As I said computer contracts questionable w DCF FL

On 02 Sep 2004 17:21:34 GMT, (Fern5827) wrote:

The state has spent at least 45M on a computer system which cw's do
not find
easy to navigate.

Your criticizm on EVERYTHING detracts from criticisms on those
essential points that can and should be addressed. Child safety, in
FL, is obviously the issue that needs attention first.

This is what I mean by "kneecapping." Of you truly wanted reform, you
phony, you would ask for a focus on one point at a time, prioritizing.
Has no ony ever exposed you to management practicies and theory?

If you throw your workers all problems at once, not only will little
get done, but that will probably be botched.

Does that sound to you like a discription of any organization model
YOU know of already?

Hint: What agency in America has more issues to juggle at once likely
than any other?

What agency is most severely underfunded for it's workload, short
handed, short of time to train emplyees, short of training money to
develop and deliver curriculum, short of adequate pay standards to
attract and hold top quality staff?

Get a 10 year old to help you figure it out if I've Stumped you with
too many hard questions.

You remind me of the old farmer that was a hard scrabble failure while
all around him other similar farms prospered. The answer was simple.
He couldn't make his horses plow, or draw the mower, or the planter or
tiller. In fact they had stopped pulling years ago.

Why?

Because he had the nasty habit of putting them in traces, and
screaming "Giddup!!!!" and when they lunged forward into their
collars, snapped the traces chains tight and began to pull the
overheavy loads he would attach them to his way of rewarding them was
to go to the whip, screaming "Giddup!" louder and hitting harder.

I once loaded a young skittish mare that would not load in a truck
after watching the handler do exactly that to her...He would hit her
as she was just about to step INTO the truck bed. She would lunge bakc
away from this monsterous machine that pained her when she approached.

That went on for half and hour until I intervened and put her in
myself.

How did I get her in? Well, I'd like to have had time to gentle her
in, as I had with all horses I trained, that would enter my trailers
and trucks upon my quiet voice or handsignal, with not even a halter
on them..just walking free, but I had to move that little mare that
day to a polo training camp I ran.

So I got up on her, road her up to the back of the truck, spun her
around, and hit her once lightly with the nasty polo whip he'd been
using...not hard enough to hurt, just to trigger the same reaction he
had just taught her.

Of course, she lunged "back" up the ramp into the truck bed. So fast
the guy almost didn't catch what happened. He signed on with me for
lessons shortly after. I used to train horseman in many disciplines.

I could train you, and in fact you'll figure out one day that I have,
right here in this ng in front of everyone....and you knowing now will
be NO protection against me continuing to train you. Enjoy.

As I wrote years ago, there's lots of wiggle room in these sweetheart
contracts
forged between vendors and the state.

Well now. Are you an expert in what the normal costs would be to
develop a statewide computer system? Have you ever written a RFP for a
contract that big, on information management?

Are you in fact trained in information management? Even just setting
up a single LAN on site? Can you cost out, say a 150 station system
with two to six servers for provision and backup?

So you know the size the FL system would require? Do you know the
numbr of caseworkers, and computer using support staff (which these
days would require on every worker and support persons desk, every
manager, every administrator, every supervisor, even caseworker aide,
and the receptionist in every office?

When you can show us that $45 mil is excessive based on a cost
analysis, get back to us and let us in on it. If you are correct I
might call FL (I have before) and see if your work would be of help to
them. They need it...and in the meantime, while YOU are occupied and
out of their hair, they can get on with the top priorities.....child
safety.

And lots of the juice gets masked with confidentiality label.

That could be. Can you provide us with something we could use if we
actually wanted to make a useful criticism directly to the state of
FL? Just standing around bitching at them in a general sense, as you
do, doesn't actually help.

Regier is now down. Even the Editorial writers and columnists were
openly
speculating

The world is full of speculation. Sometimes it right, but more often
it is wrong or incomplete, or an out and out pile of bull****. I see a
lot of that here, moreso with you than any other poster. Aren't you
proud of your status?

that Regier must have had something on Bush to remain in charge for
so long when such unethical,

While it may turn out that he behaved unethically. we cannot be sure
just from media accounts. When they are wrong they come back less
strong than when they made the claim earlier. Every notice?

I notice when YOU are caught out in error you don't even come back at
all. That called "immoral and unethical" in the media.

not to say illegal conduct was discovered.

He has been convicted then? I hadn't even heard of charges, let alone
a trial. Could they have held secret trials...HERE, in America?

Please point us to a source that will varify his guilt by our system
of laws, not your sloppy newsgroup babbling accusations.

And that's just what transpired.

I'd like to decide after watching the legal process unfold and come to
conclusion. Why is it you are unable to contain your blood lust and
must rush to judgement on your own? You a trained LE detective, a
lawyer, a prosecutor, a judge? Or any combination there of?

Now the news about the deals is surfacing.

"News" is not proof. We just saw, for instance, in ascps, Sherman post
a newspaper correction that completely changed the significance of a
prior statement, that 10% of all SIDS deaths showed a particular virus
involved.

Interestingly the correction said, 10% of all infant DEATHS. I would
imagine that only a tiny few would be SIDS deaths, because an
identification of another cause...a virus.....shows that it's not that
catchall that was created to label UNEXPLAINED infant death by some
name, any name at all, just so we had a name.

The logic lapses, and stupidity excess in this ng is well represented
by you...but you are in good company. ...for you see even that article
AFTER correction is not strickly right....as if you KNOW what killed a
child...it is automatically NOT SIDS...but a virus death, or a
smothering death, or any other of the many things that kill infants,
including abuse and neglect.

However, you seem to be having a lot of joy from this, so don't let me
spoil your fun with logic and thought.

You must be slipping off your chair from excessive lubrication.

Kane