Easy on line.
Below is a quick link to the Technology Survey.
I never had a paper copy and didn't know it was available to do on line.
It is important if we want our organization to move ahead with information and electronic voting.
Thanks, Deb Blagg for providing this information for the blog viewers.
https://docs.google.com/forms/d/e/1FAIpQLSf51DiGepZdFT2UI19-TF-_M7qLt6_P8Aom5UK8juTxLyuvHw/viewform
109 comments:
Awesome, was not aware either. I filled out mine.
Maybe this committee could teach the office how to do a survey. Looks like a good way to serve the members. Just have to ask the right questions.
Im encouraging every member to take 3 minutes to complete this survey. This will greatly benefit people, like myself, that aren't receiving notices and 2 missing ballots. It took our new board member, Deb, to push this forward. Its time for the non elitists to have a say and an honest ballot distribution. Shame on the BO for making such a mess of this.
I also did the survey here. Thanks Deb and George. This committee is about the only good news in a long time. And I did put my name on the survey, but it was not required.
I don't understand why it isn't a requirement for you to sign your name. How can it be a true accurate survey of the membership if people can submit as many as they want? Is that how the voting is going to work also?
8:47 - the committee decided to make this optional in some folks are afraid to provide their name. Given the nature of the survey, I agree the name shouldn’t be optional but I’m just one member. Electronic voting would be done through an independent, secure website. Member would have to register to vote so that eligibility could be established. This is just an informal security to get a feel for Members’ interests. The survey went live today and as if this afternoon we received triple the responses received from the paper survey alone.
Maybe the tabulation will show the vote count for each. I would think most would sign. Will be interesting to see the results.
Filling out the form is easy
This is the first step in bringing Surfside out of the dark ages. Please participate!
But again, how is this a true idea on how the majority of the members feel? I have no doubts that the people that come on here multiple times a day are going to be doing multiple surveys to give the impression that their opinion is that of the majority. So at the end of the day the survey is flawed.
The survey is very basic in it's questions. I'm not saying that as a negative. I'm saying that because there is no reason to be afraid of putting your name on it and frankly I feel that excuse is self serving.
So far 56 online surveys have been submitted and 43% were submitted by name. There is really no reason to not provide a name - I don’t think anything in the survey is controversial. Please take a few minutes to take the survey and use your name. The survey is only as good as the responses and feedback. About 16 people have provided comments also. Thanks to those who have taken the survey already.
So less than half then. I agree with above, there should only be one survey per voting member. Doing it this way only gives the appearance of a committee trying to validate its charter.
The fact that the survey exists is a step forward, considering most board members disapprove. It’s never easy fighting for transparency.
This is one of the best projects I have seen here in a decade. Hope it is refined and instituted in a manner that is beneficial to all. Like other projects it can go either way. Hope the committee keeps control of this project.
There is one improvement on the survey form that I found. I am getting old and my eye sight is not as good as a young person so when I read on here that some had signed there survey forms I looked a little closer and found the place to sign it was not some thing that jumped out at you. I summited one signed and on anonymous. I like this idea keep it up
The survey will not have a respectable validity because there is no control over the number of times that one respondent can complete the survey. Can Surfside do anything right? This survey is junk. The committee should start over and work on creating a data base that is valid on which to base decisions going forward.
I agree 8:33, should never have been an option....Won't be accurate.
As is, it's useless.
8:33 and 11:40. From the comments you are either the same person, live in the same house or are twins. All of whom don't know anything about computers. It is quite easy to install a system that will allow such things as votes to be tracked. How do you think company's track their voting for an annual meeting for instance. It appears your computer knowledge and skills have never made it up to the Commodore 64 level. Or maybe you just don't want all the members of Surfside to be able to vote, Hmmm. Get into the 21st Century!
12:53 is full of BS. Being one of the two comments mentioned, I know that the two comments were not made by the same person. Also, my career included designing and managing fairly large computer systems.
