pussycat dolls petition

[danielspencer2]

check it out here:

www.petitiononline.com/pcd


fans are saying they do not want a 7th member of the pussycat dolls and are happy with the current 6.

[kate00]

yah i think 6 is enough

[magicpatch]

This is pointless.

a. The show has been commissioned, The CW aren't going to stop it.
b. Online petitions can be 'faked' no-one takes any notice of them. Beyonce's fans have signed one so re-shoot the Deja Vu video, its got like 9000+ signatures, but I can't see Sony/BMG going "ohh maybe we should re-shoot it"

What is done is done, we have to wait and see how it all works out in 2007.

[Looby8]

6 IS enough....but do we know if this so called "7th member" will stay with PCD long term? or is it like a one-show thing?

[PhllyBeef]

This is an essay written by Barbara Mikkelson regarding what she calls "Slacktivism." It is taken from www.snopes.com and was accessed on 10-08-2006.
-------------------------

These past few years have seen the birth of an Internet phenomenon: the e-petition. It offers instant comfort to those outraged by the latest ills of the world through its implicit assurance that affixing their names to a statement decrying a situation and demanding change will make a difference. That assurance is a severely flawed one for a multitude of reasons.

Often petitions contain no information about whom they are ultimately intended for and instead are no more than outpourings of outrage. Expressions of outrage are fine and good, but if they don't reach someone who can have impact on the core problem, they're wasted. Thus, a petition that doesn't clearly identify the intended recipient may have some small value as a way for its signers to work off angst, but as an instrument of social change it fails miserably.

Even those that clearly identify the intended recipient don't come with a guarantee that the person slated to receive the document is in any position to influence matters. A misdirected petition is of no more use than an undirected one — though the voices it contains may be shouting, they won't be heard.

Even well-addressed, well-thought-out petitions have their problems, chief among them the lack of a guarantee that anyone is collecting and collating the signatures or will deliver the completed documents to the right parties. The mere existence of a petition doesn't warrant that anyone will do anything with it once it is completed.

Moreover, petitions aren't the instruments of social change we'd so dearly love to believe they are. Yes, a petition festooned with a zillion signatures can have some influence, but only as a tangible proof of a subset of public opinion, and only upon those whose welfare is dependent upon public opinion (eg. politicians). Those signatures aren't votes, and they aren't treated as such by the governing bodies that have to decide on the tough questions of our times. At best, they're seen as an indication of the public's will, no more.

[...]

Paper-and-ink petitions are signed in a variety of handwriting styles, each unique to its signer. Consequently, signatures on a paper-and-ink petition cannot easily be faked else certain glaring similarities would show up in one entry after another.

E-petitions, however, come with no such assurance — the same person could have generated all of the signatures. Moreover, it takes little by way of programming skills to create a sequence of code that will randomly generate fake names, e-mail addresses, and cities (or whatever combination of same the e-petition calls for). Once written, such a program can be executed with a keystroke, resulting in the effortless generation of thousands upon thousands of "signatures."

Those in a position to influence anything know this and thus accord e-petitions only slightly more respect than they would a blank sheet of paper. Thus, even the best written, properly addressed, and lovingly delivered e-petitions whose every signature was scrupulously vetted by the petition's creator fall into the same vortex of disbelief at the receiving end that less carefully shepherded missives find themselves relegated to.

Okay, so the average e-petition isn't ultimately worth the pixels it took to create it — why are they so popular?

In a world beset by complex problems, the solutions of which will take enormous amounts of time, money, and commitment, such simplification as the e-petition provides a welcome relief. Imagine having the power to solve those problems! Moreover, imagine having it merely at the click of a mouse!

Such is the appeal. A sense of powerlessness and lack of control over events played out on the grand scale becomes replaced by the certainty that real change can be brought about at the cost of no more effort than it takes to type a few characters on a keyboard, just enough to display one's name on a growing list of equally committed cyber activists. Through the magic of the e-petition, those left feeling like bystanders to important events are transformed into powerful agents for social change. It's heady stuff.

It's also illusion.

E-petitions are the latest manifestation of slacktivism, the search for the ultimate feel-good that derives from having come to society's rescue without having had to actually gets one's hands dirty or open one's wallet. It's slacktivism that prompts us to forward appeals for business cards on behalf of a dying child intent upon having his name recorded in the Guinness World Book of Records or exhortations to others to continue circulating a particular e-mail because some big company has supposedly promised that every forward will generate monies for the care of a particular dying child. Likewise, it's slacktivism that prompts us to want a join a boycott of designated gas companies or eschew buying gasoline on a particular day rather than reduce our personal consumption of fossil fuels by driving less and taking the bus more often. Slacktivism comes in many forms (and there are many other illustrations of it on this web site; our goal was merely to offer a few examples rather than provide a definitive list), but its key defining characteristic is its central theme of doing good with little or no effort on the part of person inspired to participate in the forwarding, exhorting, collecting, or e-signing.

