Waste of bandwidth. Good intentions notwithstanding. 
Posted on 12/08/2004 10:51:41 AM PST by inquest
OK, got my flamesuit on here...
The last couple of polls on FR have been questions regarding issues which, I'd wager, most Freepers had little knowledge of at the time the question was asked. There was a poll as to who should be the next chairman of Senate Judiciary. Everybody of course knew about Arlen and his rather presumptive remarks directed at the President, but I don't think a lot of people were terribly familiar with the credentials of the other two senators who were named in the poll.
Likewise with the most recent poll, I doubt whether most Freepers knew at the time that Mr. Gonzales was a member of La Raza or that as a judge on the Texas supreme court, voted to "rule" that a minor doesn't have to obtain her parents' consent to obtain an abortion. I have a very strong feeling that if these facts had been known beforehand, the numbers would look starkly different from the way they currently do. Indeed, over time, the percentage in his favor has been steadily dropping.
Therefore I have this simple proposal for future polls: When a poll question is posted, I recommend to have it link to a thread discussing the question, and to not accept any votes for 24 hours, so that Freepers have the opportunity to hear the different arguments and cast an informed vote. Comments?
Proof? If I know the H2 Hummer is a large SUV and I read that the tires fall off unexpectedly, I want to know why. That's a weak example, but it's one I can think of off the top of my head.
You're doing exactly that.
Gee this is gonna be a toughie.
First you said this:
The last couple of polls on FR have been questions regarding issues which, I'd wager, most Freepers had little knowledge of at the time the question was asked.
So you are making the assertion that many freepers were ignorant of these facts. And then you said this:
I have a very strong feeling that if these facts had been known beforehand, the numbers would look starkly different from the way they currently do.
To anyone schooled in logic, that proves my point quite nicely. You are basically claiming that the reason so many freepers disagreed with you was because they were ignorant of the facts at hand.
No, you haven't given me any proof, other than to prove my point correct. People aren't going to know the full scope of events if they largely depended on the lamestream media for their information. Therefore, they're going to be ignorant of the facts, because the lamestream press isn't going to give people both sides to every story. Having both sides to every story is what you get from sites like FR.
To get a good handle on the sheer volume of information out there, one just has to use Google or some sort of similar search engine. This isn't rocket science here.
You could use a little "schooling" in logic yourself. You started with the accusation that I was claiming that they were ignorant of the facts because they disagreed with me, and then you concluded by saying that I was saying that they disagreed with me because they were ignorant of the facts.
The first rule of logic is that "if p then q" is not the same as "if q then p".
Waste of bandwidth. Good intentions notwithstanding.
And what else can we draw from this statement:
I have a very strong feeling that if these facts had been known beforehand, the numbers would look starkly different from the way they currently do.
You made it clear that the poll positions are based largely on ignorance.
You can try and hide within your nuances, but the gist of your post is clear - those who had a different opinion than you on these polls held those positions because of ignorance.
Ah, but your posting history says otherwise on the subject of Gonzalez.
So you can pretend that wasn't your inferrence because you didn't specifically say it on this thread. Even though the points you raise would have, in your opinion, shifted the polls from positions you have opposed in the past to positions you have supported in the past.
Nah, I'm the one who is logically challegned. /sarcasm.
Agreed. Additionally, solution is 'iffy' too - some polls are up for less than 24 hours.
Like I said, if you're going to make an accusation like that, you should find a way of backing it up somehow.
I have backed it up just fine. I have shown that you held a position that Gonzalez was not a good choice. You stated the premise that you felt people were ignorant of Gonzalez's parental notification ruling and his membership in La Raza. And you stated the premise that knowledge of those facts would have changed the poll votes of many people - from a position you disagreed with to a position you agreed with, from your earlier posting history.
It's a clear indication on your part - that you believe that many people who voted in that poll in a way different than what you believed in must have not known the facts - so their positions were based in ignorance, and would have changed if they knew those facts.
You demanded that I back up my assertion. I have. You can try and parse that away all you want. I've had enough of efforts to deflect the obvious, and really don't care to play any longer.
That's grossly distorting what happened. Incidentally, the majority of the Texas Supreme Court, all Republicans, agreed with him.
Gonzales is fine lawyer, and fine judge, a fine Republican, and a great choice for AG.
Everyone is in favor of limited government and judicial restraint until it inhibits their own causes.
I've never dated a pole? Are they nice people?
Glad you have your flame suit on, considering the warm reply some people have given your proposal.
I like your idea, but obviously some do not. As a compromise, how about just having a link to a discussion thread for each poll? I would appreciate being able to read other people's opinions, to see whether they know something I don't, before I vote. I'd guess that implementing just the dicussion thread would be easier than implementing the rest of your proposal.
For the person who said that "there are already discussions of online poll topics aplenty", that may be, but it would be more convenient to have a hyperlink to a discussion thread on the subscription bar next to each poll than to have to search for relevant threads. Also, having a thread generated automatically for each poll might better organize dicussions that otherwise could be split over multiple threads.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.