1:46 You don't really expect us to believe that, do you? Maybe by a "large" computer you meant a big box.
If it is so damned easy, why didn't the committee design a survey that tracked who was voting and how many times they were voting? 12:53 & 2:05 - you are full of it.
Worse yet, do we have another committee where no one knows what the hell they are doing?
The last six comments were made by lost soles that don't have much of a life any more and want to get evolved but just don't no how to do it so they take out what juvenile frustrations out on this blog!
Yet your life is so grand and full that you felt the need to come on here to be condescending?
Some people brought up a legitimate point on how that to better understand what the membership wants that the survey should have been done in such a way that someone can submit multiples. It was also said with out the snarky attitude yet you and possibly others felt the need to be twits. Congrats.
Is Deb Blagg the Chairperson for the Tech Committee? Isn't she a Trustee? How has she become spokesperson for the TC?
The Chairman of the Tech Committee is David Tollefson. I am one of two Trustees assigned to the Committee; the other is with Mark Scott. The Committee has representatives of the Community Relations Committee and the Business Office, as well as several members at large.
So why are you speaking for the TC?
My question is why you are speaking for the TC.
9:57/9:59 I’m not sure what your point is? I’m a member of the committee and the liaison to the BOT. As an HOA member, Trustee and member of the Tech Committee, my hope is for good participation, so I have encouraged Members to go online and complete the survey. The Committee Chair doesn’t follow this blog. Since I’m the Board liaison to the committee, they have updated me on how the survey is going.
What is the purpose of your question? Do you have a problem with me encouraging Members to participate?
The problem is with a survey that will not produce valid statistics because there is no control to prevent individuals from completing the survey more than once. This skews that resulting data and makes the survey useless. Why is anyone encouraging members and god knows who else to complete a survey that will produce faulty data?
What do you want to bet that committee members have completed the survey more than once to achieve an outcome that supports whatever they want to do?
7:36 you are pathetic. One guess who you are. Jusy go away and polish your golf clubs!
7:36. Prior to conducting this survey, we have had NO information on the desires of the members with regard to technology. We now have lots of ideas and need a way to prioritize them.
This is NOT a scientific experiment that requires control, double blind or other scientific measures. It is more of a litmus year of Members’ interests.
Your are correct that some people may fill out the survey more than once. They may do this because they thought of something new or they may be doing it for nefarious reasons. This can happen with a paper surveys just as easy. The best chance to have accurate information is to get the largest sampling possible and from as many sources possible. We are doing that. We are getting surveys via mail, office drop ins, Surfside publications, events, direct contact as well as the online surveys. By doing this, we have the best chance to increase our sampling and get non-skewed results.
Please also keep in mind that all of these questions are very basic and obvious. There is no political motivation or hidden agenda behind these questions. We just want to get a feel of what is important for the members. The goal of the tech committee is to suggest solutions to help our members through technology. This is a huge topic and this survey can help prioritize where we focus our time. The survey will be followed up with “town hall” type meetings, where we will share the results Members can come and discuss.
Instead of attacking what could go wrong, how about suggesting a solution?
How about a new survey that limits respondents to one survey completion? You know, something that will actually result in valid data about what the members of Surfside want.
spin, spin, spin again for Mrs. Blagg
Any effort to tap into the opinions and ideas of Surfside members has been a long time coming. In some sense, this survey is a thoughtful step forward. Some members of the Board drug their feet for months before approving the comm. Charter, successfully preventing online voting becoming available for the July election.
It has been quite clear that the conservative block of Trustees oppose a broader voting base and better communications in the community, which this committee has the potential to bring. So it is not surprising that we have these harsh critics having a fit at the mention of the survey.
The lack of I.D. on individual surveys does allow for some misrepresentation, but the Comm. obviously had reasons for allowing anonymous entries. As we look at the critic's comments here, we see that none of them have offered THEIR names ! This has been the tendency on the blog of course, and the Comm. probably decided to just go with the option to try and draw participation.
