Boxerworks.com

gspd wrote:

The Web Mistress wrote:[ I was joking around. Sorry it didn't come through as such.
PS - My name has second "E" in it. :~)

Hi Keelly
Sorry I forgot the second E in your name.
I knew you were just joking around
I sometimes joke around a bit too.

Now, now, GSPD.

THAT will get you kicked off the forum!

The Veg wrote:

The Web Mistress wrote:

The Veg wrote:Bevahiour seems to be the crux of the matter. I've never seen a recreational (key word there) forum that time-limited the edit function, but then the issues we saw in the past were fairly unique too. I do agree that the questions should be worded as functionally as possible- the way they stand now as I write this seems a little bit 'editorialised.' possibly reflecting someone's opinions. Polls with tangible outcomes should strive for objectivity, period.

I also remain open to the idea that this issue might require some trial & error to get comfy.

Polls always equate to OPINION which do NOT necessarily equate to OBJECTIVITY. It's what people want... and it's driven by experience and emotion nine times out of ten... thus, objectivity is subject to the user; not by the poll.

Even so, write the questions as objectively as possible. Editorialising in them gets construed as trying to lead or influence the user, and certainly makes the questioner appear less respectful of the user's opinions, to say nothing of coming across as crass and snide. Take the high road, *I dare you!*

+1000

Kelley, if you don't think poll results can be skewed by how the question and multiple choices are worded, I don't even know what to say. An objective survey of opinion can only occur if the greatest care is taken to try not to steer results by the wording of the question and available choices.

Example:
Do you support the war in Afghanistan?
1) completely
2) though there are problems, I fully support the troops efforts
3) we shouldn't have ever gone in, but we have to stay and finish

The pollster could claim that 100% of the people responding to the questionnaire support the war in Afghanistan.

Or

Do you support the war in Afghanistan? Yes No
vs.
Do you support the troops in Afghanistan? Yes No
vs.
Do you support staying in Afghanistan regardless of how long it takes, even if it's decades? Yes No

These three questions could each purport to measure public support for the war, but they would get substantially different results. Someone desiring positive responses might choose the second, and someone desiring negative results might choose the third. Both would get different results than the first one.

Look....

Some folks may have Control Issues, wherein they feel the need to influence or control the thoughts or actions of others but I'm not one of those people. Therefore, if you or I, Vanzen or Veg, sees the need to edit an old post or even remove all of their posts, I have no problem with it and don't see why anyone else should.

When I post here or anyplace else, my writing doesn't become the property of the board owner or the other posters and I feel that if we have the responsibility to control what and how we write, we also need the ability to edit or remove our posts.

I know that the board owner expects us to act like adults and I think that its imperative that I/you/we be treated in the same manner. My words are mine. Not yours and when the board owner or the mods begin editing my posts... Well, I have other ways to spend my time.

If it sounds as if I feel strongly about this issue, you're reading me right.