Posting Polls

flacaltenn

Diamond Member
Staff member
Senior USMB Moderator
Moderator
Gold Supporting Member
Joined
Jun 9, 2011
Messages
60,774
Reaction score
15,485
Points
2,180
Location
Hillbilly Hollywood, Tenn
Texans have more ways to vote now than they did before.

Elections have consequences.
Yes they do.

And you are going to feel those consequences since your libertarian credentials went out the door when you started whoring for Authoritarian Orange Jesus.
Yep.. My libertarian credentials went flying also because I just LOVE an outsider who wants to "drain the swamp" and has given me the biggest gift ANY politician has given me EVER..

I just bought a LEGAL package of 60 Watt incandescent light bulbs.. Don't have to go the back door ask for "slim pickins" of "Boosted Hardware" anymore to score them..

People just LOVE choices.. Libertarians especially.. And Trump won my loyalty for giving me LIGHT that actually ILLUMINATES my brick house and brown aggregate walkways and driveways.. I could kiss him for that... I hear if he's re-elected -- I can finally buy a NEW washing machine that WORKS.. Instead of throwing hundreds of $$$ at insisting on REPAIRING a 18 yr old one...
 

SassyIrishLass

Diamond Member
Joined
Mar 31, 2009
Messages
66,737
Reaction score
24,351
Points
2,250
If a posted poll doesn't allow seeing demographics I laugh....you know it's fixed.

WAPO is bad on that
 

Sun Devil 92

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 2, 2015
Messages
31,832
Reaction score
10,804
Points
1,410
Texans have more ways to vote now than they did before.

Elections have consequences.
Yes they do.

And you are going to feel those consequences since your libertarian credentials went out the door when you started whoring for Authoritarian Orange Jesus.
Another name to add to the suicide watch when Trump wins.
 

bear513

Diamond Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2012
Messages
62,404
Reaction score
10,804
Points
2,030
Is there anyway to make it to where one has to vote in a poll to take part in a thread?

Like if I were to start a thread entitled, "Who will win the 2020 Presidential Election". I would post a question "Who will win the Presidential Election" and post the choices of Trump and Biden.... what would happen is that some people would pick Biden, some people would pick Trump and some would comment who voted. But Many would comment without voting. Thus defeating the reason for posting a poll. You'll note that Gallup/PPP/Zogby etc... don't often have a "no response" option on their polling data.

What I would like to see happen is to make it to where someone can't take part in a thread unless they vote in the poll. They see the Title, they see the question, and they see the options....

But only those who take part can see the results, can post comments, etc....

If you're going to have a "Post a Poll" option, why not make it to where those who wish to take part can do so without the trolling that almost always goes along with it? Like Lakhota posted a poll today....


215 views
67 replies
11 votes (responses to the poll).

I wouldn't expect there to be 67 votes--people comment multiple times in the threads--but I would expect there to be a lot more votes than 11.

Anyway, I think it would elevate some of the conversation if the respondents have to lay down a marker.
8 years later, I knew you cared no matter how much bullshit post you made
Try again, in English please.

I don't speak liberal english sorry..

And webster just called





Fuck you bitch








.
 

Mad_Jack_Flint

Diamond Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2020
Messages
1,536
Reaction score
1,227
Points
1,903
Is there anyway to make it to where one has to vote in a poll to take part in a thread?

Like if I were to start a thread entitled, "Who will win the 2020 Presidential Election". I would post a question "Who will win the Presidential Election" and post the choices of Trump and Biden.... what would happen is that some people would pick Biden, some people would pick Trump and some would comment who voted. But Many would comment without voting. Thus defeating the reason for posting a poll. You'll note that Gallup/PPP/Zogby etc... don't often have a "no response" option on their polling data.

What I would like to see happen is to make it to where someone can't take part in a thread unless they vote in the poll. They see the Title, they see the question, and they see the options....

But only those who take part can see the results, can post comments, etc....

If you're going to have a "Post a Poll" option, why not make it to where those who wish to take part can do so without the trolling that almost always goes along with it? Like Lakhota posted a poll today....


215 views
67 replies
11 votes (responses to the poll).

I wouldn't expect there to be 67 votes--people comment multiple times in the threads--but I would expect there to be a lot more votes than 11.

Anyway, I think it would elevate some of the conversation if the respondents have to lay down a marker.
The reason why is because most of the time the polls lack the right response some of us would take as our choice...

Using your own poll about who would win Biden or Trump or who would you vote for Biden or Trump you left out the Green and Libertarian voter in this conversation which I know for a fact this board has a heavy Libertarian base on it.

So no I would not want them to change the system to help you limit who write in your threads because that is your goal and you would rig the poll questions so that you would get the result you want while denying those that disagree with both political parties the right to voice their opinion...
 
Last edited:
OP
candycorn

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
69,765
Reaction score
12,734
Points
2,180
Is there anyway to make it to where one has to vote in a poll to take part in a thread?

Like if I were to start a thread entitled, "Who will win the 2020 Presidential Election". I would post a question "Who will win the Presidential Election" and post the choices of Trump and Biden.... what would happen is that some people would pick Biden, some people would pick Trump and some would comment who voted. But Many would comment without voting. Thus defeating the reason for posting a poll. You'll note that Gallup/PPP/Zogby etc... don't often have a "no response" option on their polling data.

What I would like to see happen is to make it to where someone can't take part in a thread unless they vote in the poll. They see the Title, they see the question, and they see the options....

But only those who take part can see the results, can post comments, etc....

If you're going to have a "Post a Poll" option, why not make it to where those who wish to take part can do so without the trolling that almost always goes along with it? Like Lakhota posted a poll today....


