-
We are now running on a new, and hopefully much-improved, server. In addition we are also on new forum software. Any move entails a lot of technical details and I suspect we will encounter a few issues as the new server goes live. Please be patient with us. It will be worth it! :) Please help by posting all issues here.
-
If you are having trouble seeing the forum then you may need to clear your browser's DNS cache. Click here for instructions on how to do that
-
Please review the Forum Rules frequently as we are constantly trying to improve the forum for our members and visitors.
Anti gun has taken over the Hartford Curant Poll - hit it!
- Thread starter PFI
- Start date
Rich B
Regular Member
imported post
Simple, they voted, turned off cookies and set the page to refresh at a short interval.
Might help if you post the URL since not everyone has it readily available:
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/todaysbuzz/tuesday
Simple, they voted, turned off cookies and set the page to refresh at a short interval.
Might help if you post the URL since not everyone has it readily available:
http://www.courant.com/news/opinion/todaysbuzz/tuesday
Just a Guy
Regular Member
imported post
Those numbers appear to be self-correcting. For now, at least.
Those numbers appear to be self-correcting. For now, at least.
Rich B
Regular Member
imported post
How does 75% to 25% sound?
How does 75% to 25% sound?
Just a Guy
Regular Member
imported post
I'm probably preaching to the choir, but shouldn't the poll question read "Should Connecticut CONTINUE TO be an "open carry" handgun state?"
And, @ 10:15pm, it's 81% - 19%, in favor of open carry.
I'm probably preaching to the choir, but shouldn't the poll question read "Should Connecticut CONTINUE TO be an "open carry" handgun state?"
And, @ 10:15pm, it's 81% - 19%, in favor of open carry.
Just a Guy
Regular Member
imported post
And, at the risk of getting up on the soap box, can I say this about this non-scientific poll? Around lunch time today, it appeared there was a concerted effort on the part of some in the anti-gun crowd to try to skew the numbers. I am quite pleased at the response to those who are either a) pro-gun / pro-open carry or b) anti-'poll skewing' who have shown (and stillcontinue toshow) that the games played on the anti-gun field will not be allowed to go unchallenged - we will not allow a local online poll to suggest, in error, that a majority of the locals are anti-gun. While I would not rely on this poll to support our side of the argument (because we recognize it is not a valid sample), I feel we must, to the best of our abilities,deny our opponents any ammunition at all to support their claims. The preservation of open carry will be difficult enough.
And, at the risk of getting up on the soap box, can I say this about this non-scientific poll? Around lunch time today, it appeared there was a concerted effort on the part of some in the anti-gun crowd to try to skew the numbers. I am quite pleased at the response to those who are either a) pro-gun / pro-open carry or b) anti-'poll skewing' who have shown (and stillcontinue toshow) that the games played on the anti-gun field will not be allowed to go unchallenged - we will not allow a local online poll to suggest, in error, that a majority of the locals are anti-gun. While I would not rely on this poll to support our side of the argument (because we recognize it is not a valid sample), I feel we must, to the best of our abilities,deny our opponents any ammunition at all to support their claims. The preservation of open carry will be difficult enough.
Rich B
Regular Member
imported post
It personally offends me that some anti freedom extremist decided to spam that poll. It reeks of the stereotype that pro freedom people are ignorant rednecks who don't understand computers.
I hope they learned a valuable lesson this time. We will not stand for lies and misinformation. A lie left unchallenged is a lie that becomes truth.
My thoughts are very similar in that either the numbers had to be corrected or the poll had to be completely written off as ridiculous. The first poll seemed fair and at least fairly accurate. This one was not and it had actively biased cheating. Two can play at that game and it can be done better than these liberal hate mongers.
Carry on!
It personally offends me that some anti freedom extremist decided to spam that poll. It reeks of the stereotype that pro freedom people are ignorant rednecks who don't understand computers.
I hope they learned a valuable lesson this time. We will not stand for lies and misinformation. A lie left unchallenged is a lie that becomes truth.
My thoughts are very similar in that either the numbers had to be corrected or the poll had to be completely written off as ridiculous. The first poll seemed fair and at least fairly accurate. This one was not and it had actively biased cheating. Two can play at that game and it can be done better than these liberal hate mongers.
Carry on!
HankT
State Researcher
imported post
These polls are useless. For either side.
Totally invalid. Totally unreliable.
The pro-gunners game the polls ("Hit this poll--hard!").
The anti-gunners game the polls ("Hit this poll--hard!").
The pro-gunners get all offended that the anti-gunners try to "take over" polls.
The anti-gunners get all offended that the pro-gunners try to "take over" polls.