For many, e-petitions satisfy the need to feel they are doing good and thus somewhat quell that nagging feeling they should be doing more to make the world a better place. As such, they serve a purpose as an outlet — those who "sign" such missives experience a personal sense of accomplishment in tandem with the warming sensation of having come to society's aid. Good feels like it has been done in two directions — the signature helping a worthy cause, and the act of signing helping the person who was moved to add his name to the petition. E-petitions are sexy even when they don't have a hope in hell of helping to accomplish their stated goals because they afford us an opportunity to bestow upon ourselves a pat on the back rather than continue to feel guilty about not doing our part. That nothing is really getting accomplished is almost beside the point; we believe we've been part of something worthwhile and so feel better about ourselves.

Because e-petitions are as popular as they are, a number of web sites have sprung up to service the interest in them. That these web sites exist doesn't impart to the lowly cyber petition any more credibility than it previously had, nor does it imbue it with any more power to effect change. The presence of web sites devoted to them (even well-constructed authoritative-looking ones) changes nothing about e-petitions' inherent shortcomings. Those tempted to confuse the appearance of legitimacy with legitimacy itself should keep in mind that many a mark has been conned out of his life's savings by a smooth talker who had a fancy, seemingly well-staffed office and impressive letterhead. Looks ain't everything.

We're not going to offer an opinion on whether one site or another is legitimate (ie. the petitions it houses are actually delivered to those they were intended for and all the "signatures" visitors provide are actually appended to them). Those questions are far better directed by interested readers to the sites themselves. Rather, we're going to acquaint our readers with one further point they might not otherwise be taking into consideration.

Many of these sites display banner ads that generate revenues for the sites' operators. That means every time someone visits to view or sign a petition, the site's owners earn revenue. This happens whether or not there are any real petitions, whether or not any petitions are delivered to their stated recipients, whether or not the "signatures" collected are appended to them, whether or not only the "signatures" collected are appended (versus the site's owners adding to the list names they have generated). An entirely bogus petition site will make money for its owners just as well as a real one would because revenue is dependent on how many visit the site, not upon how many petitions are completed and delivered to the named recipients, nor upon how useful cyber petitions are.

Granted, a great many sites (e-petition and otherwise, such as this one) carry advertising banners, and granted, the revenues gained through that are often the only thing that keeps those sites operating. The presence of ads doesn't indicate anything about the quality or integrity of a site that bears them, but that those ads are there should be taken into consideration when musing "Does this site exist for the purpose I would otherwise think it does?"

[...]

Of course, that same valid purpose could be better served by essays circulated on the Internet. Essays, at least, don't foster this growing climate of slacktivism, of participation at no cost, of lasting social change achieved through no effort.

Those truly committed to righting the wrongs of the world are encouraged to take pen in hand and craft actual letters to their congressmen or to whomever they deem are the appropriate people to contact about particular issues. Real letters (the kind that are written in a person's own words and sent through the regular mail) are accorded far more respect than form letters (let alone petitions), and that should be kept in mind by those intent upon being heard. Yes, the effort it takes is far larger. But so is the potential for making an actual difference.

[steps]

They don't need another member. things aren't going to be the same with a 7 member.

[PussycatBoy]

There used to be 7 members before the release of Don't Cha, so its no big deal.

But they are noe established as a 6 piece, so adding members isn't the greatest idea.. unless its to replace a current member aka Nicole..

[MySweetTime]

If you notice, the seventh member was in the Don't Cha video during the dance scene where Nicole has a pink shirt. She is also on one of the covers of the CD Single. Plus isn't Nicole leaving? She only signed for one album.


**
Ignore the edit I pressed the wrong button
**

[Stepstar90]

If you notice, the seventh member was in the Don't Cha video during the dance scene where Nicole has a pink shirt. She is also on one of the covers of the CD Single. Plus isn't Nicole leaving? She only signed for one album.

They haven't found the 7th member yet ;)

[magicpatch]

Love to see that cover, can you point us in a direction to see that cover?

My UK singles have just six people on them.

