of responses...

---------- Post added 18-09-2018 at 10:33 ----------

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Bloke View Post
Hmmm...

... maybe the people who were 'not bothered' foolishly trusted the council to do the 'right thing' and only remove those trees that really needed to be removed on safety grounds, and never considered the fact that they might lose their healthy trees purely for financial reasons?

Maybe there should be a second vote now that all the implications are known... it seems to be the thing to do these days if you don't get the result you want first time.
Quite likely that a lot of people believed the council would do as they'd publicly said, which like most of what they publicly say, turned out to be a lie.
_______
Ask yourself, what would Chuck Norris do?
Youtube videos, snowboarding, climbing, bad drivers.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmn...qpXEZMGnJHf3Wg
  Reply With Quote
18-09-2018, 11:18   #2197
makapaka
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Total Posts: 3,839
You can interpret it as you wish.

But in the walkley bank example
6% were in favour of the tree felling
3% were against the tree felling
91% didn’t bother to reply

If you believe that suggests the majority of people were against the felling that’s up to you.

I would say most people were indifferent to the issue on that basis.
  Reply With Quote
18-09-2018, 11:22   #2198
Cyclone
Registered User
Cyclone's Avatar
 
Joined: Feb 2004
Location: Wadlsey
Total Posts: 71,743
Status: Online
And you're going to ignore unaddressed, brown envelope delivered without stamp or postmark, because to consider it would result in criticising the council for a deliberate, cynical attempt to have the survey ignored by as many residents as possible.
_______
Ask yourself, what would Chuck Norris do?
Youtube videos, snowboarding, climbing, bad drivers.
https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCmn...qpXEZMGnJHf3Wg
  Reply With Quote
18-09-2018, 11:24   #2199
Flexo
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2014
Total Posts: 1,137
The letter which accompanied the survey in the plain brown envelope said that trees would only be felled "as a last resort". That sounds fine so there's no need to return the survey.

This turned out not to be true. Some 80% of trees listed for felling do not need felling, and felling these is not a "last resort" - it's the first. The contract has a target to fell 17,500 street trees and penalties if the contractor does not meet their targets, so it incentivises the contractor (Amey) to drum up spurious reasons to fell trees.
_______
The Chancellor has set aside £59bn to pay for the administrative costs of Brexit. That's before any divorce bill.
Let's fund our NHS instead.
  Reply With Quote
18-09-2018, 11:29   #2200
makapaka
Registered User
 
Joined: Mar 2009
Total Posts: 3,839
Quote:
Originally Posted by Cyclone View Post
And you're going to ignore unaddressed, brown envelope delivered without stamp or postmark, because to consider it would result in criticising the council for a deliberate, cynical attempt to have the survey ignored by as many residents as possible.
I’m not ignoring it - I’m saying that citing that’s as an example for 91% of people not responding doesn’t stack up for me.

That’s 91% of people in walkley bank that didn’t open a letter delivered to their house?

You can speculate on that as you wish.

As I’ve said before I’m not suggesting the information demonstrates people are for or against - I’m just citing it as something that might go against your argument that the silent majority is against felling - which you have based on chats with your friends and I have based on the response to the survey.

Like in in the two examples above which both have between 10-20% response rate and marginal for and against votes.

Now - as it doesn’t reinforce your own view - you are suggesting this survey was flawed because you believe people didn’t open the envelope and have then again just resorted to having a dig at me.

The information is there for you and others to form their own view on. It’s up to you.
  Reply With Quote
Reply To Topic

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search



All times are GMT +1. The time now is 11:52.
POSTS ON THIS FORUM ARE NOT ACTIVELY MONITORED
Click "Report Post" under any post which may breach our terms of use.
©2002-2017 Sheffield Forum | Powered by vBulletin ©2018