drewfx1

Anderton
I've used polls a lot in the past, but not for statistical purposes due to the reasons Bitflipper mentions. However, it can help set priorities. For example in the tip of the day thread, I would like to have put up a poll where you could choose either:
 
1. Please do more tips about Matrix View.
2. I don't use it, nuke the Matrix View tips.
3. At least do some, I'd like to know more about Matrix View.
 
Now, this would not give me statistics on how many people use or don't Matrix view, but if a lot of people cared enough to post they did or did not want tips, I'd find that helpful.

But the question is:
 
Is there any need for you to quantify this, and do you get any less info if you just ask the same question without putting in the format of a poll?

A poll is a far more compact and time-efficient way to obtain information compared to trying to track individual replies within a thread.

craigb

Ruben

craigb

Ruben
 If new mods can't ban then how will they eliminate spammers?

We can do it now.  Three flags as a spammer and they're gone.  Any abuse of the process is handled by a Cakewalk mod.  

IINM, this method only removes one offending post at a time - it doesn't stop a spammer from making more posts. Banning does (to a degree).

 
Not true!  On the third flag the poster is banned until the flagged post can be reviewed by a moderator.  Yes, you'd have to flag each spam post three times for it to disappear (and bump another topic over it so it doesn't show in the main index), but the first priority is to get three flags on any spam post to ban the offender (which is usually a bot).

Meh. Still too much effort. Most of us have better things to do (like read the Software forum) than spending our time clicking on spam. Better to let the mods ban spammers - spammer goes away, end of story. Anderton already does this... saves members' time for more creative endeavors.  

dubdisciple
Drew..great strawman but it assumes at least two worse case scenarios.

 
Um, it wasn't a strawman's argument, but whatever.
 

1) All polls will come down to a black white choice all the time.

 
A poll restricts you to the choices given. Even if there's an "Other" or "None of the Above" it's almost always devalued compared to the choices expressly given. That's just the way it works.
 

2) People will be forbidden from chiming in other than selecting a or b.

No, but if they are expressing unpopular opinions their arguments are devalued by the poll results in bold at the top. This is not a problem if "popularity" is what is being measured, but if popularity is what is being measured it really doesn't matter if one chimes in or not.
 
 

They have their weaknesses but it is probably among those quickest ways to get general overview even if that overview is skewed

Some people come to forum to read but lack confidence among more experienced people to chime in. Some people fear over the top responses from overzealous fanatics on some topics. Some simply are short on time and would gladly check a simple poll. There are infinite possibilities besides laziness. 

 
On the one hand you are admitting that the number is skewed, but then you appear to be arguing that it is important to count people who might not be willing to post, for whatever reason, but would answer the poll question.
 
If you don't go through the proper steps to make sure you are obtaining a representative sample and don't run the appropriate statistics, how do you know what the margin of error is on whatever number you get out of it?
 
If you are convincing yourself that the numbers somehow mean more than they do, then that is the pseudoscience point I made earlier. It is very easy to fall into this trap, but you either have to do the work to establish the level of confidence in the numbers or else just disregard them. 
 
And if you can't have any real confidence in the quantified results because you don't know the margin of error and whatnot, then what's the point of doing a poll where the only added value is getting quantified results?

drewfx1
The only choices given were:
 
A) Black
B) White
 
You have to choose one of those two. 
 
If you happen to have an idea other than one of those two, or wish to express an unpopular opinion, it's devalued by the polling process before you even start. 
 
That's the way it works.

CNN and Fox News polls, yes. But when I did polls on Harmony Central, they were the opening post in a thread and I would hope this software allows a similar option. People could add comments if they wanted. Sometimes I changed a poll shortly after posting if it needed another option.
 
For my purposes (to gauge interest in a topic), any option is better than no feedback at all; and a poll is easier to manage than a thread that's a lengthy collection of essay-type replies. And if someone's opinion is indeed "black" or "white," a poll accommodates that information better than having to write a reply with that word. If the answer is "gray," don 't post in the poll, and make a comment. If needed, modify the poll to include gray.

Ruben

Anderton

Ruben
Whoa!... moderators who are non-Cakewalk employees ?!? - This is quite a "first" after over a decade of the "CW employees only" policy! That's a big move. (Insert eye-popping emoticon)

It's already happened. I'm not a Cakewalk employee, and I did not have mod status for quite a while after Gibson acquired Cakewalk. But I'm up at all hours and when the spam was out of control, I asked for mod powers to get rid of it. I was not asked to be a mod, and I'm not particularly sure anyone at Cakewalk wanted to have an outside person be a mod, but they needed help. So I guess I was the first crack in the wall

Yeeeaaahhhh... I don't think so.

