ewx: (Default)
Richard Kettlewell ([personal profile] ewx) wrote2003-09-16 12:48 pm
lnr: Halloween 2023 (Default)

[personal profile] lnr 2003-09-16 06:02 am (UTC)(link)
I love the way you can't actually tell *which* tickyboxes people ticked.

[identity profile] senji.livejournal.com 2003-09-16 06:08 am (UTC)(link)
They're coming out reasonably evenly too, which is interesting...

[identity profile] imc.livejournal.com 2003-09-16 08:46 am (UTC)(link)
For some reason I find the View Answers (http://www.livejournal.com/poll/?id=180729&qid=2&mode=ans) page for this question hysterical.

Do we ever get to find out what drugs [livejournal.com profile] ewx is on when he posts surreal polls such as this one?

[identity profile] keirf.livejournal.com 2003-09-16 09:03 am (UTC)(link)
tickybox!, tickybox!, tickybox!, tickybox!
gerald_duck: (lemonjelly)

[personal profile] gerald_duck 2003-09-16 08:56 am (UTC)(link)
Indeed. But we can at least deduce that nobody he knows is a non-ticker. Everyone ticked at least one box!

( And yes, I chose "imperial" rather than "metric", because he's probably more imperious than he is useful for measuring things. )
ext_8103: (Default)

[identity profile] ewx.livejournal.com 2003-09-16 11:27 am (UTC)(link)
On the contrary - if you don't tick anything it doesn't mention you at all. So there could be dozens of non-tickers...
gerald_duck: (Default)

[personal profile] gerald_duck 2003-09-16 01:40 pm (UTC)(link)
Oh.

Bloody quirkly polls mechanism.

Is there any way to offload the entire poll dataset and manipulated it yourself in comprehensible ways, I wonder?

[identity profile] imc.livejournal.com 2003-09-17 04:41 am (UTC)(link)
According to the percentages listed just now, 28 people answered the first part and 29 people answered the second part.

So if you don't vote in the radio-button poll then you don't affect the percentages in any way. I suppose this might be the appropriate way to do the calculation. I suspect this may also apply to the ticky-box poll, but I'm much less certain that that's the right way to compute the result (because `none of the above' may well be a valid answer).

[identity profile] pseudomonas.livejournal.com 2003-09-16 12:27 pm (UTC)(link)
Yeah, my reasoning was similar - a person can be imperial, although these days of democracy that's quite rare, but metric? nah. I suppose whoever it was that got their arm to become the standard cubit was metric. And there's something measured by the pace or foot-length of Heracles, but that was all a long time ago. I'll just stop wittering now.

[identity profile] ex-lark-asc.livejournal.com 2003-09-16 06:33 am (UTC)(link)
Imperi*ous*, shirly?

[identity profile] ex-lark-asc.livejournal.com 2003-09-17 12:52 am (UTC)(link)
No, that's [livejournal.com profile] emperor :)

[identity profile] davefish.livejournal.com 2003-09-16 09:27 am (UTC)(link)
Personally I think that you are impteric.

[identity profile] keirf.livejournal.com 2003-09-17 02:58 am (UTC)(link)
Mice trip.