Tv Results In The Mail! - Page 8

Straightline · #1 08-27-2007, 10:52 AM

5. Would the adoption of a limited use of tv have an affect on your relationship with the UPCI? 935 yes/ 1427 no, 55 no response

This is the question that sparked the whole survey. The Mullings motion last year was to form a committee to determine the long term effect that tv advert. would have on the UPCI fellowship. The other questions are interesting, for sure, but the important information to absorb is that 40% of the ministerial constituency will take some form of step backward if res.4 passes.

Are we ready to pass something that will give the go-ahead to the 6-8 pastors that can afford and want this, but lose the participation of 935?

There is no bend in this
Straightline

StillStanding · #2 08-27-2007, 11:05 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Straightline

5. Would the adoption of a limited use of tv have an affect on your relationship with the UPCI? 935 yes/ 1427 no, 55 no response

This is the question that sparked the whole survey. The Mullings motion last year was to form a committee to determine the long term effect that tv advert. would have on the UPCI fellowship. The other questions are interesting, for sure, but the important information to absorb is that 40% of the ministerial constituency will take some form of step backward if res.4 passes.

Are we ready to pass something that will give the go-ahead to the 6-8 pastors that can afford and want this, but lose the participation of 935?

There is no bend in this
Straightline

In other words, the 935 want to control the 6-8 on how they choose to evangelize, or they'll take their ball and leave. A heavy majority say "live and let live!"

deacon blues · #3 08-27-2007, 11:09 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pianoman

In other words, the 935 want to control the 6-8 on how they choose to evangelize, or they'll take their ball and leave. A heavy majority say "live and let live!"

Great point PM!

Straightline · #4 08-27-2007, 11:11 AM

The burden to persuade lies with the proponents of change; not those that want the status quo. EVERY proponent of TV adv. should've been responding to this survey. Why would they not vote if they are all-fired-up about this? 1175 out of 9000 is not enough persuasion.

There is no inertia when you travel a
Straightline

Theresa · #5 08-27-2007, 11:06 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pianoman

My interpretation:

UPCI should vote NO to TV AND Internet advertising!

Professionally produced TV advertising by the organization would be acceptable, meaning I may not have the budget to produce a nice TV advertising campaign, so I don't want other pastors that do have the budget to have an advantage over me!

Question: Why take the time to do a survey and NOT RESPOND???????

explain to me how a person is "doing a survey" if they dont respond....

what, you just mail in a blank form?

Bishop1 · #6 08-27-2007, 11:23 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Theresa

explain to me how a person is "doing a survey" if they dont respond....

what, you just mail in a blank form?

Y E P ,

They Just Do It Like They Do

The Television Question

On The Affiimation Statement -

THEY JUST LEAVE IT

" B L A N K " !

Bishop1

P.S.
{ I, for one, am NOT going to be leaving the UPCI }

CC1 · #7 08-27-2007, 11:26 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Theresa

explain to me how a person is "doing a survey" if they dont respond....

what, you just mail in a blank form?

Theresa,

There were many questions on the survey. Some people may choose not to particpate in some of the questions but that does not mean they have not participated in answering others.

deacon blues · #8 08-27-2007, 11:05 AM

The question is worded in a vague way. Why not just ask, "Will you cease to be a member of the UPCI if Res 4 passes?" Instead of "will tv advertising affect your relationship with...." I think most people get that, but still there could be some thinking, well, I won't leave, but I won't go to Conference anymore, or something like that. It will affect a lot of people's relationship with the UPCI, but to what extent----QUIT BEATING AROUND THE BUSH AND JUST ASK THE QUESTION, "ARE YOU GONNA LEAVE OR NOT?

Kansas Preacher · #9 08-27-2007, 11:47 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by deacon blues

The question is worded in a vague way. Why not just ask, "Will you cease to be a member of the UPCI if Res 4 passes?" Instead of "will tv advertising affect your relationship with...." I think most people get that, but still there could be some thinking, well, I won't leave, but I won't go to Conference anymore, or something like that. It will affect a lot of people's relationship with the UPCI, but to what extent----QUIT BEATING AROUND THE BUSH AND JUST ASK THE QUESTION, "ARE YOU GONNA LEAVE OR NOT?

The reason the question was not worded as you suggest is because our General Superintendent demanded that it NOT be worded that way. The very day that the motion to send to committee was passed, KH told the General Board that the survey would NOT include a question asking how many would leave if it passed. He said that would provide a "club" for people to try to hold over the head of the UPC.

This is not hearsay. I was there. (For those who don't know, I used to be the District Superintendent of Kansas. I stepped down -- or, more literally, refused to allow my name to run at the end of my term -- in order to focus more of my time and attention on the church I pastor.)

A very close relative of mine served on the committee. He and I discussed this fact. I am not saying that I had any influence, but I reiterated to him that having SOME KIND of question regarding how this decision would affect the constituency HAD to be a part of the survey, or the entire point became meaningless. He agreed, and suggested the "will it affect your relationship with the organization" approach. Knowing that the direct question itself had been prohibited, I believe this was the best the committee could do.

CC1 · #10 08-27-2007, 11:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kansas Preacher

The reason the question was not worded as you suggest is because our General Superintendent demanded that it NOT be worded that way. The very day that the motion to send to committee was passed, KH told the General Board that the survey would NOT include a question asking how many would leave if it passed. He said that would provide a "club" for people to try to hold over the head of the UPC.

This is not hearsay. I was there. (For those who don't know, I used to be the District Superintendent of Kansas. I stepped down -- or, more literally, refused to allow my name to run at the end of my term -- in order to focus more of my time and attention on the church I pastor.)

A very close relative of mine served on the committee. He and I discussed this fact. I am not saying that I had any influence, but I reiterated to him that having SOME KIND of question regarding how this decision would affect the constituency HAD to be a part of the survey, or the entire point became meaningless. He agreed, and suggested the "will it affect your relationship with the organization" approach. Knowing that the direct question itself had been prohibited, I believe this was the best the committee could do.

I did not have the problem with the wording that the good deacon blue had. I thought it was direct enough without drawing a line in the sand.