NEW KM style (page 7)

garybuss

Assuming 1% mortality per year and an average of 6.5 million active JWs, you end up with 300,000+ deaths.

?????????

6,500,000 X .01 = 65,000

What am I missing?

sir82

Assuming 1% mortality per year and an average of 6.5 million active JWs, you end up with 300,000+ deaths.
?????????
6,500,000 X .01 = 65,000
What am I missing?

Poster said this was the period 2003 - 2007.

5 years X 65,000 = 325,000.

I don't think dropping the figures from the KM can be explained on the basis of trying to cover up bad numbers. As others have mentioned the figures have actually been getting slightly better for them in the past few years. Nothing spectacular but a bit improved. If they were going to drop the numbers out of embarrassment you might have expected them to do it around 2000 or 2001 when the figures were really quite bad.

Plus a big turnover in members is nothing new. Baptism numbers have vastly outweighed net increases for decades.

jws

It's been ages since I've seen a KM. Weren't the figures only for the country they you were in? And weren't they only figures for the month? Not last-year, this-year comparisons?

Assuming that's the case, I can't see where publishing numbers is going to show any growth or decline by itself. How many people actually go look up what the numbers were last year and calculate percentages except for people like us hoping to see signs of decrease?

What might be semi-fresh on people's minds is month-to-month. You're still carrying around one KM when you're given the next one. Now you might see huge increases or decreases because of the seasonal nature of most things (which some people might not understand).

I can't imagine a little box with 1-month at a time figures for your country would hurt. I'm sure they could make it fit, so that isn't the reason. And maybe not so much to hide bad news, but to only show you outstanding news. If they stick to highlights, all you see is positive, rah-rah type statements. You never ever see slow increases, leveling off, or declines.

I can't see them doing away with counting hours. How would they even be able to give highlights if they had no data to base them on?

I think it's to portray only positive news. We'll see what the fallout is. When JWs keep hearing reports about some seldom heard of country having increases and never hear any news about their own country, they might start to feel alienated and want to see what their numbers are. Of course even in places that are flat, a good spin can be put on things.

You could find the last bad year and show how much you've increased since then. Or simply state figures like over 10,000,000 pieces of literature were placed last month in the US! That sounds impressive, but without being able to average that out, who's going to know whether that's really impressive or not.

wobble

I think in the past they always had what at least looked like wonderfull growth.Those days are gone,so even vaguely honest figures are dangerous.the R&F really do look for growth as proof of Divine approval.

I had a visit from my P.O (as was) 2 or three months back,his fleshly Bro. is a big cheese in Brooklyn,and during conversation he said to me "Even if next years figures are down,I will not lose faith" I think he had heard something and now they have to cover up the truth,mind you they are past masters at that!

Love

Wobble

slimboyfat

I think in the past they always had what at least looked like wonderfull growth.Those days are gone,so even vaguely honest figures are dangerous.the R&F really do look for growth as proof of Divine approval.

Yeah but trying to cover it over by not publishing figures at all looks worse than simply publishing modest growth figures in my view.

No I think dropping publishing the figures can only mean one thing - they plan to stop getting people to submit reports altogether.

sir82

No I think dropping publishing the figures can only mean one thing - they plan to stop getting people to submit reports altogether.

Man, can you imagine how devastating that would be to the pioneers, especially women?

"Pioneer" was the one single solitary title a JW woman could have. With no time reported, there won't be any more pioneers.

If your conjecture turns out to be true, there's going to be a heck of a lot of (even more) seriously depressed JWs out there.

Mickey mouse

No I think dropping publishing the figures can only mean one thing - they plan to stop getting people to submit reports altogether.

slimboyfat

Man, can you imagine how devastating that would be to the pioneers, especially women?

Yes I can think of quite a few whose whole self-esteem revolves around that badge. I can't say I would be too sorry to see them come down a peg or two. Nah come to think on it I don't have dog in that fight.

Anyway the egos of sisters is probably not a big priority to WT policy drivers - even if it should be given women are something like 65% of the membership.

If you were going to dismantle the WT religion slowly piece by piece then I think you would do well to follow their programme over the past few years.

What are they up to? Where will the cutbacks stop?

Doubting Bro

You could always go in between and have only the pioneers submit their time or have some other criteria for being a pioneer. I agree that's the only title a woman can hold as a JW and given the title driven nature of the religion, that would be very demoralizing. I still think that time reporting is so much more than just collecting data. Its the very yardstick by which every JW is measured. Not saying it couldn't happen, but they'd need to replace it with some other yardstick by which JWs could measure their spirituality by.

NEW KM style

Share this