But, the survey doesn't tell you auto assign is broken nor give you background to make and informed selection.

Auto assign is busted. Give members the ability to manage their affiliation online and get rid of auto assign.

Auto assign works this way, but this is not what is told to you in the survey:

If you move even one mile, you might be assigned to another chapter, even if its further away; if you move 150 miles, you might not be assigned to another chapter, even if one is closer; if your chapter assignment is changed, it might not be to the closest one; you cannot know which chapter you might or might not be reassigned to if you move, even if you know where you are moving to; if your chapter assignment is changed or not, you won't be notified of any change by autoassign.

For more background on auto assign, see:
http://techcommdood.blogspot.com/
and
http://www.stcforums.com/viewtopic.php?id=875&p=2

It's broken. It's not worth fixing. Get rid of auto assign.

In my opinion, surveys aren't supposed to influence the opinion of those taking them. They are designed, however, to gather information. And surveys aren't ballots...no one is "voting" for a winner.

Before the survey went out, approximately 100 people knew about auto-assign. That includes the 79 CT members who were sent an email asking for their opinion on auto-assign because of the problems that had occurred n CT. Of those 79, 13 members asked that auto-assign be disabled for their accounts, and 4 asked that it stay the same. In addition, 6 members asked that auto-assign be disabled for the chapter and 6 ask that it not be disabled.

Therefore, some members who were involved in the CT situation do not think that auto-assign is broken.

Meanwhile, the knowledge-based survey went out to 15,000 members (give or take), which means that the other 14,900 members were able to voice their opinions. Any members with an Internet connection could Google "stc auto-assign" and get 250+ results, most dealing with the various discussions from the CT issue.

The survey was merely designed to find out what members think of auto-assign, and the results will be discussed at the August 18th board meeting.

[quote]
Therefore, some members who were involved in the CT situation do not think that auto-assign is broken.
[/quote]

That's untrue. Did you read the vote the CT chapter had?

Those 13 might have just been uncomfortable making the decision for other chapter members. The language of the vote was confusing, provided no context, and actually misrepresented the reason for the vote. CT Chapter members were not told that their BOD requested the feature be disabled, for example.

[quote[
In my opinion, surveys aren't supposed to influence the opinion of those taking them.[/quote]

I agree. And if you read the survey, you are lead to believe auto assign actually works. People voting on auto assign should be informed. The survey hides the actual workings of auto assign and so solicits uninformed votes.

Since those voting for auto assign don't know how broken it is, how can you get any meaningful data from the vote?

The STC should communicate honestly and clearly to the membership. Both this survey and the Connecticut Chapter vote involve a masking of the issues by the STC. This misdirection by STC communication is a worse problem than auto assign itself.

I understand the basis for the survey, and I think it's good to poll the membership for input into BOD discussions. I do feel, however, that the issue surrounding the auto-assign feature has been mishandled by the STC. The poll that went out to STC members a while ago (captured on my blog) was misleading as to the reason why CT membership was being polled. In fact, the communication was downright confusing, and seemed engineered to downplay the issue as well as the circumstances that caused it to be an issue in the first place. Further, the current poll provides zero context surrounding the issue, asking many members to provide uninformed input. I don't think the poll was a bad idea, and I know it's soliciting input and not votes, but let's be clear and accurate in communicating why the question is being asked. The STC has indicated that it is trying to improve communication, but circumstances such as these seem counter to their efforts.

I'm not saying don't use surveys, polls, and votes. I'm not saying don't solicit opinions from the membership. Indeed, I want these things.

What I am saying is you need to have informed opinions from the membership.

Soliciting uninformed opinion does not good other than to let you claim you solicited uninformed opinion; you cannot make decisions based on it.

So, provide the context for the opinions you are soliciting from the members. Based on the text of the survey and the text of the CT vote, it is clear a particular outcome is desired by the STC; that's wrong.

Provide links to the discussion. Summarise cons, as well as pros ... your survey paints auto assign as a useful automatic feature that works; it isn't and it doesn't. (And, in truth, putting the stuff a link away might cause some members to remain uninformed, so the outcome desired by the STC might still be perserved.)

Educate the members. Informed opinion would be much more useful to you guys.

The STC needs to begin communicating clearly, completely, and honestly.