Big Announcement From Lord Marblehead - Polls

[GOBUCKS]

Lord Marblehead makes a big announcement:

Mon Apr 23, 2012, 01:06 PM
EarlG (12,664 posts) 

DU Update: Polls are almost ready for launch -- please help us test
We are now testing DU3's new poll functionality! Currently only Admins can create polls but once this test is complete we'll open it up to all eligible members.

DIFFERENCES BETWEEN DU2 POLLS AND DU3 POLLS

DU2 poll votes were private. DU3 poll votes are public. Logged-in members can click the "Show usernames" link to see who voted for which option.

DU2 polls would not allow you to change your vote once it had been cast. DU3 polls allow you to undo your vote and make a different choice if you change your mind (or if you accidentally clicked the wrong button).

While any logged-in member can vote in a DU3 poll, only Star Members can create DU3 polls. This has not changed from DU2 where only donors could create polls.

Polls in groups: by default polls can be created in all groups. However, if an individual group decides that they do not wish to allow polls, they can petition Admin and we'll consider disabling polls in that group.

polls cannot be created in Help & Meta-discussion, because that forum doesn't need any new tools for creating drama.

All DU3 polls automatically include an option to vote "the Jews".

http://www.democraticunderground.com/1002600420
Okay, I added that last one.
With all DUmpmonkeys able to see how one another voted, expect a lot of 99% and up results.

Anyone falling outside groupthink boundaries will be short-lived.

Poor addled Sherlock Judy and the mole sniffers will have a field day.


A nervous DUmpmonkey makes a plea:

Response to EarlG (Original post)
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 01:25 PM
MattBaggins (4,771 posts) 
12. Is it really the best idea to have show usernames?

Using any online poll as a serious snapshot of public opinion is not in any way a good idea, but if a poll is to have any real meaning anonymity is crucial or people will abstain from voting or go with the popular option.

I understand the desire to have people take ownership of their views but for the purpose of polling it will simply have a silencing effect and start flame wars.

 


Skimmer himself tells the nervous DUmmy to pound sand:

Response to MattBaggins (Reply #12)
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 02:11 PM
Skinner (55,317 posts) 
30. The transparency will cut down on some of the absurd behaviors that we saw on DU2.

The admins could see how people voted on DU2. One of the more interesting phenomena (and not uncommon) was when people would vote for a particular option, and then reply in the thread to express their shock that someone would vote that way.

Yes, this happened regularly.

There would also be those times when someone would put up an offensive poll (with, say, a bigoted option), and people would actually vote for it. Sometimes those votes were cast to protest the offensive option, but you dont really know. Whatever the reason, I was the one who had to deal with it.

Internet polls are BS anyway. There is no compelling need for anonymity.

Skimmer wants nothing to do with his little band of lunatics. 

Response to Skinner (Reply #30)
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 02:46 PM
Call Me Wesley (37,372 posts) 

46. If it's BS to begin with,

why implement it? The only polls I really took for serious were the ones from the Photography group anyway.

 

Response to Call Me Wesley (Reply #46)
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 02:59 PM
Skinner (55,317 posts) Profile 

51. Because they're fun. (nt)

Stalinists are nothing if not fun.

 

[chitownchica]

Next he needs to make voting a requirement. 
You must vote and everyone can see how you voted.  That might create some interesting chit chat.

[Ogre]

Response to MattBaggins (Reply #12)
Mon Apr 23, 2012, 02:11 PM
Skinner (55,317 posts) 
30. The transparency will cut down on some of the absurd behaviors that we saw on DU2.
The only way to cut down on the absurd behavior is either mass medication or termination of the DUmp.  There is no system in use or yet to be devised that will stop the absurd DUmpmonkeys from being, well absurd.

The admins could see how people voted on DU2. One of the more interesting phenomena (and not uncommon) was when people would vote for a particular option, and then reply in the thread to express their shock that someone would vote that way.  Yes, this happened regularly.
I'm shocked, shocked to find someone not taking a DUmp poll seriously!

There would also be those times when someone would put up an offensive poll (with, say, a bigoted option), and people would actually vote for it. Sometimes those votes were cast to protest the offensive option, but you don't really know. Whatever the reason, I was the one who had to deal with it.
Awww, you mean you actually had to do the clean up of the site yourself?  Really, you're gonna bitch about the primitives shitting all over the place after you opened up the door for them and you are seriously wanting sympathy?  Here's a hint you can find it in between shit and syphilis in the dictionary.

Internet polls are BS anyway. There is no compelling need for anonymity.
Then why make it a feature at the DUmp?  Is the mole hunting going so badly that you have to resort to the most ineffective tool for finding them?  Oh, wait you couldn't find my mole if I gave you three guesses and the first two didn't count.

[GOP Congress]

Hmmm...wouldn't polls actually make moles HARDER to find? Because no mole in his right mind is going to show his conservative side, n'est pas?

 

[Doubleplusungood]

Mon Apr 23, 2012, 02:11 PM
Skinner (55,317 posts)
30. The transparency will cut down on some of the absurd behaviors that we saw on DU2.

The admins could see how people voted on DU2. One of the more interesting phenomena (and not uncommon) was when people would vote for a particular option, and then reply in the thread to express their shock that someone would vote that way.

Yes, this happened regularly.

Not surprising as libs are known to vandalize their own property, and even assault themselves to them blame it on "Repigs".