Enough With The Polls

swiss

Originally posted by bonkey:


Hey....I'm willing to try anything. I'm just skeptical of the effectiveness of "non-rule rules" in general, and thats what I see this as.

Perhaps I should explain my reasoning.

The majority of polls that have been posted here are by members that are shall we say newer to these boards, and perhaps a little more zealous about posting than some other posters. In fact, despite the fact that polls can be such a nuisance there is little evidence that such polls are deliberately disruptive. You can accuse me of being naive, but I think many polls are posted since such newer members, not knowing the views of the other posters, want to do so in the easiest manner possible (i.e through a poll) without knowing how potentially annoying such a poll can be.

A sticky clearly pointing out how much of a nuisance polls can be gets around this problem. If a relative newcomer posts a pointless poll, he can no longer fall back on this defence. If that poster cannot read the thread on top clearly labelled "read before posting" then I would be far less willing to give that poster leeway in this regard.

Another reason why I prefer this approach is that I don't want to constantly deal with requests from people wanting to know if such and such a poll is okay to post. Call me lazy (or if you're politically correct - "convenience orientated"), but I think that the approach I have advocated has a reasonable to good chance of working, with a minimum of fuss or administrative overhead on our part.

Yet another reason why I prefer this approach is that - increasingly - we are beginning to dictate to people what is and what is not okay to post. I much prefer to leave a set of common sense guidelines and hope that such common sense prevails. Of course occasionally we have people who simply don't post that way, and that's where we step in. Having a blanket "run this past us first" ideology can only discourage posters. In this particular case I accept that this is the desired effect, but I also think that as a precedent, I feel uncomfortable with this philosophy.

Victor

Originally posted by swiss
Call me lazy (or if you're politically correct - "convenience orientated"),

"Differently prioritised"

bonkey

Originally posted by Hobart
There you go again off to the land of assumptia again.

In fairness, either I can assume that it is a waste of our time to continue, or I can assume that it isn't In either case, I'm in the land of assumptia, and in either case I'm doing what you asked me to have the courtesy not to do.

But allow me take that comment to mean that I'm wrong assuming its a waste of time continuing this dicussion.

If thats not what you meant, and you do think it is a waste of time continuing this dicussion, then please just ignore this mail....I don't want to waste any more of your time.

So...where are all these disruptive influences? Well, see, I've been thinking some more on that, and here's the thing....I'm trying to figure out what - if anything - is the best thing to do regarding polls and the complaints we've received. The best way that I see of doing this is if people tell me what they want, based on how they perceive the issue - on how they perceive the polls.

If someone doesn't see a problem with polls as is, then I'd prefer a suggestion based on that perception (and the knowledge that others have voiced problems with polls), rather than me trying to alter your perception of whether or not there is a problem.

Analysing the specifics of the problem will only cause people to look at polls more closely than they do on a day-to-day basis. But all I'm trying to do is make the way people see things on a day-to-day basis as good as possible for as many as possible, so I don't honestly see any benefit in such close analysis.

If someone thinks polls are the coolest thing on the planet and we should have more of them, I want to hear that. I don't want to try and convince them we have too many polls and ask what we should do as a result. I want them to know that some people think we have too many polls, and when they take that information and their own opinion into consideration, what they think - if anything - should be done.

Similarly for people who want no polls, fewer polls, more balanced polls, whatever. I'm not trying to change people's perception of the polls and their worth.

I'm trying to find out what - if anything - they would like to see changed, or what they would see as a reasonable compromise knowing that others would like to see change.

Mabye it's a lesson some can learn from.

Maybe indeed.

jc