As with the blog, many who may try to invalidate the survey by making multiple entries will have a "TELL" in their replies, and may be screened out. But a question to ask is, "don't we really want to get an honest picture of what members envision for Surfside, their ideas and opinions ?"
Why screw it up ? It is true, this is an "honor system" and some will feel compelled to be dishonest, but it is so petty, and would only be a concerted effort to make it fail. This is a groundbreaking effort, and a nice opportunity to draw much more participation in the HOA and in particular, VOTING.
Once something new has been launched, the information may or may not appear to give some useful input, and can be more finely tuned based on results. I think the initial survey seeks to just get participation, and get the word out that good changes are in the making here in Surfside.
Blog commenters have sunk to the lowest levels haranguing Deb relentlessly, and she has endured, and working as a comm. member has helped bring this Tech Comm. its' first test run. Ignore the naysayers and take the survey. The results will still be interesting, and the likelihood of fraud purveyors "stuffing the box" honestly seems slim.
Unfortunately, some on the BOT have preferred a lock-down on progress and has seemed willing to do anything to discredit more progressive efforts to make this a happier more interactive community. One would think that they would be as interested as anyone else as to WHAT specifically owners want out of the community moving forward. Thanks Tech Comm. and Deb B. !!
Ta-dah! Now it's quantity over quality.
How much did it cost to set up the survey link that anyone can access even if he/she is not a Surfside member?
Only 20 some folks have signed in. And now you have their names and contact addresses?
I think you ought to think it over again.
10:50 I’m sorry, but those who lack a knowledge and understanding of technology may want to do some research before spouting untruths. The survey was created in Google docs and does not track email addresses or any other data, except for the date and time of submission. We asked for names, but didn’t want that to stop people from participating. The survey cost the HOA nothing but the time of the volunteers who participated in its development. FYI - 85 electronic surveys have been submitted since today at 11:30AM and 42% of respondents provided their names. I’m shaking my head over the negativity and criticism exhibited toward the volunteers on this committee and the simple survey created to gain better insight into how members use technology and how they would like to see the HOA use technology in the future. The sun is out, so I’m going to forgo technology for awhile and enjoy our beautiful beach and surroundings. Have good day!
It must be something in the water that prevents many Surfside members from ever admitting to a mistake. If you want a believable survey with the Surfside members as the population to be surveyed, you need to do something to limit it to responses from members and to limit the responses to one per member. Otherwise, the data collected is crap that shouldn't be used to make any decisions.
Time for a break and to respond to 12:55.
· We could have set up the survey to limit one per person. It would have required a login and email address capture. This may have been viewed as too obtrusive and possibly limited input. If there is a follow-up Survey, perhaps it will be of that type.
· Keep in mind this is all being done by volunteers with varying experience levels. Flawed or not, after multiple weeks of time (before the online survey) we only had 15 replies. In less than a week we have 85 additional ones from the online survey. This is a learning experience for everyone.
· The fact we are collecting surveys from multiple avenues, should be viewed as a positive.
· Keep in mind, we are only using this survey to help the committee set priorities and make recommendations to the Board, not to set policy or make changes.
At least she is trying to effect positive change, as opposed to simply leaving snarky comments.
Using a flawed survey to set priorities for a committee is nuts. In less than a week, there are 85 surveys completed by who knows how many members. It might be two people completing many surveys because they have time on their hands and an ax to grind.
This is a member issue. I see nothing positive in "collecting surveys from multiple avenues" when the source of the info provided on the survey is unknown. Again, this is a member issue which deserves fairness and accuracy.
Yeah, I think we get your point 3:57. Do you just cut n paste your comments? Keep those clubs shiny,👍
Nothing in this world is perfect. Flawed or not, this survey is a needed start. Everyone I have talked with, is in favor of the work started by this committee. The opposition is nothing more than the status quo not wanting to see any change that would provide members with more information and easy voting and paying dues on line. I think some board members are embarrassed that Deb and others are doing what should have been done years ago. Change happens folks, and this is one that is long over do. Thanks.
