Date: Fri, 28 Jan 2011 01:41:24 +1100 From: Andrew McGlashan <andrew.mcglashan@affinityvision.com.au> To: elbbit <elbbit@gmail.com> Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org, debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Any package for surveys? Message-ID: <4D418414.7010803@affinityvision.com.au> In-Reply-To: <4D40D77D.1000200@gmail.com> References: <4D3EA1C8.9030403@daniel-gr-andersson.com> <4D40D77D.1000200@gmail.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Hi Simon, elbbit wrote: > I held off writing back because I have just launched a new website at: > http://www.tibble.net/ > > Wait! Don't go! This isn't spam! Please! Just listen! Yes, it looks very spammy to me.... > For anyone who is half in the know about the goings on in the world, and > are aware of Project Venus or the Zeitgeist Movement, you will > understand that there is a growing concern over many global issues: > - over-population of the planet > - resources might run out (as a result of too many people) > - money is a form of slavery > - the choices available to us are set by corporations/governments, not > by us the people > ... the list goes on. The problem with many "leading" questions [as per your site] is that you can't agree / disagree with the question properly as there are grey areas. You might somewhat agree with each argument, so you are unable to choose b/w either given answer in a simple y/n situation. There are often at least three answers to a question, "your" answer, an "opposing" answer and the "correct" answer; however that trivializes the fact that multiple answers could be equally correct for different people with or without further argument -- but if you define the question to rigidly, you can't give fair license to get the answer that is truly relevant for the responder. I think back to the good old Eliza program, back in my late primary school days in the era of the TRS-80 and Apple ][e computers. The program asks a simple question, then depending on your response, it will ask further questions along the way to get to an artificial point of "knowing" the answer. Not sure if this helps, but along those lines, you could perhaps ask simple questions and build a tree to allow people to always give very short and un-ambiguous answers which they can agree with and not end up on the shelf trying to decide an impossible "right" answer for them based on the question which doesn't give them enough scope to answer properly and therefore let the asker know what is really thought by the responder. Inevitably, many forum polls have the same problem. Limit the available choices and you can't get appropriate or meaningful results. There are always other options that aren't seen in the poll. This might give you an idea: http://www.mobygames.com/game/trs-80/eliza -- Kind Regards AndrewM Andrew McGlashan Broadband Solutions now including VoIP
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?4D418414.7010803>