HP-3000 Systems Discussion wrote:
> Fred writes:
>
>> On Friday, February 14, 2003, at 07:31  AM, Tom Brandt wrote:
>>
>>  > The validity of on-line polls using self-selected responders: 0%
>>
>>  I agree with the idea that they're validity is suspect. One doesn't
>>  need to toss the results into the trash. One can accept them without
>>  believing that they are (even close to) perfect. The 0% you assigned
>>  implies that they're absolutely false. Is that the result of a
>>  1-person poll? :-)
>
> Beyond the case that robots are responding to the polls, which I'm
> sure is not the case, asking about the cross-section of people who
> are responding to the poll is to miss the point of the comparison.
> How polling is conducted is an obviously legitimate question when
> only one group is polled, but it becomes much less important when
> multiple groups are polled, so long as the same methods are applied
> universally.

In US elections, you are not allowed to have campaigning within a given
distance (200ft?) but the same is not true for AOL users.  As I have peered
over the shoulder of AOL users, I see they are greeted with current
headlines.  What effect on the poll will there be if the "voter" first reads
"US Defies the Will of the UN", "Europe at odds with US on Iraq", "%^&@!
Cowboy at it again", etc.

> comes to that, I believe that Bush, Cheney, Rumsfeld and Powell
> should be arrested and put on trial before the Hague. Quite
> obviously, the United States cannot claim that it is unilaterally
> enforcing UN resolutions without the consent of the UN itself.

Right after we capture Clinton, Gore and Albreit for the Kosovo invasion?

* To join/leave the list, search archives, change list settings, *
* etc., please visit http://raven.utc.edu/archives/hp3000-l.html *