* IPSOS, Mari Harris, Didier Truchot, Nick Coates, SA Consumer Complaints, eNCA, Jeremy Maggs.
* 03 May: McV20 Re: IPSOS-MH: Re: EoP Law Re Errors in IPSOS: South Africans support lockdown poll.
* Tygae: EoP Leg Sub: McVeigh2020, LJ v SANEF / EoP NWO SCO: EoP NTE GM: EoP NTE GMZA: EoP NTE GMG| EoP Axis MilNec Evac: Lotto: EoP v WiP Law, EoP v WiP Academia, EoP v WiP Media, EoP v WiP Charity, EoP v WiP Peacenik / EoP v WiP Neg.
From: McVeigh 2020 Exp Comm <email@example.com>
Date: Sun, 03 May 2020 21:50:39 +0200
Subject: EoP Law Re Errors in IPSOS: South Africans support lockdown poll
To: “IPSOS: Mari Harris” <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Cc: “IPSOS: Didier Truchot:
Jean-Marc Lech” <email@example.com>, Nick Coates <Nick.Coates@ipsos.com>, SA Consumer Complaints <firstname.lastname@example.org>, “eNCA: Editor in Chief: Jeremy Maggs: eNCA” <email@example.com>, Newsroom <firstname.lastname@example.org>
TO: IPSOS: Mari Harris
CC: SA Consumer Complaints.
CC: eNCA: Editor in Chief: Jeremy Maggs
Re: IPSOS: As we head into level 4, South Africans strongly support lockdown; via eNCA.
Ref: 10 Feb: EoP Re: SABC Q: What can media do to help gov legislate climate change solutions?.
EoP Law Re Errors in IPSOS: South Africans support lockdown poll.
I received your IPSOS [ipsos] 03 May [03 May: IPSOS-MH: Re: EoP Law Re Errors in IPSOS: South Africans support lockdown poll] response to McVeigh2020 [mcveigh2020] 02 May [02 May: McVeigh2020: EoP Law Re Errors in IPSOS: South Africans support lockdown poll] correspondence.
IPSOS-MH: Thank you for sharing your opinion. Please take it into account that not all South Africans are of the same opinion.
McVeigh2020-LJ: I don’t know what IPSOS and/or Mary Harris definition of a fact and opinion is.
If IPSOS and/or Mary Harris have a definition for fact and opinion, then it would be easier to adjudicate as to whether the EoP Law feedback information provided to IPSOS fits IPSOS definition of a fact or opinion.
I don’t know how many South Africans – excluding lawyers and judges, and a few scientists – know the difference between a fact and opinion and of those who have some idea as to the difference between facts and opinions, have a legal definition for fact and opinion.
Generally speaking McVeigh 2020 experience is that South Africans have a very low tolerance for objective factual reality [eop-rh-fr] and/or subjective [SHO: Brad Blanton: And Nothing But the Truth; Radical Honesty Channel: Radical Honesty: 01:02:03; The Importance of Telling the Radical Truth; LSOO: Radical Honesty – What If We All Told The Truth?; SQ-Esquire: I Think You’re Fat; The Most Honest Conversation in the World; EoP RH FR Caveat] factual reality honesty; which is manifested in the fucked up nature of South African relations with themselves, each other and other species.
According to McVeigh 2020 definition of objective factual reality [eop-rh-fr] honesty:
FACT: No EoP law [EoP v WiP Law: eop-v-wip-law: PDF] culture Commons-ism [eop-v-wip-ism] South Africans [eop-axis-oath] were interviewed for IPSOS survey [IPSOS: As we head into level 4, South Africans strongly support lockdown].
If you can prove that alleged fact to be an inaccurate factual representation; I shall be happy to edit it for accuracy and if necessary apologise.
As for IPSOS Fuck Honesty Policy: Not a big deal. If IPSOS gave a fuck about honesty and was an EoP v WiP law neutral polling corporation [13 Jan: LJvLS-EU Re: Swiss – EoP v WiP – naked transparency neutrality?] a sincere honest reply could have been:
Thank you for the EoP Law information. I was not aware that there is an EoP law citizen in South Africa. I will notify IPSOS management with a recommendation to amend South African polling enquiries and conclusions to clarify where we poll WiP law and/or EoP law citizens; so as to clearly differentiate between EoP and WiP law South African citizens polling. Or something to that effect.
Hypothesis: Objective and Subjective Honesty means fuck all to IPSOS. Honesty is so low on IPSOS priority list, that it does not even make it to the IPSOS priority list. IPSOS have fuck all objective reality honesty definition.
The possible fact that there are IPSOS employers or employees who potentially give a flying fuck about honesty, would be a far higher ‘what the fuck; IPSOS give a fuck about honesty’ surprise; than the fact that all IPSOS employers and employees could not give a flying fuck about honesty.
No big deal: IPSOS is not an anomaly. Honesty means fuck all to millions of corporations and non profit organizations and ‘pretend they give a fuck about honesty’ media corporations employers and employees. The world is not fucked up because corporations employers and employees give a fuck about honesty. Its well and truly fucked up because corporations employers and employees do not give an honesty is important or it isn’t [mcveigh2020] fuck about honesty.