As for Nicole, no one knows, but personally she'd be rather foolish to go solo this soon, its too soon for her to have a long solo career, she'd obviously have initial success but keeping it going for several years .. too soon

[PussycatBoy]

The previous member was on the "Sway" CD cover, and appears in that video.

I think she was the founder of PCD, Robin Antrim, something like that, and left to concentrate on the behind scenes of PCD, as a whole merchandise.

[PussycatBoy]

http://i23.ebayimg.com/03/i/05/07/66/0b_1.JPG

Looking back on it, seems like Kimberley and Jessica weren't members at the time either... or maybe they just look really different, those 2 girls at the end on the right, and the girl on the left I'm assuming is Robin, the founder of the group, and creator of the PCD franchise.

[filipinachick84]

thanks for the info..

[crazy vampire]

If you notice, the seventh member was in the Don't Cha video during the dance scene where Nicole has a pink shirt. She is also on one of the covers of the CD Single. Plus isn't Nicole leaving? She only signed for one album.


**
Ignore the edit I pressed the wrong button
**


Nicole signed for one album? where did you get this info from?

and on the cover of Don't Cha single, my front cover has 6 people not 7th so can you do me a favour and put you "cover" of the single up here so i cant see - as my cover has six not seven (as you quoted) people on it

[MySweetTime]

Ok, as you see in the Sway CD Single cover you have Carmit, Jessica, Ashley, Nicole, Melody, and Kimberly with a seventh member.
http://i23.ebayimg.com/03/i/05/07/66/0b_1.JPG

When Don't Cha came out, it was clear that a seventh member was dancing in the scene where Nicole has a pink beater type shirt on. The early releases of the Don't Cha CD Single in the USA included this woman
http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/3e/47/ce8692c008a04bddc7a34010.L.jpg

But soon after in later USA CD Singles and European singles, this girl was left out BUT her thank you's on PCD are in the slip cover. The name in it is Robin.
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B0009A1APK.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V1115430259_.jpg
http://ec3.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000B5JSC0.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V1126724733_.jpg

So Robin must have recorded songs with PCD so she has thank you's on the album. Her thank you's are the last ones on the album next to Jessica's picture.

[mtvlatina2]

A 7th member? NO!!!

[crazy vampire]

Ok, as you see in the Sway CD Single cover you have Carmit, Jessica, Ashley, Nicole, Melody, and Kimberly with a seventh member.
http://i23.ebayimg.com/03/i/05/07/66/0b_1.JPG

When Don't Cha came out, it was clear that a seventh member was dancing in the scene where Nicole has a pink beater type shirt on. The early releases of the Don't Cha CD Single in the USA included this woman
http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/3e/47/ce8692c008a04bddc7a34010.L.jpg

But soon after in later USA CD Singles and European singles, this girl was left out BUT her thank you's on PCD are in the slip cover. The name in it is Robin.
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B0009A1APK.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V1115430259_.jpg
http://ec3.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000B5JSC0.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V1126724733_.jpg

So Robin must have recorded songs with PCD so she has thank you's on the album. Her thank you's are the last ones on the album next to Jessica's picture.


sorry for not believing you in my earlier posts

and thanks for the info

can i say in this pic the girl on the right (with the blonde hair)looks like Nadine from girls aloud

http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/3e/47/ce8692c008a04bddc7a34010.L.jpg


the first few pics all the girls look different

[gummiebearz]

Ok, as you see in the Sway CD Single cover you have Carmit, Jessica, Ashley, Nicole, Melody, and Kimberly with a seventh member.
http://i23.ebayimg.com/03/i/05/07/66/0b_1.JPG

When Don't Cha came out, it was clear that a seventh member was dancing in the scene where Nicole has a pink beater type shirt on. The early releases of the Don't Cha CD Single in the USA included this woman
http://g-images.amazon.com/images/G/01/ciu/3e/47/ce8692c008a04bddc7a34010.L.jpg

But soon after in later USA CD Singles and European singles, this girl was left out BUT her thank you's on PCD are in the slip cover. The name in it is Robin.
http://ec1.images-amazon.com/images/P/B0009A1APK.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V1115430259_.jpg
http://ec3.images-amazon.com/images/P/B000B5JSC0.01._SS500_SCLZZZZZZZ_V1126724733_.jpg

So Robin must have recorded songs with PCD so she has thank you's on the album. Her thank you's are the last ones on the album next to Jessica's picture.

wow thanks for the info :D i never knew that!! ;) lol

[MySweetTime]

You are both welcome! Anything to help.

[m0cha]

Thanks. wow a seventh?