So very well spoken 5:48. The efforts that this committee and Deb have strived foris no doubt long over due. The status quo(including the golf club polisher) are against anything that is in the best interests of the whole community. Why, pray tell, would anyone be against members being kept up to date information, paying your dues online and simple voting? This truly is puzzling and it hurts no one. It doesnt block any views and best yet, it may greatly improve the moral of SHOA. Please folks, give the committee a pat on the back. This survey isn't perfect but it beats what we have accomplished towards the better for all so far. The comment regarding fairness left me chuckling. Fairness is not evident in Surfside! Thx TC. There will always be critics that are opposed to transparency.
Long overdue. Btw, why don’t we have a readerboard?
Most of us are certainly not opposed to transparency and improved communications and voting. Most of us are opposed to plans being made by a committee based on a faulty survey and invalid survey data. This is a bad start for the committee. A restart with a corrected survey procedure would be welcomed and trusted.
The contagion of the Deb and the RVers paranoia is horrifying. Use your heads folks. This is not about Deb and her ideas. This is about having survey data that truly reflects what the members of Surfside want in regard to using technology to improve communications and to increase the ease and accuracy of voting.
Oh, come on 9:48.
You made your point time and time again. You sound like a broken record. Your own paranoia about Deb only diminishes your point. Give it a rest, please.
Good job Deb keep up the good work
Sorry, to say this could happen with a paper survey isn't completely true. It would only do so if you let it be anonymous with multiple submissions like you are doing with the online one. Requiring a name makes it more accurate which is a fact, don't understand why people are getting so upset with those that point this out. I also don't understand how you can say by doing it this way will give you non-skewed results. The opposite is true and that is all we are pointing out.
This isn't an "attack" as Ms. Blagg is saying nor is there any haranguing going on. People are just suggesting a solution to make it more accurate, something she just asked for, right? I have no doubts that if the dreaded tree committee would have done something similar the same people who are defending this would not have been so forgiving.
If you've read the entire thread, Ms. Blagg explained why the choice was made to start out with this simple survey allowing anonymity. I was initially surprised by that, but having read her comments, I agree that this will encourage participation for a first contact.
They are only defending because you are attacking. Your tone gives you away. What are you so afraid of? A majority wanting a step forward with technology should not be the big deal you are trying to make of it. Have to question your motivation.
Blagg's explanation is an unacceptable dodge that totally invalidates the whole point of the survey. Do we honestly want the opinions of the MEMBERS of Surfside regarding the use of tech supports or do we not? There has been no attack. The observation and factual point was made by several commenters that the survey will not serve its intended purpose because there is no control over who is responding or how many times the same individual can respond to the survey.
Rational, calm and factual communication and information does not enter into the picture for the small number of members who are hell bent on changing things to suit themselves in Surfside. This makes us wonder if the whole push to use technology for better communications and voting is simply a move to swamp the communications and voting procedures to achieve changes that do not benefit the majority of Surfside members.
What is not rational, is the comment by 11:53.
So, what's your opinion 11:53? Not on the survey, but on tech advances. But, by your way of thinking, if you answer anonymously, your opinion does not count. You have no trouble speaking your opinion on the survey, so what is that worth?
I am one that is completely in favor of new technology, we can and will be able to cut the office staff down to just a book keeper that under stands technology. Just think of the pay roll reductions.
Opinion of 11:53. I adore using computers, tablets, readers, VOIP for phone, streaming TV and any other tech available that will serve to make my life better. I have taken classes to keep up with latest advances since retiring. I'd love to see Surfside take advantage of the tech that is available for almost no cost to support a better homeowners association. I don't understand why we retain people in the office who have only the most basic tech skills. We give them good equipment and they don't know how to use it to the best advantages. I want to see a survey that collects data that is accurate to the target population's preferences. That would exclude all but verified Surfside members. It is another waste of time to have a survey that anyone can fill out as many times as they want with no controls. They questions on the current survey are mostly useless to set any priorities for the work of the committee.
