 |
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% |
|
|  |
 |
|
Verto

|
|
Yes, we are both tired. We are saying the same things over again, yet we cannot stop.
What I am saying is, Group 1 represents the opinion of 13 voters.
IF the poll was done correctly, Group 2 would represent the opinion of 6 voters, and Group 3 would represent 9.
Now, Group 2(the middle one) is not saying they should be forbidden, merely restricted. Allowed to exist, but under some guidelines. Therefore, they are voting that polls should still be allowed, which IMO is closer to Group 1 than to 3.
Am I still making sense? I don't convey thoughts very well at 1:12 am
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sir Ralph
|
 |
Long live teh Schwampel!
Dec 2001 time: 06:20
|
|
Yes. One more bad is, that too many polls make citizens, that have not much time to spare, vote uncareful. If there are 3-5 actual polls, I can take the time to think about all circumstances, even if I have not much time. If there are 13-15 polls (and most of them, well, spam), I most likely just say "yes" to all and "leave me alone". I hope, this is not intended to press not well thought out polls through.
This empire has meanwhile more than 200 citizens. But how many of them are active? The third part? Fourth? Fifth? The rest probably does not have much time to devote for the game, and thus are probably "yes" sayers or don't even vote. Do we wish more citizens to participate actively? I think yes. So don't make it harder for them. Make it easier.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
MrWhereItsAt
|
 |
New Year's Resolution: 2005 is the year of Where It's At - come get some.
Nov 2001 time: 17:20
|
|
I tend to have strong opinions on most things here, and (quite probably to certain posters' despair ) post my views and reasons. However, there are one or two issues to date, eg the tech-whoring plan, where I have swayed my opinion/vote to join those of almost everyone else posting in the thread. I did so however NOT because of the number of votes for the plan as opposed to against, but due to the replies, all from experienced Civ3ers, giving their good reasons why they supported the plan.
Ideally this is what opinion posting is for, and this is how we want undecided voters to decide - to be convinced by a superior argument - it is superior by virtue of how easy it is to comprehend and that it has reasons in it's favour. But, not many have the time to read all the posts (alas, many of them are very, very good ), thus it is undoubted some resort to following the majority, thinking it won't matter too much anyway.
Your vote may not count for much in a general election, but in a game forum with about 40 or so regular voters, a few people following this line of reasoning means A LOT. Thus, if you are reading this, I hope you add this to the list of arguments AGAINST opinion polls. Then again, if you're reading this post still then you probably read all the others and are not one of the people I refer to here. Oh well.
And personally I am sick of trying to catch up to this forum after 12 hours with half a dozen "unofficial" and "opinion poll" threads (I haven't seen any opinion poll ones yet, but I'm sure I will ) - the less clutter the better.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mtgillespie
|
|
Manchester, England
Oct 2001 time: 05:20
|
|
Can i just mention something else. Every example we've had here has been of person A beating person B. What about person C (or D or E etc...)? I think this is a bigger area where polls skew a result.
Take the minister for expansion election. Johnny, Timeline and GodIsKing. There was a thread about that where at least on person (there may have been more) was re-considering their vote because GodIsKing was so far behind. That was because they checked how the vote was going so far, and that will still be a problem, but Poll's make that problem worse, especially for independant candidates.
I get the impression that with one or 2 exceptions, the most active members of this democracy are party members of the 2 big parties, who generally vote in most polls, official or otherwise, and soon after they are posted. Latecomers or people who pop in more rarely will see from a poll that a candidate is behind, and may change who they vote for.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
mtgillespie
|
|
Manchester, England
Oct 2001 time: 05:20
|
|
My other objection is to the argument about Gallup (and other) polls in real life. Yes, they are allowed, but there are STRICT rules about who can commision them, who produces them, and the questions which can be asked. Again, in our case i'm ONLY making this comparison in the case of election polls, in all other cases ask what you like how you like.
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Captain
|
 |
by Divine Right
May 2001 time: 00:20
|
|
In addition to all the other harmful effects people have elaborated on, let me give you all a real example (names changed) right here on Apolyton that will show how harmful such polls can be (and for that matter, the ability to view poll results before voting).
Candidate X, Y, Z are running.
I think Z is the best candidate. I want to vote for Z. But scrolling through the posts, I notice very few others are supporting Z in a vocal manner. I check the current poll results. I discover X and Y are neck and neck, but Z is way way behind. I don't like Y so I vote for X, just to prevent Y from winning.
Chances are, I'm not the only one doing this. So... once the first few votes are up, people start thinking... no one is voting for Z and even though I support Z, I better vote for someone who will win. Therefore, as more votes pile up, they marginalize candidate Z, who may have actually had the widest support... just not the earliest support.
The unofficial pre-election opinion polls do the same thing except worse.
While ideally I should just not look at it and have the personal discipline to do so, the reality is that as long as others have the ability to do so, I will use it also. This is one of those cases where either everyone agrees to vote "blindly" (without knowing the current status of the polls), or no one does.
It's like the car pool lanes. As soon as a few unqualified persons do it, more and more jump on since the apparent benefits of doing so outweigh the negatives, even though overall abusing the car pool lanes like that is more harmful to society.
Previewing results may help you avoid getting a candidate you disliked elected, but it doesn't help democracy because it marginalizes those who don't have early votes. People may have several candidates they like, and vote not for their favourite, but which one will likely win. Why "throw away" your vote?
|
|
|  |
 |
|
Sheik
|
|
quote: Originally posted by Tassadar5000
Person A is winning the gallup poll. and that may only be by one. Well, the guy who voted for person B notices person A winning the gallup poll, and that either discourages him from voting, or he votes for person A.
It can happen.
|
It can happen but I think that everyone here in Apolyton is smart enough to think independently and vote the way they want.
However Captain brings up a good point. Although eveyone does have one vote and if thats the way someone wants to use it, then alright.
Last edited by Sheik on 08-07-2002 at 20:35
|
|
|  |
 |
|
kring
|
 |
Wichita,KS,USA
Dec 2001 time: 23:20
|
|
I may check out a poll before I vote, but it rarely changes me to either not vote or to vote for the ahead candidate. While I am a party member (I think), I vote for the person, not the party. A two party system is more of a threat to our group than gallup polls.
If a person is dumb enough to vote based on a poll, then they get when they deserve.
Locally, back in the mid 90's exit polls showed the incumbent ahead in the polls by several %age points, I still voted for his opponent. Guess what? That's right, his opponent won by several %age points.
While I am not a fan of gallup polls for many of the reasons stated by others, I do think:
1) people here are intelligent to vote not based on poll outcomes;
2) those disclaimers mentioned several pages back make sense to me;
3) a one week pre poll limit (or several days) also is acceptable to me, since by that time, most people have forgotten the results anyway, and it will be so far down the list, most people won't go looking for it.
4) freedom of speech issue. While I know there are limits to such, I don't consider this one of them.
If we limit gallup polls, then we need to limit campaigns for the EXACT same reason.
On a side note, how about requiring candidates to honor their campaign issues if elected.
|
|
|  |
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
|
|
|
|
|
|