Difference is that before I notified IPSOS of your error, my hypothesis that IPSOS: Mary Harris does not give a flying fuck about EoP Law [eop-rh-fr] honesty was simply a hypothesis, now that hypothesis has gained a bit of data. Same [eop-rh-fr] objective honesty is important? [mcveigh2020] hypothesis enquiry principle applies to everyone else notified of EoP TRC to End Abel and Kane Cold War negotiations.
IPSOS-MH: Ipsos drew a representative sample from the Ipsos i-Say panel of adult South Africans who have internet at home and/or access the internet on mobile phone. This constitutes about two-thirds of the adult population.
McVeigh2020: Presumably your definition of adult, is biological, not psychological or emotional or intellectual intelligence adult. EoP v WiP law edit Accuracy correction in [brackets]:
Ipsos drew a representative sample from the Ipsos i-Say panel of [biological WiP Law] adult South Africans who have internet at home and/or access the internet on mobile phone.
This constitutes about two-thirds of the adult population [Highly possible that all biological adults in South Africa are WiP law culture citizens, but without providing them the opportunity of confirming their EoP EoP or WiP law culture preference, I would not state that as a fact.].
IPSOS-MH: Results were weighted and projected to this universe.
McVeigh2020: Presumably ‘universe’ should be interpreted as a ‘fuck you’ type sarcastic comment, by someone who lacks the pussy balls to say ‘fuck you’; cause her fragile ego IPSOS bosses – unlike Bridgewater – don’t give a fuck about her being an honest employee. If so your ‘fuck you universe’ sarcasm is noted. I am not offended, its very difficult to offend me with honesty [08 May: EoP Re: Theryn Meyer: Dear Non-Binary People: I’m Sorry]. I would have respected a ‘fuck you’ more, but I understand you may have fragile ego bosses; who want to impress fuck honesty WiP media [eop-v-wip-media] and their conscious and/or unconscious fuck honesty WiP readers; and keeping your job is higher on your existential priority list than honesty. If not, I am unclear as to how to interpret the ‘universe’ aspect of your statement.
Ray Dalio: Just to give you an example, this is an email from Jim Haskel who works for me ~~ Ray: you deserve a D for your performance today in the meeting. you did not prepare at all because there is no way you could have been that disorganized -~~ Isn’t that great? Thats great, because I need feedback like that, and if I did not make Jim’s criticism public to my employees, Bridgewater would not have an idea meritocracy. …… I believe that the biggest problem that humanity faces is an ego sensitivity to finding out whether one is right or wrong and identifying what one’s strengths and weaknesses are. … Constantly worry about what you are missing. Even if you acknowledge you are a ‘dumb shit’ and are following the principles and are designing around your weaknesses, understand that you might still be missing things. You will be better and be safer this way. Our greatest power is that we know that we don’t know and we are open to being wrong and learning. One rule of radical transparency is that Bridgewater employees refrain from saying behind a person’s back anything that they wouldn’t say to his face. … To me, if I don’t let everyone see everything with the tapes, its the equivalent of creating spin. In other words, why wouldn’t you let them see? If you are going to have an idea meritocracy, they should be able to see everything and ask questions. It raises interesting questions, gets them a sense of real reality. That also causes them to be bought in, cause there’s no spin. There is no talking behind anybody’s back. When you put things out in the open and everybody looks at it. You know bad things happen in the dark. … A lot of people just want sugarcoating. You have to be as accurate as possible. They have to be as accurate with you as possible. That you have to create a system that is not just an exchange of mutual feedback, but data collection. So if people are doing certain things, we can correlate if it is being done well or not. If people believe that there is a fair system, an idea meritocracy, where the evidence becomes clear that you are that kind of a person. As long as you have a system that people believe is fair, and is being accurate about someone being that kind of a person. That’s not true that everyone wants that, because not everybody wants to stand naked infront of everybody. So its a little bit like going ito a nudist camp for the first time. Its very awkward. Everybody’s looking around, but before you know it you are talking about interesting subjects and you don’t pay attention to being naked. If you can stand naked infront of other people and have them stand naked infront of you, you can have better relationships and be more productive. It is about getting over that emotional reaction [to being vulnerable]. Your logical self wants it, but your emotional self doesn’t. Its about getting your logical self and your emotional self together. … If you don’t have radical transparency; you are going to have a lot more problems. So by making everything transparent you are going to have less lying, you are going to have less problems. Everyone is going to understand better. Isn’t it better to be that way? – TED: Ray Dalio: How to build a company where the best ideas win; Bloomberg Markets & Finance: Ray Dalio on Bridgewater’s New Partnership; CNBC: Ray Dalio to take step back from Bridgewater: NYT; NYT: Ray Dalio: The Culture Principle; Business Insider: The Treasury And White House Ignored Billionaire Ray Dalio When He Warned Them About The Coming Credit Crisis Back In 2007.
EoP/OKC TRC Negotiations correspondence is published at EoP Leg Sub [eop-leg-sub.tygae.org.za]
EoP MILED Clerk [EoP Oath PDF]
16 Taaibos Ave, Heatherpark, George, 6529