Mike: You say I do not need to bring up Dr. Harry
everytime I post. Interesting you point this out to me when
a select few spew out their false statements about him
(i.e., Stan) in an obvious attempt to discredit and defame
his work (every chance they get). Why dont you provide
commentary on this each time they do this and point out
their being unprofessional? Bias perhaps? Second, you
indicate that you know a couple of people at that place
[ASU]
that their implementation knowledge is shaky at
best. This too is interesting since it is only Dr. Harry that is
providing the instruction, not ASU. So, based on your
comment, what does ASU have to do with the course
content? Dr. Harrys business partner Mr. Phong Vu, was
the senior champion at Ford Motor company (reporting to
the CEO). Seems these two gentlemen likely know more
about Six Sigma and its deployment than most. Perhaps
your bias is showing through. In terms of the debate, ASU
has taken a neutral position, but we all know Stan will not
show up. You speak of this forum being turned into a
daytime talk show
wake up man and read some of the
site cronies posts
it already is a daytime (and night
time) talk show (and tabloid). False, misleading
information abounds and goes unchecked. Disrespect to
others is always on the menu and being served. Of
course, it is pointed out that this is a discussion forum and
not a expert Q&A site
many have said let the buyer
beware when it comes to obtaining information on this
site. In many cases, the inflammatory posts are little more
than bathroom graffiti. Unfortunately, the respect policy
of this site has little meaning and is not enforced. While
the vast majority of posters are well intentioned, a few use
the discussion forum to vent their alter egos using lies
and deceit to further their own agendas. Like Stan, when
called out into the open, they fail to appear. Biased?
Maybe so.
.
.