2:30 says...
Seeee, you can make a comment without all the insults. Those are the kind of comments that should be made on the survey, with or without a name. Don't you think that would help the committee even more than just checking a box?
Thank you.
There was nothing insulting in 11:53's previous comment. It is insulting to the office personnel in the opinion written later. 2:30 I don't know who you are but you are a simpering jerk. 11:53 is not responding to the survey because it is useless crap.
You should seek therapy for your mental condition. You have trouble maintaining a coherent thought chain. Your so full of hate it keeps you in a constant state of confusion. Sorry for your family and what they must be enduring.
It's a start, which apparently scares you. Why? Your version of this HOA might change. That would lead to the fact you believe status quo is adequate.
It is not.
This whole association needs a restart. Honesty in adherence to covenants, RCW's, and County laws have become negotiable. The BOT acts on their own interests, not the desire of the membership. They run out of control, dancing to their own tune, and blindly ignoring the people they have committed to serve.
The only positive thing that had come out this year is the Technology Committee. Now you want to bag on their initial effort? Try selling this garbage somewhere else.
Now we bring in garbage by the boat load. Sorry, but your agenda is showing. ANY advancement in this organization would be welcome.
11:53 - yes it was insulting. Since the previous post was obviously 11:53 again, let's address both.
Your self-indulgence towards the current setup is truly apparent. The Technology group has actually done something, and should be commended for get up & running. You throwing shade on it exposes the self-interest and verbal attacks for what they are - a sham to continue ruling in the fashion you like. Please consider crawling back under your rock.
The Tech Committee should consider a revamping the survey concept to include procedures that would produce valid and usable data. Admit a mistake was made and correct it before making recommendations or setting policies. The current survey is a mistake that needs to be corrected. Those who say that the committee should be praised for lousy work have an agenda that does not represent the best interests of the majority of the association. How about fixing the survey to achieve reliable results instead of defending a flawed survey?
The evil motivations attached to fixing the survey as outlined by some comments is ridiculous. The point is to do good and reliable work that reliably serves to make our association better. There is no wicked plot to subvert the work of the Tech Committee. There is a hope that their work will be respectable and reliable to achieve changes that will better serve our members.
I seriously doubt that anyone has any intention of making policy changes based on this survey. It is quite benign in what it addresses, and is just a test run. There is such paranoia expressed here that becomes hateful and personally insulting, and all over this harmless exercise to encourage participation.
And now it's part of a "hidden agenda", surely bent on huge changes that serve only the "hostile few". You must see hidden agendas everywhere. I couldn't live like that, and many of us cannot, feeling confident that we have the insight to discern WHO is being honest, and who is not. Ms. Blagg has no hidden agenda, nor does the Tech Comm. Simmer down. Really ! It's not healthy to be so full of fear over trifles.
Simmer down, exactly who are you talking to?. People came on just to point out that to get a true idea on what the membership wants it would have been better to only allow one per member instead of multiple anonymous ones. How can anyone argue the opposite of that? There was no mention of anything against the tech committee, just a suggestion on making it better. Yet the same B.S. starts coming out attacking those that only made a valid point.
You are apparently numb to the tone and hysteria that is expressed in many of these comments. The points made here regarding anonymity are quite obvious, and the Tech Comm. was aware of the potential shortcomings of this approach. It is just a first launching to test the response, asks nothing controversial, and doesn't merit these hysterical responses. I suggest you re-read if you don't notice that.
You are so very far off base Steve Cox. The smell of paranoia in the air in Surfside is alarming.
You seem so very pleased that you can direct your comment at someone who has put their name to their comment, you can't resist dishing out more without anything substantive to say.
Yes, there is often paranoia expressed - whenever something new is suggested, or the scary word "CHANGE" is spoken. The world turns, bringing change with each new day. Governance that denies the need for review of policies and adjustments to standards over time, grows stale and ineffective. That's where we're at in the Surfside HOA.
