This questionnaire has been handed out at the Yung Shue Wan ferry pier this early morning to commuters.

Here's a higher-quality bilingual pdf file for printing, filling in and returning to Yu Lai Fan's office ASAP (next door after Lamma Gourmet cheese/meat shop):

Questionnaire on Yung Shue Wan

_________________
Click here for Lamma-zine stories and recent Lamma Spotlights of the Week:
Photo, Video, Person, Wildlife, Bird, Artwork.

Looks as if Yu Lai Fan beat Living Lamma to this. Deliberate?

Seems to me to be a fairly reasonable and balanced questionnaire. What does Living Lamma think of it?

I really hope this gets a good return of opinion. Despite the pettiness and childishness of the other thread, I think this project (and others) should be decided on the community's view - for better or for worse.

Hopefully this will be collated fairly and the findings published.

Where's O Tsai and what's that project?

Is it true that Yu Lai Fan has family ties to the concrete companies that operate on Lamma?

So, no need to sign it or give any ID.

If anyone has an hour or two they can fill out a few hundred of them for whichever side they support.

As they say in Chicago, Vote early and Vote often!

You should do that. What is the population of YSW? 6000?

Go in there tomorrow with a stack of 12,000.

Hardly! I imagine that many people would quite likely answer 'yes' to Q6, without realising that they are agreeing to a wholesale redevelopment of the waterfront that will take over two years to complete. And there are many other irregularities. e.g. Q4 - any answer indicating that there are traffic problems in Main St will be used to justify the EVA.

The leaflet should start with something like:

"The Government plans to ..."

... including a basic outline of the project.

_________________
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears.

I think they are just asking the pertinent questions and in that respect, it is pretty balanced.

They are being explicit about the extent of the reclamation, too. They aren't saying "Don't you think we should spruce up our shoreline?" or "Don't you agree that dogsh!t on the beach and waste being pumped out is a bad thing?" - Both of which are pretty loaded questions. They are being quite clear about the extent of the reclamation.

One thing I thought you would have mentioned is that it is a little rich they are conducting this survey post-op.

Alan - genuine question - how would Living Lamma have made each survey verifiable? It is an interesting point you raise.

No they are not! This leaflet is, as we know, all about the reclamation, but it doesn't get a mention until Q6. And who the fuck knows what 0.4 hectare is?

As I pointed out already, the questionnaire should start with the government plan and show a diagram of it.

_________________
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears.

It is disheartening to see that you haven't managed to change your aggressive and defensive tone.



Well, you did as you showed in the previous thread and with due respect, you don't seem to be so clever. Crass, yes, clever, no.

Why start this discussion with such a tone? I managed not to. Alan managed not to.

It's neither aggressive nor defensive - in fact is was intended to be light hearted!

Mr Turtles, you quite obviously have no intention (as was made clear in the main thread on this topic) of engaging in debate with those who disagree with you. Whenever a valid point is presented you dodge it (or try to) by resorting to sniping, personal comments or by ignoring the point/s raised.

_________________
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears.

Oh well in that case, you have my apologies for misunderstanding your use of tone. I am realising that you are just boorish by nature.

On the contrary, I wish very much to engage with people who disagree with the reclamation. I still haven't really made up my mind on this. Some people (not you) have made some really good points in opposition - some people have made some very good points in support. Given the disgusting state of the shoreline as it currently stands, I lean in favour of the reclamation in the absence of any other concrete (no pun intended) solutions. It would be easier for you to classify me as pro concrete, but actually, all I am trying to do is try to engage in an open and honest debate.

Asking people to identify themselves by name and perhaps ID no would not be foolproof, but would stop the more obvious abuses.

Since this is going to be used to decide how to spend $55 million, the possibility of stuffing the ballot box is not out of the question.

And I'm not "Living Lamma". I'm just a member. Here I'm speaking for myself.
Other members of LL contacted YLF a few weeks ago and asked her to organise a public consultation. This is apparently part of that.

Elsewhere, YLF has claimed to have 3000 signatures in support of her bicycle parking platform.

I am rather doubtful of her survey methodology if she can get more than half the population to agree to anything, in a survey that no one I've ever met had heard of.

And as Marc says, the questions are designed so that almost any response can be spun as an endorsement of the EVA project.

So when she inevitably says that however many thousand people support the scheme, it will prove very little. But she'll use to to try to force it through.

LOL. OK, so, answer the points above. And then how about going back to the main thread and answering all the relevant questions you avoided there. Perhaps then I'll ignore the insults and name-calling (that you started).

_________________
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears.

I'm glad that she let point 9. be Other Comments.... I shall be taking my form round to YLF personally on my way home duely filled in

As student I once had a job doing surveys about public transport.

They told us that if the subjects wanted to expand on their answers we should write their comments on the back of the form, which would then be ignored.

Sorry, I didn't realise I missed any - please feel free to list them and I will duly oblige you, though I would suggest not discussing the prospect of evading questions because that is exactly what got everyone's knickers in a twist the last time I am sure you will agree.

If we are all being reasonable, honest and mature individuals these days, then swearing doesn't really come into the equation. So lets keep that out.

Answer what points above?

I was awaiting LL's questionnaires to see how LL would approach the survey - i.e. whether it would put its own spin on the merits of the reclamation (which, given that LL is not duty bound to be impartial (whether to concrete or to nature), is understandable).

So when I picked a questionnaire up this morning, I looked for signs of bias with YFL's questionnaire too. She appears to have picked up on most things "discussed" in this forum and are reasonable questions to ask. Other than attaching a plan of the proposed works (which, by now, have been very well advertised in the Lamma community anyway by the excellent work L-G is doing), what else could she have done? The language is neutral, the questions are not loaded, there are plenty of spaces to provide comments.

Alan - interesting. Do you know what LL would have done to verify/collate the questionnaires? I assume it will be YLF herself doing it. Did LL anticipate counting the votes themselves?

Without spending a fortune, I can see how the survey process can be abused.

I don't even really see why it is that YLF has decided to survey the opinion of the community. It diminishes the credibility of her previous assertions relating to community opinion (unless, of course, she produces 6000 'yes' votes).

There have been about a dozen people expressing views here.

This forum, and in particular, the Environment subforum, reaches only a small minority of local people.

I doubt more than a few percent of residents are aware of the plan in any detail.

That the questionnaire should:

1. lead off with a statement summarising the government plan

2. include a diagram of it.

Also, that Qs 4 and 6 are loaded or dubious, for the reasons given above.

_________________
Friends, Romans, countrymen, lend me your ears.