IMHO a 'Corporate Compliance' scoring framework is absolutely required, but the proposed framework is beyond the technical comprehension of, and is inaccessible to far too many people, for it to become 'mainstream' and popularly supported and approved.
I'm in awe of your technical capabilities Alison.
The question IMHO is how best to convey the need, opportunity and benefits arising for nearly all people, by transforming our corrupt corporate systems.
I wonder if a simple 'test case' might leverage necessary publicity to get the ball rolling.
Keir Starmer is an obvious example, because he is such an obviously demonstrably corrupt person in very many ways, and there seems an increasing public reaction against him and his methods and policies, etc.
There are many other (rightly) highly unpopular obscenely wealthy psychopathic 'elites' as alternatives. (Bill Gates, Rishi Sunak, David Cameron, Matt Hancock, Tony Blair, to name a just a few).
Another approach is to focus efforts on promoting corporations and leaders who are NOT corrupt, so that these examples offer a template or blueprint for ethical compliance.
I want to generate some metrics that could then be used for further analysis. You mentioned Pareto analysis before but I can't see how to apply it. I'd welcome help with that. I like your example of finding leaders who don't appear to be corrupt, I should really be reporting those findings too, because there are some. One problem I notice is that CHatGPT is working to a modified version of the Companies Act. If you ask it what Section 1082 is about it gives unconnected, incorrect text, compared to the actual act. So, I keep having to remind it of the actual text. I certainly will focus on the other leaders you mention. Some I have tackled, but I haven't done a complete analysis in all cases.
I found that video bewildering. Some of it made sense but leaps of logic were made that left me confounded. He discussed all the Police Forces as being incorporated as satellite corporations of the English and Welsh Police Force which trades as Pitcomp 233 but I could find no evidence for this assertion. The person with significant control of Pitcomp 233 is given in Companies House as Southern Housing Group. The Police Federation of England and Wales may be a director (as a corporate person) but that is an association which represents officers 'rights and this is not the same as the English & Welsh Police Force.
My framework, however, is designed as a method to assess the legal compliance of individuals and companies, in an effort to reduce their breaches to a score that gives people an understanding of the individuals' honour. I'm going to test it in my future "Compliancy Assessments". In time I will do an assessment on the companies "Blue" mentions.
IMHO a 'Corporate Compliance' scoring framework is absolutely required, but the proposed framework is beyond the technical comprehension of, and is inaccessible to far too many people, for it to become 'mainstream' and popularly supported and approved.
I'm in awe of your technical capabilities Alison.
The question IMHO is how best to convey the need, opportunity and benefits arising for nearly all people, by transforming our corrupt corporate systems.
I wonder if a simple 'test case' might leverage necessary publicity to get the ball rolling.
Keir Starmer is an obvious example, because he is such an obviously demonstrably corrupt person in very many ways, and there seems an increasing public reaction against him and his methods and policies, etc.
There are many other (rightly) highly unpopular obscenely wealthy psychopathic 'elites' as alternatives. (Bill Gates, Rishi Sunak, David Cameron, Matt Hancock, Tony Blair, to name a just a few).
Another approach is to focus efforts on promoting corporations and leaders who are NOT corrupt, so that these examples offer a template or blueprint for ethical compliance.
I want to generate some metrics that could then be used for further analysis. You mentioned Pareto analysis before but I can't see how to apply it. I'd welcome help with that. I like your example of finding leaders who don't appear to be corrupt, I should really be reporting those findings too, because there are some. One problem I notice is that CHatGPT is working to a modified version of the Companies Act. If you ask it what Section 1082 is about it gives unconnected, incorrect text, compared to the actual act. So, I keep having to remind it of the actual text. I certainly will focus on the other leaders you mention. Some I have tackled, but I haven't done a complete analysis in all cases.
I’m bewildered by this stuff…
Is it something to do with this?
They are all corrupt and I can prove it: https://youtu.be/FOzVtkhg4Ck?si=_Kr3EX_QZHSkUvaT
I found that video bewildering. Some of it made sense but leaps of logic were made that left me confounded. He discussed all the Police Forces as being incorporated as satellite corporations of the English and Welsh Police Force which trades as Pitcomp 233 but I could find no evidence for this assertion. The person with significant control of Pitcomp 233 is given in Companies House as Southern Housing Group. The Police Federation of England and Wales may be a director (as a corporate person) but that is an association which represents officers 'rights and this is not the same as the English & Welsh Police Force.
My framework, however, is designed as a method to assess the legal compliance of individuals and companies, in an effort to reduce their breaches to a score that gives people an understanding of the individuals' honour. I'm going to test it in my future "Compliancy Assessments". In time I will do an assessment on the companies "Blue" mentions.