That's not paranoia you smell, it is change. Scary thing for some like yourself, that feel that status quo is a good thing. It is not.
Rereading through the comments on this topic, I see no fear of change. In fact, there seems to be a well recognized need to embrace tech advances to achieve better and fairer results in communications and voting. Some of you mistake the need to achieve good results with the air headed wishes to make a change whether it is good or not.
Start with a reliable survey that truly reflects the opinions of Surfside members if you want to make changes that better serve the majority of Surfside members.
Just can’t resist, can you? Gotta throw in “airhead” so your repeating your opinion over n over sounds different? Ain’t workin,lol
Same old, same old from 10:36.
We know what your about. No changes that will take away from the advantages you get. Attack the messenger. In this case it happens to be the tech. committee or anyone who supports them. The only air head on here is 10:36. You fool no one except yourself.
Why are 11:04 and 12:27 afraid to let a better use of tech proceed as guided by the opinions of the members of Surfside? Beware. They want to make tech changes that serve the agenda of a few mavericks rather than respond to the what the majority of members want for Surfside.
Online voting can be controlled to assure only member's votes are counted. Meetings can be made available to all members online instead of being presented with edited minutes that are meaningless to most members. Transparent communications generally would make Surfside a more trusted and decent place to own property. What are the few mavericks after in trying to make changes based on data from a messed up survey? Scary isn't it.
12:40 ....No idea what you are in favor of. No one intends to alter policy based on this survey. Get real. It is just an attempt to test interest. What does the survey ask about ? Nothing of great substance. A list to ask your priorities of communication and what should be added to the website to aid homeowners. Have you even looked at the survey ?
Definitely looked at the survey and decided it is open to misuse due to the failure to limit respondents to members with only one response allowed per member. Put that together with Blagg's earlier comment on this topic, "Keep in mind, we are only using this survey to help the committee set priorities and make recommendations to the Board, not to set policy or make changes".
Setting priorities and making recommendations to the Board from this flawed survey would be nuts.
Misuse? You mean like alot of people not getting ballots? Would make a list, but unlike some, don’t want to repeat myself.
2:20 .... Misuse ? Like a potato and a paperclip in the wrong hands - okay McGiver.
I find it hard to believe that people are actually surprised the survey was done this way. I knew from the beginning that such a thing would happen to get results to validate the committee and push its creators agenda. I guess having her FB friends submitting one each wasn't enough.
I was curious if there was any discussion about doing it in a way as others have pointed so I went and reread the minutes from the committee meetings. There was no mention of any but I have to believe that at least one member must have spoken up. It would have been nice to know who felt that one survey per member was a bad idea and their reasoning behind it. I guess all the accusations of the board doing back room deals and having a lack of transparency caries over to committees too.
Interesting the amount of blowhard fear in the above...
I just think it would be nice to move into modern times. I can only imagine how nice it would be to get that email that says "your dues are ready for payment" and I go online and use my linked bank acct. to then pay the bill. Done... No waiting on checks... No lost mail... nothing but business.
More importantly, I also imagine "voting is now open, please go to the website to vote". I have only received my ballot like once.. so a reliable system where I can vote instantly and securely is also a modern method desired. No worries about postmark dates, lost mail, lack of trust with human handling.
8:59.... You express totally baseless paranoia eloquently. "Secret agenda !!" You're nuts !!
It would almost be worth getting rid of anonymous option again, just to stop the repetitive comments from 8:59.
I'm giggling that the RV/Tree coalition think that only one person is commenting about the worthless nature of the survey. Ignorance is bliss I guess.
RV/Tree Coalition ? You are demented. These are 2 entirely separate issues that everyone in the community has an opinion about. Your concept, like most of these hysterical responses, makes assumptions out of fear that everyone has a secret agenda and conspiracies are everywhere.
