Re: WHY ARE YOU ALL GETTING OUT OF THE SUBJECT?


[ Follow Ups ] [ Post Followup ] [ The Henna Page Forum ] [ FAQ ]

Posted by Maureen on October 11, 2002 at 20:13:43:

In reply to: WHY ARE YOU ALL GETTING OUT OF THE SUBJECT? posted by Noli on October 11, 2002 at 18:48:41:

Hi Noli,

I am sure that I know exactly where Catherine got the henna powders
from...including the Mazaya. I know who sent it to her. I know it
wasn't lots of people on the forum as she has alluded to but rather
one person. And I know that it was not your customer/client as
Catherine stated. I don't believe that the person who sent it to
Catherine was motivated by any ill-will. If I am correct, that
person's own experiences with the henna powder is quite different
from what Catherine's list indicates.

So what does this mean. It means that "pristine" and control has
lost all meaning if it means that bags can be opened, powder taken
out, rebagged, and any other sort of variables and actions taken in
order to send a sample and then that sample be considered reliable.
This is not about the person sending it. This is about whether or
not Catherine cares about or knows what controlling a sample
requires. It is sort of the "garbage in/garbage out" thing that
most people understand about databases. Uncontrolled samples
in/unreliable data out. It sounds like people can just send anything
under any conditions and it be considered "pristine"
and "controlled." Those words shouldn't just be thrown out without
being quantified in some way. Samples collected from different
sources under different circumstances without any cross the board set
of objective standards for handling and collection meet no definition
of either pristine or controlled. And there is only one person
responsible and accountable for establishing and setting those
standards in something to be considered testing, analysis and
research. That rests with Catherine. And the absence of those
standards should make any exporter doubt the validity of any
resulting analysis.

There are people on this forum who understand those standards very
well. And they know that I am not making up "Maureen's Rules and
Standards for Acceptibility." There are perhaps some people on the
forum who don't understand those standards. But everyone deserves to
have those standards used whether they know what standared are
required to be in place or not. The people on this forum deserve as
strigent a set of standards to be in place as would academia.
Academia will raise questions about methodology and dismiss outright
the results when the process and methods lack reliability. That is
why the people here deserve more in terms of control and reliability
than they have been given. Because many are putting their faith in
the outcomes...believing in the outcomes...drawing conclusions from
them...drawing lines in the sand because of them. It is easier to
cling to the list than it is to look closely at the process involved
in the creation of the list.

Don't get caught up on the mirror. That is not where the problem
lies.

Maureen

 


Follow Ups


Post Followup

Name:   
E-Mail:   
Subject:   

Optional link URL:   
Link title:   
Optional image URL:   
   

[Home] [How] [Why] [What] [Where] [FAQ] [Forum] [Journal]

Served by ruboard 2.1.1; Copyright © 1998 by Andrew Maltsev.