Apples and oranges - you may not be a CW employee, but you are an executive (? I think) of Cakewalk's current owner - that puts you in a different class than those of us in the Great Unwashed. You asked for mod powers, including the ability to ban spammers, and CW certainly considered your position in evaluating your request.

 
Of course I assume that was a factor, but I also have a track record of moderation going back to 1995 on AOL, as well as a long familiarity with the company and its products, so I was a pretty "safe" option. Regardless, I'm not a Cakewalk employee, so that line has been crossed.

drewfx1
If you are convincing yourself that the numbers somehow mean more than they do, then that is the pseudoscience point I made earlier. It is very easy to fall into this trap, but you either have to do the work to establish the level of confidence in the numbers or else just disregard them. 
 
And if you can't have any real confidence in the quantified results because you don't know the margin of error and whatnot, then what's the point of doing a poll where the only added value is getting quantified results?

Don't think of forum polls as rigorous statistical data, because we both know they aren't. I think of them as a more formal version of anecdotal evidence.
 
If lots of people say they want Matrix View tips and only a couple say they don't, that doesn't mean anything about how many Cakewalk users use the Matrix View. But it does tell me that if I do Matrix View tips, a bunch of people will appreciate them. OTOH if lots of people say they don't want Matrix View tips and only a few say they do, then I would back off on including the tips in the thread, and write a blog article instead on the Matrix View so people who didn't want to see Matrix View tips wouldn't have to deal with them "cluttering up" the tips thread.

Drew, you are still using pseudoscience yourself by continuing to use worse case hypothetical scenarios as fact. People express unpopular opinions now. Not sure how having a poll would change that. Also, the exact same critiscisms you lob at polls can easily be applied to an open question. In fact it can be argued that people are less likely to respond to a thread filled with statements opposite of their stance ( particularly if made by overbearing orb popular forum members) than they are to numbers not attached to a name. There is no doubt that a well thought, rational response from a member well informed on topic is more valuable than simple poll data, but since this is not controlled the deviation on how informed those statements are is still a wildcard. It is not always the sensible guy who talks the most. Often it is simply the person with the most free time and the most passion.How many times have we seen threads dominated by who gathered the most troops or simply insisted on the last word? Even now, it is pretty clear that nothing anyone says will matter so I will just drop it.

Anderton

drewfx1
The only choices given were:
 
A) Black
B) White
 
You have to choose one of those two. 
 
If you happen to have an idea other than one of those two, or wish to express an unpopular opinion, it's devalued by the polling process before you even start. 
 
That's the way it works.

CNN and Fox News polls, yes. But when I did polls on Harmony Central, they were the opening post in a thread and I would hope this software allows a similar option. People could add comments if they wanted. Sometimes I changed a poll shortly after posting if it needed another option.
 
For my purposes (to gauge interest in a topic), any option is better than no feedback at all; and a poll is easier to manage than a thread that's a lengthy collection of essay-type replies. And if someone's opinion is indeed "black" or "white," a poll accommodates that information better than having to write a reply with that word. If the answer is "gray," don 't post in the poll, and make a comment. If needed, modify the poll to include gray.

I don't have a problem with the way you are talking about using polls Craig, but I also have confidence that you would not misuse them or grossly misinterpret the results.
 
But just so you know - polls expressly measure popularity and some of us are not going to bother expressing our opinions if they're on the wrong side of a popularity contest. 
 
Arguing an unpopular opinion is difficult enough as it is (trust me on this one ). Trying to make that argument after it's been revealed right up top that 87% of the populous already disagrees with you (regardless of whether that should have any bearing) makes it not worth the bother because you know that a great many will just dismiss your arguments without even bothering to consider them.

dubdisciple
Drew, you are still using pseudoscience yourself by continuing to use worse case hypothetical scenarios as fact.

Actually I'm not using pseudoscience at all. Psuedoscience is conjecture masquerading as science and I did no such thing.
 
I never stated that "all polls are bad" or any such thing. I am merely pointing out that they are ripe for misuse. And if you want some non-hypothetical real world examples of your so called "worse case hypothetical scenarios", well how many would you like? 
 
And you seem to wish to misconstrue my arguments for rhetorical reasons. Please stop.

Drew., it's just not that serious so you win. I am 100% wrong. Polls have absolutely no value and you are 100% right aboit any opinion you give. Problem solved.