 |
Should we allow unofficial opinion surveys about elections ?
This poll is closed. |
| Group 1 : We should allow them in all circumstances |
   |
23 |
43.40% |
| Group 2 : We should forbid them in specific circumstances / periods (please explain) |
   |
8 |
15.09% |
| Group 2 : We should forbid them in all circumstances. |
   |
20 |
37.74% |
| Abstain |
   |
2 |
3.77% |
| Total: |
53 voters |
100% |
|
|  |
 |
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001 time: 06:20
|
|
My view is that it does harm. If the candidates know likely results of the election beforehand, they'll try to change their behaviour to something unnatural, to get the odds in their favor.
It can also influence voters, in the bad way. Some people, thinking the lection has already been played, won't bother to vote. After all, why vote in an already won (or lost) election ?
This is a well-known phenomenon in politics, it happens pretty often.
IRL, gallup polls can be useful, so that established politicians know if the people are satisfied. However, in Apolytonia, these polls serve no purpose : those who are unhappy can voice it, and they will be listened by the ones in charge. Plus, elections are held every month, which is a very short while compared to RL, and they can be seen as permanent popularity contests.
To summarize, these gallup polls are useless, and rig the one poll which counts, the election. You'd guess my position 
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sheik
|
|
And I will state my view again:
what ever happened to free speech and democracy. We must allow opinion polls. You just cant silence people because you don't like what they are saying. This is part of the process. Maybe we should just get rid of campaign threads because they might influence the election. This is ridiculous. Of course we should allow UNOFFICIAL polls this is a democracy game and the poeple must be heard.
And so what if they may effect elections. I dont think they will but if they do who cares. If I post a thread saying NINOT RULES that may influence elections. Should I not be able to say NINOT RULES because someones vote may be influenced?
any citizen should be able to post a poll or thread on anything he wants whenever he wants. The official polls will say OFFICIAL. Everyone has a right to be heard. This is like saying television stations cant poll citizens before real presidential elections because it may influence the way people vote. Campaigning and polling are both parts of any elections.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sheik
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Epistax
A pre-poll-poll cannot help however, in any way because it does not provide any qualitative information about the candidates, just how people decided to vote on a whim.
In short- they may hurt, they can't help, don't have them.
|
Just because something isn't helpful doesn't mean we shouldn't have it. By eliminating unofficial opinion polls you are setting a precedent against freedom of speech. We must allow unofficial opinion polls. jdd2007 has a right to say anything he wants just like everyone else. And he is also right that it will help canadates plan elections. If it doesn't help then why do politicians in the United States and other countries do it? Its not so they can waste time and money.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Epistax

|
 |
of Bananas
May 2001 time: 00:20
|
|
I will try to explain this-- freedom of speech does not give the right to say whatever you want.
Examples:
*Giving trade secrets to anyone.
*Giving governmental secrets to anyone.
*Insider trading (combination of being told something you aren't allowed to know, then acting on it)
*Disturbing the peace (after someone requests you do not communicate something to them, doing so anyway is against the law)
*Slander/Libel
Now this is not directly related to the pre-poll-polls, but this is to show you the freedom of speech is not universal. You do not have the right to communicate anything you want, and that's a good thing. If you think otherwise, you don't have the right to complain about email spam, banners, pop ups, etc online (just a tag on fact).
Simply doing something like a pre-poll-poll because you WANT to may not be directly against any law, but it's irresponsible. If something is wrong for any minor reason, and you do it anyway, it's also immoral.
I would hope the people in power of the forums would eliminate such polls, but I don't think it is necessary. I hope people will think about their actions in the future instead of doing them simply because they have the right to; that's not a reason.
peace
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Epistax

|
 |
of Bananas
May 2001 time: 00:20
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Verto
If what some of you have said is true, then that will mean that I cannot create a thread to discuss why I think ---- should be president or whatever, because it may or may not influence someone. If there are four pages of posts about how glorious the candidate is, that would be the same as a pre-poll-poll in which one candidate won in a landslide. |
This will be my last post on the subject (and they rejoiced) but yes. this is a problem too. The only way to get an honest choice between two people, is only to hear the facts about each. If someone posts something in favor or someone, they are bound to use bias that others may not pick up on and treat as the complete truth. I don't expect us to get such a good democracy, but anything better than the real-life media driven one we have in the US would be wonderful. It's all about morals and ethics.
If you like a candidate, vote for them. Don't try to impress your views on others. Don't tell your views to others either, let everyone decide for themselves. By impressing yourself on others, your undermining the basics of a democracy- freedom of thought. Let them reach the same conclusions you did. If they reach a different one, don't try to change their mind, else you oppress their train of reason.
I know many people believe that whoever can campaign the most should win, but I believe in the natural thought progression. After the agendas are laid down and I think my way through, I will not change my decision with any information except straight out of the candidate's mouth. This also allows for an evolution of my thought as I see if I made good choices.
If you demand to campaign with brut strength, and have these polls, I'll just have to do my part of ignoring them, or falsifying data to add to the unreliability of the polls for purposes of their eventual demise.
I will now shut up.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Spiffor
|
 |
CPA - Evil Clone brigade
Nov 2001 time: 06:20
|
|
It seems some people missed the point. The question is absolutely not bout limiting freedom of specch, thread creation, and even poll creation at large.
It's only about unofficial pre-election opinion polls. This very poll is unofficial, and I posted it as a simple citizen, and anybody could have done this.
Anybody has tremendous ways to express himself (namely, anybody can post in an existing thread, post a new thread, or pot an official poll). I feel, like many others, that a "gallup" poll has nothing to do with free speech, but is a flaw of Democracy.
Sheik : please tell me if your freedom of speech has been limited in any ways here. I've never seen somene thinking about banning the "I'm with this one ! -No, I'm with that one" posts and threads. Contrary to opinion polls, they're a healthy form of Democracy IMO.
Anyways, the polls will decide if opinion polls are a good thing or not.
|
|
|  |
All times are GMT. The time now is 05:20. Apolyton Time is 00:20. |
top of page
|
| archivepost |
|
Forum Rules:
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
|
HTML code is ON
vB code is ON
Smilies are ON
[IMG] code is ON
|
|
|
|
|
|