This is warped out beyond recognition of a simple reality. Is the survey worthless or is it dangerous conspiracy theorists ? Can't make up your mind can you ? The survey is simply testing whether there will be interest enough to gain participation, not to glean detailed information.
Worthless survey because it is not limited to Surfside members and one survey completion per member. How many times does this point have to be hammered into the skulls of the few who want change with no regard for the quality of the change.
You give yourself far too much credit. Your point is missing the point. No one intends to base changes to anything based on this survey, except the next survey.
Not too surprised to see how this topic blew up.
Unfortunately for everyone the Committee by doing the survey this way missed an opportunity to end a debate and get an actual idea of the needs and wants of the entire membership. Worse yet it also gave fodder to the extreme elements on both sides as you can tell by all these comments. Too bad, I had hoped for better.
It's a shame that a few bad apples have to bash on the effort of others. Nice work by the tech committee, and Ms Blagg! Keep working and Surfside will be a better place to live and spend time relaxing...
To comment #1, I didn't say secret agenda because it isn't much of a secret. I may be nuts but obviously you're clueless.
To comment #2, along with being against the anonymous survey I feel the same about here too but you and I both know that will never happen. Along with being able to actually see exactly how many different people are making the comments it would also be interesting if people would be as insulting if they put their name on it.
Definitely wouldn’t see any more comments by the board members that don’t have guts to use their names like some others.
6:59 .... Only the conspiracy theorists claim that Ms. Blagg has this "Agenda" she wishes to impose on the entire community. It has been pointed out numerous times on the blog, that the number of RV owners in the community is only a small percentage of the entire membership, and if they wish to change some of the restrictions on their property use, they must appeal to the entire membership to support such changes.
This hysteria that the RV owners are plotting and scheming to force major changes on the HOA, that Ms. Blagg has this evil agenda, and has created division among the membership by creating an RV website, ... is all just bananas - fear-mongering based on absurd fabricated claims that have no truth to them.
There is no RV/Tree coalition, the list goes on of sheer fantasy stated as fact on this site by nuts like you.
Blagg is an RV owner and as is true for most of the RVers, feels they should have fewer restrictions on their property use. She is no different than anyone else, in that she has opinions about the issues that directly effect her and her family. She hasn't made any proposals as a Trustee that would change RV standards, and it has not been an issue focused on in the last year, the period of her tenure. She is not running for re-election.
Ms. Blagg has taken it upon herself to promote the formation of the Tech. Comm., with a primary goal being to bring electronic voting and broader communications to the membership of Surfside. This has some potential to bring more participation by members, and attempt to make our governance more inclusive of the entire community. That is not a selfish objective, nor does it serve a "personal agenda".
Stop the character assassination and talk of rebel coalitions hijacking the community. It's complete b.s., and seeks to hurt people personally, rather than talk about issues.
We can't say what the Tech Comm. plans as a next step, but the moment they include more serious matters in a survey, and/or insist on IDs on entries, there will no doubt be more complaining and fear. The Committee's intentions are to help the community, so let it evolve as it will, and speak to the issues without focusing on personal attacks.
Well said Steve.
Steve, you are very kind. I’m grateful for all the folks who are supportive of the technology initiatives and appreciate the efforts of this group of volunteers to move Surfside out of the dark ages. The committee will review preliminary survey results in the Jun meeting, which is open to anyone who is interested. Check the HOA website calendar. Surveys are also being mailed to all Members with Aannual Meeting notice and proxy voting forms. We have over 100 surveys now and about half have names. I can see that electronic voting and website enhancements are frontrunners as of now, for both signed and unsigned surveys, but that could change as more surveys are received. Again, the purpose of the survey is to help the committee focus its efforts on what the Members want to see improved. This will be used to research and price options and will all go to the Board before any plans are made to implement.
Invalid survey will not help the committee or the board to focus on what the members want to see improved because there not proof that it is members responding to the survey. The results of this particular survey should not be used to make any recommendations or decisions. It results should not be used to research or price any options either. If there is to be member input, then there should be valid member input.