215 views
67 replies
11 votes (responses to the poll).

I wouldn't expect there to be 67 votes--people comment multiple times in the threads--but I would expect there to be a lot more votes than 11.

Anyway, I think it would elevate some of the conversation if the respondents have to lay down a marker.
The reason why is because most of the time the polls lack the right response some of us would take as our choice...

Using your own poll about who would win Biden or Trump or who would you vote for Biden or Trump you left out the Green and Libertarian voter in this conversation which I know for a fact this board has a heavy Libertarian base on it.

So no I would not want them to change the system to help you limit who write in your threads because that is your goal and you would rig the poll questions so that you would get the result you want while denying those that disagree with both political parties the right to voice their opinion...
Wow...then don't participate in the poll. Easy. Nobody is forcing you to respond to any thread....

Just give the person posting the poll the option of disallowing any participation if they aren't willing to take part in the poll. If you don't have a strong feeling (not enthusiasm--different question)...your participation probably isn't going to be welcomed. You'd get people willing to discuss and you'd get respondents who know wherer you stand.

If you don't want to make your poll contingent on someone voting....fine. I'd like to have the option.
 

Missourian

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
22,267
Reaction score
9,153
Points
940
Location
Missouri
If you don't want to make your poll contingent on someone voting....fine. I'd like to have the option.
You haven't clearly explained reasons why that contingency should be mandated.

Many times I believe the poll question is loaded and I skip it...but I still may have an opinion or read a response I wish to challenge.

And I've started threads that are immediately diverted by deflection onto a totally different track.

The OP isn't the final arbitrator of the trajectory of the thread...the participants are.
 
OP
candycorn

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
69,765
Reaction score
12,734
Points
2,180
If you don't want to make your poll contingent on someone voting....fine. I'd like to have the option.
You haven't clearly explained reasons why that contingency should be mandated.
Mandated? No. Should we be given the option? Yes.

Many times I believe the poll question is loaded and I skip it...but I still may have an opinion or read a response I wish to challenge..
If you feel strongly enough, start your own thread about the poll subject.

And I've started threads that are immediately diverted by deflection onto a totally different track.

The OP isn't the final arbitrator of the trajectory of the thread...the participants are.
I'll give you some background.

I was asked to weigh in on this:


I'm considering posting a thread there. Apparently, the OP can limit participation to an audience that they select. It strikes me as being a bit doctrinaire. I'd like to limit participation on an "opt-in" basis... Also, if you limit it to certain people, you divorce yourself from the input of others. You have some cogent moments. I'd like to think that you believe the same of me. If I don't overtly invite you...I'm not hearing your voice.

If I post a "loaded" poll question...is it worth your time? Really?
===
If you want to run a poll using the current settings...fine. We all know what happens; 50 responses, 5 votes.
What would it hurt to give someone the option of limiting the discussion to people willing to lay down their marker on an issue.

As for the whining that people "can't see" the discussion...when the poll closes...close the thread and you can see what we were talking about. I can't believe it was that important but...to each their own.
 

Missourian

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
22,267
Reaction score
9,153
Points
940
Location
Missouri
I'll give you some background.

I was asked to weigh in on this:


I'm considering posting a thread there. Apparently, the OP can limit participation to an audience that they select. It strikes me as being a bit doctrinaire. I'd like to limit participation on an "opt-in" basis... Also, if you limit it to certain people, you divorce yourself from the input of others.
I can't see why you couldn't do that.

The Structured Debate rules still apply there...it doesn't require Invite Only.

Make one of your rules that participants must vote publicly in the poll to post in the thread.

Read the sticky.
 
OP
candycorn

candycorn

Alis volat propriis
Joined
Aug 25, 2009
Messages
69,765
Reaction score
12,734
Points
2,180
I'll give you some background.

I was asked to weigh in on this:


I'm considering posting a thread there. Apparently, the OP can limit participation to an audience that they select. It strikes me as being a bit doctrinaire. I'd like to limit participation on an "opt-in" basis... Also, if you limit it to certain people, you divorce yourself from the input of others.
I can't see why you couldn't do that.

The Structured Debate rules still apply there...it doesn't require Invite Only.

Make one of your rules that participants must vote publicly in the poll to post in the thread.
Ahh...I misunderstood. I do know that when I just posted a reaction to one of those threads, I was banned from the thread by the powers that be.
 

Missourian

Platinum Member
Joined
Aug 30, 2008
Messages
22,267
Reaction score
9,153
Points
940
Location
Missouri
I'll give you some background.

I was asked to weigh in on this:


I'm considering posting a thread there. Apparently, the OP can limit participation to an audience that they select. It strikes me as being a bit doctrinaire. I'd like to limit participation on an "opt-in" basis... Also, if you limit it to certain people, you divorce yourself from the input of others.
I can't see why you couldn't do that.

The Structured Debate rules still apply there...it doesn't require Invite Only.

Make one of your rules that participants must vote publicly in the poll to post in the thread.
Ahh...I misunderstood. I do know that when I just posted a reaction to one of those threads, I was banned from the thread by the powers that be.
I may misunderstand too.

But I believe the old structured debate rules were that the OP could structure the debate with three rules.

Rule one had to bee that all site rules applied.

Then the OP could make two additional rules as long as those rules did not violate site rules.

I can't see why you couldn't make the rule you're advocating. Invite Only, as I understand it is merely an optional replacement for a rule.

Might want to check with a Mod...but IMO it would be completely acceptable.
 

New Topics

Most reactions - Past 7 days

Forum List

Top