Re: FW: Ground ambulance accident data

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...

[Guest guest]

Simple answer. Data collection makes jobs. Good paying jobs. The more data

you manage to get collected, the more people it takes to deal with it. When

you're the first person hired, the best way to move up is to build an empire.

Hire others to be under you. The more people you manage the higher your

budget. The higher your budget the better it looks on your resume`.

Data collection is a particularly good place to " hide " the fact that you

can't really do anything also. Nobody else understands what you do, so there

is that mystery that surrounds you. You MUST be important. And nobody wants

to challenge you. Because in order to challenge you, they have to bother to

learn what you do.

See, it's the perfect job. And it's very easy to hide the fact that you're

not doing anything meaningful with the data because it's so easy to create

charts and reports that nobody understands but are afraid to question because

they're afraid they'll look stupid.

Higher education is the hands down leader in this charade. No wonder ny

can't read. All the money that ought to be spent teaching ny to read

goes to the Office for Mental Masturbation.

When I was at TJC I saw, in 12 years, data collection mushroom. We were

constantly being required to report all kinds of stuff with names like

Outcomes Verification and so forth. As the demands on me as an administrator

to provide more and more mindless drivel to faceless offices increased, I got

more and more bitter about having to do it, and finally it virtually killed

my enthusiasm for being an administrator.

I often spoke out about that, which didn't exactly endear me to the BIG

Kahunas, the ones making big money for doing nothing much meaningful. One of

my colleagues who was particularly prone to announce that The Emperor Has No

Clothes finally got the ax because he wasn't a " team player. "

Much data collection is utter hogwash because it doesn't lead to any changes

in the way we do things. It is data collection for its ownself, and it

supports meaningless jobs.

Now, before you roast me, think about what I've said. Can any of you name a

single benefit that you've ever seen from the data that you have been sending

in for years?

I'm not talking about legitimate research to see what works and what doesn't.

We need more of that.

But every time a new PhD is looking for a topic for a dissertation, we run

the risk of having more data collection rammed down our throats.

Me, I'm going to gather data on the mating habits of Two Headed Dutch

Orphans in Brazil. That should get me a nice grant.

Cynically yours,

Gene Gandy

Gene Gandy, JD, LP

4250 East Aquarius Drive

Tucson, AZ 85718

home and fax

cell

wegandy@...