I notice that those who support the tech. committee and the survey use their names and those who do not, don't. Why do you suppose that is? Just an observation.
We do support the tech committee in any endeavors that truly improve communications, office tasks, document processing and voting for the general membership. We don't support the tech committee doing stupid things like putting out a useless, invalid survey. BTW, we have learned to be careful about when to use our names or not to use our names to avoid the personal attacks that have been suffered by some. It is a small price to be anonymous to enjoy some peace.
It is not a matter of taking the high road to use your name on this blog. It is a matter of smarts to be anonymous.
How is it that there are a few on this blog who truly can't see the forest for the trees? The only members who do not want tech improvements are those who remain afraid to touch a computer, a smart phone or a tablet. Yes, we do have some of those members.
I don't know, but, It could be some are trying to discredit the survey before they come out with the results because they have an idea of what it will be, or they fear what it will be. Just the same old thing of attacking the messenger. In this case, the survey.
With only a 100 in, seems like the lack of response is an answer to the survey.
All I can say to all those who are bashing the Tech Committee efforts, and putting forth their ideas on how it should be done, why aren't you on the Committee
Cause most are on the board🤣😂🤣🤣
Here's another observation for you 11:48 am. It always gives me a chuckle when someone like yourself comes on here and calls people out for not using their names while remaining anonymous. Then when you consider the fact the people you are calling out here are asking for surveys with names on them, I find that funny as heck. So thanks for the entertainment.
Again, at first people came on here making the suggestion that for the survey to give an idea on exactly how the membership feels it would have been better to just allow one per voting member. I don't understand how people can argue against that idea or turn it into being against the committee itself. But, that's the downside of social media.
What I do find interesting is this. There have been numerous topics where the subject line and comments are bashing other committees like the Tree Committee for example. Why should the Tech Committee get a pass? This obviously shows a bias here and is quite telling.
Good morning Georgie. Let me make your day by putting the comments into triple digits. Now go have a cig and celebrate.
Congrats!
The fact this topic has triple digits is a vote of confidence it's an important topic for the people.
Why is it sensitive?
1) Some people are interested in modernization to do the same tasks we already do not so efficiently.
2) Other people realize said modernization will be a more efficient vehicle to change and are threatened by that since they are happy with the current limited communication that helps contain the current status we have that caters to their personal wants regardless of the community as a whole.
I have not seen one comment on this thread that would indicate that anyone is against adopting the best tech advances to make our homeowner's association better. In my day to day errands and conversations, I have not heard one Surfside member say that they are against making the best use of technology unless it would entail some huge expense. The facts are that we have already paid for good hardware and most software to run an efficient and cost saving HOA. The main point on this blog thread is that making recommendations for changes based on a faulty survey is not a good thing to do.
A few narrow minded people look for negatives when none are there. Is it impossible for the committee to come up with a valid and reliable survey? I don't think so. The problem is an unwillingness to admit a mistake and to correct it.
A few are wanting to pick a fight whether it is necessary or not. The RVers who have decided that they want all the benefits of permanent homes have created a belligerent environment. The tree contingency also wants to create a fight. Anyone who calls for any kind of common sense negotiations or actions is attacked by these groups. Both groups have a knack for reading negative BS into any comment that does not fully support their causes or mindset.
A little passive aggressive 12:28? You keep saying the same thing like your a differant person. It ain’t workin!
You are entitled to make up your own opinion but you are not entitled to make up your own "facts" 12:38.
Seriously people, it's time to stop! Take a break and go out and enjoy the day. No offense to George but maybe even avoid the blog for a day even though I realize it may be hard for some.
Why shouldnt the RV property owners have the same rights as stick built home owners, 12:28? That is the whole point: discrimination. Pay same dues but only allowed half of the benefits. Go walk the beach and let go of some of your frustrations.
The good reasons why there are covenants have been outlined on this blog over and over and over again. If 11:45 doesn't understand, so be it.
So has the reason for change. Move on!
Post a Comment