A modest proposal regarding FR polls

shameless vanity posting | 12-08-04 | El Inquistador

[dirtboy]

You're as bad as the Democrats, presuming that those who disagree with you must be ignorant of the facts.

[inquest]

Why should I presume that everyone knows everything about any question asked, from the moment it's asked? Is that a fair assumption?

[leadpencil1]

I propose no polls aat all. The FR group as a whole is too homogeneous in their views, for the most part.

[Scutter]

I don't think that polls on FreeRepublic add any value whatsoever; the results for almost all of them could be predicted without conducting the poll. It is like polling delegates at the Democratic National Committee over whether they prefer the Democrat or the Republican. What's the point?

[BigSkyFreeper]

Disengenious. The people who post here are probably the most informed people on the planet, that's why they're here, not because they're ill-informed, but because they have a thirst for the issues that directly effect them.

[thoughtomator]

We should have a poll on it!

[BigSkyFreeper]

I don't think that polls on FreeRepublic add any value whatsoever

Then ignore them.

[stylin19a]

I knew about both those things.

I'm thinking we should have a poll about this thread.

[johniegrad]

A conflicted 2. On the upside, there is an honest attempt to rectify a perceived problem by taking charge. On the downside, there is an honest attempt to rectify a perceived problem by taking charge.

[FreedomFarmer]

[inquest]

I don't think that polls on FreeRepublic add any value whatsoever

Again, I'd wager that the current poll, if the respondents had been aware of the relevant facts, would have proven most interesting indeed.

[RightWhale]

A person doesn't have to vote right away. The polls are up for a long, long time.

[dirtboy]

Why should I presume that everyone knows everything about any question asked, from the moment it's asked? Is that a fair assumption?

Why should you assume that because a freeper disagrees with you, they must be ignorant of the facts? Most evidence I've seen on FR is the opposite - I knew both of those facts, for example - I happen to disagree with you regarding his abortion decision, I think it was a fairly narrow decision around the law in Texas at the time and does not give a good indication of his views on abortion. I knew he was a member of La Raza - but I don't know enough about what that group was like then versus what it is now, just as the NAACP used to be somewhat respectable but now is a con game.

[dansangel]

On the upside, there is an honest attempt to rectify a perceived problem by taking charge. On the downside, there is an honest attempt to rectify a perceived problem by taking charge.

Ouch. My brain hurts.

[Echo Talon]

I'm new here and think you have point, not to many people know very much about Gonzales... How can we judge him?

[Burlem]

The polls here do not mean anything. It is more for fun.

If we wanted to know more about the subject matter there is always google.

[inquest]

The people who post here are probably the most informed people on the planet, that's why they're here, not because they're ill-informed, but because they have a thirst for the issues that directly effect them.

There are still going to be realistic limits. If a news item comes at them from out of the blue, and then they're expected to comment on it, does it make sense to assume that they're going to know enough about it to give an informed answer?

Having a thirst for information isn't the same as actually being informed. I made my proposal so that Freepers could have a chance to satisfy their thirst before answering the question being asked.

[inquest]

Why should you assume that because a freeper disagrees with you, they must be ignorant of the facts?

I'm not assuming that on that basis.

[inquest]

I'm thinking we should have a poll about this thread.

Sure, I'd go for that.