Joe, pour yourself another polygraph-apologist Kool-Aid. Cheers!

Lets try this again.   

Are you doing this because you want to make polygraph better; or are you simply trying to institute anarchy for anarchy sake?   

All your goals for the industry seem destructive, over constructive.   

What are your constructive goals?   

How would it benefit me, to have you calling the shots?

Say something constructive this time.  Because you are telling actual voters how it benefits the polygraph community and the general public to have you in charge.   

Insurgencies only work for revolutions; you want to win an election.  There is a difference 

Dan,

You explain you are all about consumer protection.  Last night I posted the consent form I used with criminal defendants who had been referred to me by their defense attorneys.  That consent form might possibly be thought of as the defendants "bill of rights," as it explains his protections regarding the voluntary nature of the exam, his right to approve all questions to be asked on the test, the confidentiality of the test, and whom to complain to if he felt the test was not properly conducted.

Would it be asking too much of you for you to post the criminal defendant consent form you use in your exams?  I would be genuinely interested in how your form improves upon mine.

I'm not saying mine is so great.  If I were still conducting exams today I can see several modifications I would make.  I'm simply curious about how you word your form.

Peace.

Gordon

Hi Gordon,

I don't have any particular input on consumer protection and/or consent forms, but just thought I'd say hi.   

It’s been a while since we last had contact (I guess neither of us is here as frequently as in the past) and an even much longer time since we first experimented with systolic time intervals and cusum analysis during concealed information tests--but I've thought of you many times over the subsequent years.  

Quite apart from anybody else in the field, whether in agreement on some point or not, you have always been the consummate gentleman.  My sincerest condolences on the loss of your wife...

Best Wishes,  Drew

Mr. Barland, so very very sorry for your loss. It was mentioned at NPA, and all thoughts and prayers were with ya. 

Anyway, I saw you at a TAPE conference and found a lot of what you had to say fascinating.  Won't go into detail here.

Dan, you think that, "what's in it for me," was about money?  Oh I hope not.  Wow clearly you don't know me as well as I hoped you did.  

Nonetheless, still avoiding the relevant questions as much as you can, and deflecting with insinuations at something, that no one who knows me, would believe in a million years.  Given that standing up for consumer rights, and a fair market place, FOR ALL EXAMINERS, left me ostracized for many years, and still financially recovering, your insinuation that I am here for the money is laughable.  

You want to talk about tough, come down here to Texas, and I will show you what true hostility in polygraph looks like.  

You want to "fix" things?  Even if you got elected, you have no plan to fix the things you say you want to fix.  Even if you did have a plan, It sounds to me, you'll be leaving out some important factors you will need in instituting said plan.

Anyway, lets try this again. 

Are you doing this because you want to make polygraph better; or are you simply trying to institute anarchy for anarchy sake?  

All your goals for the industry seem destructive, over constructive.  

What are your constructive goals?  

How would it benefit me, to have you calling the shots?

Is there anyone who thinks these are unreasonable questions for a candidate that wants to run the biggest polygraph association in the world into the ground?

And dan why are you avoiding them?  One of the questions asks you to detail your platform.  Tell the members of the APA, why they should vote for you to run their association?  It's not your association Dan, it is every member's association; they are the ones you need to convince, you don't seem to understand this?  They are the ones you need to convince, and you are not doing a good job.  

Moreover, Because the APA's policies do affect me on some level, albeit small, tell me what is in it for me to hang your elections sign in my yard (so to speak)?  Here is a hint, it has nothing to do with money.  It does involve consumer protection and protecting the little guy of the business?  Because All I hear about is how you want to destroy this business.  I don't hear a damn word about how you want to improve it for ALL.

Joe, my reforms are primarily consumer oriented. Those reforms could have an adverse effect on a significant number of polygraph practitioners, on different levels.

Think of it this way... The Credit CARD Act of 2009 helped consumers immensely, but many banks felt a lot of pain. Was it the right thing to do? Absolutely. My reforms are similar in spirit.

The nomination process for APA officers occurs during the month of May. My opponent(s) for the race for president-elect will be known soon after that.

Finally, I do not seek -- nor do I want -- your endorsement.

Ex Member wrote on Feb 22^nd, 2016 at 4:58pm:


The two prime consumer-oriented reforms are:

1. A comprehensive bill of rights [previously detailed here] for prospective polygraph examinees, in which such individuals are told the full truth about the "test" -- including its inherent risks, realities and limitations -- well in advance of any examination; and

2. Transparent polygraph validity (accuracy) research -- to include a vigorous countermeasure component, as applied to randomly selected "forensic psychophysiologists" -- that is administered by a fully independent and financially disinterested entity, such as the psychology department of a reputable university.

Implementation is as I've stated before: I will use the office of APA president as a bully pulpit, leverage the power of the media, then shame the APA board of directors into taking action in an appropriate manner.

Yes, I do.

Funding can come fron grants.

Meanwhile, a model policy bill of rights is immediately doable -- as is a model policy for fidelity "testing."

Which reminds me...the newfangled EyeDetect technology is deemed by its purveyors as unsuitable for fidelity tests. What's up with that?