Subject:
|
Re: Polls as propaganda devices.
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Wed, 14 Aug 2002 15:59:12 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
173 times
|
| |
|
|
Larry Pieniazek wrote:
> But I would argue that poll #3 at least covers all the possible answers,
> even if bias shows through. (my bias is that there *is* a problem with the
> track geometry and it needs fixing, but I admit that others may not see it
> that way and have allowed for several gradations including an answer of the
> form "everything is fine")
Actually, I had a bit of trouble with this poll. The reason is that I am
now not convinced LEGO should put resources into alternative track
geometries. On the other hand, it would be real swift to have some new
track geometries, so my personal hope is that one of the model
railroading manufacturers will see potential, and come out with new
track elements.
> Now consider http://members.lugnet.com/polls/ballots/?n=21 ... Look
> carefully at the answers. This is a much broader question, of course, but
> the answer set has been constructed so that it deliberately or inadvertantly
> does not cover all possible responses. There is no "none of the above", no
> "TLC's current direction is fine", no "I enjoy video games, bring me more
> LEGO themed games", no "juniorization is a good thing" or similar. The
> author's bias shows through clearly, all answers support the position that
> he has taken in the past. If you answer this poll and choose ANY answer, you
> are supporting the author's case. (1) The only way not to do so is not to
> answer at all.
Hmm, perhaps the polling system should add the following alternate
question which can only be answered if you don't answer the poll (each
item is a check box):
I didn't answer this poll because:
0 my answer was not present
0 it is biased
0 I think it's frivolous (1)
0 I didn't feel like it
(1) I'm specifically avoiding "stupid" or other such really derogatory
terms, but allows people to convey that they think it's a waste of time.
The last option just someone bow out without giving a reason. Probably a
couple other reasons could be proposed also, but the list should be
short.
> That brings me back to "what's the point of polls?" If they're just a
> mechanism to have some fun, great. But if anyone thinks that they can use
> poll results to make any broad case (anything beyond "the pollees like this
> set better than that set" sorts of questions, that is) I think they are
> greatly mistaken, unless the poll has been constructed with some rigor. (2)
> Even so it's a self selected sample set which has its own drawbacks.
One must always take polls with a grain of salt. Almost every poll is
biased, and it's user certainly is. Far too many polls are missing
necessary answers. Sampling problems always reduce the value of the
poll. Heck, even one of the least biased polls, the free market, is very
far from perfect.
Frank
|
|
Message has 1 Reply:
 | | Re: Polls as propaganda devices.
|
| (...) Good point. The poll, however, doesn't say that LEGO has to do anything per se, just that there is or isn't a problem with the track geometry. I like your suggested mandatory/automatic addons. (22 years ago, 15-Aug-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Polls as propaganda devices.
|
| Let me preface this by saying that the polling mechanism just introduced, while it has some bumps (some of which have already been fixed, like the ability to keep a poll result anonymous, e.g. the CLSotW poll results are now anonymous so everyone go (...) (22 years ago, 14-Aug-02, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
11 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