These pollsdo keep the partisans busy, though. Like a Skinner box keeps a little mouse busy...
These polls are useless. For either side.
Totally invalid. Totally unreliable.
The pro-gunners game the polls ("Hit this poll--hard!").
The anti-gunners game the polls ("Hit this poll--hard!").
The pro-gunners get all offended that the anti-gunners try to "take over" polls.
The anti-gunners get all offended that the pro-gunners try to "take over" polls.
These pollsdo keep the partisans busy, though. Like a Skinner box keeps a little mouse busy...
Rich B
Regular Member
imported post
HankT wrote:
HankT wrote:
I have to agree, but we cannot let lies go unchallenged regardless.
HankT
State Researcher
imported post
Rich B wrote:
Two words: opportunity cost.
Rich B wrote:
Two words: opportunity cost.
Rich B
Regular Member
imported post
HankT wrote:
In order to consider opportunity cost to be relevant there would have had to be a cost. What are you defining cost as in this scenario? Surely you don't think someone sat there manually voting 80,000+ times do you?
What was the other opportunity missed out on?
HankT wrote:
In order to consider opportunity cost to be relevant there would have had to be a cost. What are you defining cost as in this scenario? Surely you don't think someone sat there manually voting 80,000+ times do you?
What was the other opportunity missed out on?
HankT
State Researcher
imported post
Rich B wrote:
Whatever time and energy is spent on voting in such polls, talking about such polls, encouraging others to participate in the polls, worrying about the outcomes ("Hey we're only up to 98.638%--we need to hit it harder!), posting about such polls and denouncing the antis for their participation in such polls (even though they are doing the same thing we are--hitting the polls hard!) is the cost.
The opportunity cost is whatever other activities we could to with that time and energy: thinking about pro-gun ideas, discussing pro-gun issues, posting about pro-gun issues, writing to media or political entitites, reading pro-gun literature, joining pro-gun advocacy orgs,understanding better the regulatory landscape, worrying about real threats to 2A and gun ownership and carry......the list goes on and on...
Effective advocacy or political activity cannot come from a Skinner box. And whether the mouse is an anti-gunner or a pro-gunner doesn't matter. He's still just pushing the lever because it is....simplistic and his little brain can understand it.
Rich B wrote:
Whatever time and energy is spent on voting in such polls, talking about such polls, encouraging others to participate in the polls, worrying about the outcomes ("Hey we're only up to 98.638%--we need to hit it harder!), posting about such polls and denouncing the antis for their participation in such polls (even though they are doing the same thing we are--hitting the polls hard!) is the cost.
The opportunity cost is whatever other activities we could to with that time and energy: thinking about pro-gun ideas, discussing pro-gun issues, posting about pro-gun issues, writing to media or political entitites, reading pro-gun literature, joining pro-gun advocacy orgs,understanding better the regulatory landscape, worrying about real threats to 2A and gun ownership and carry......the list goes on and on...
Effective advocacy or political activity cannot come from a Skinner box. And whether the mouse is an anti-gunner or a pro-gunner doesn't matter. He's still just pushing the lever because it is....simplistic and his little brain can understand it.
ccwinstructor
Centurion
imported post
Yes, their are opportunity costs, but they are very small. There is also a positive effect, in that people who start doing a small bit of activism are more likely to do more at another time. It is a small way for people to become "invested". In addition, the polls measure a real thing, the intensity that people feel about the issue. This is something that the politicians pay attention to. The people that read the results of this poll mostly do not understand or care that it is unscientific, they just see the results. I see these polls as cheap and effective activism.
Yes, their are opportunity costs, but they are very small. There is also a positive effect, in that people who start doing a small bit of activism are more likely to do more at another time. It is a small way for people to become "invested". In addition, the polls measure a real thing, the intensity that people feel about the issue. This is something that the politicians pay attention to. The people that read the results of this poll mostly do not understand or care that it is unscientific, they just see the results. I see these polls as cheap and effective activism.
Rush Creek
Regular Member
imported post
Just received this in my e-mail from World Net Daily -
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=144957
Story concerns a man arrested and later released for OC in a Chilli's in CT
A poll is attached regarding open carry question. You have to register to vote.
I just checked the link reference - it works. Apparently things are heating up in CT.
That's more than I can say for Texas - where the State legislature is AWOL on this issue.
Just received this in my e-mail from World Net Daily -
http://www.wnd.com/index.php?fa=PAGE.view&pageId=144957
Story concerns a man arrested and later released for OC in a Chilli's in CT
A poll is attached regarding open carry question. You have to register to vote.
I just checked the link reference - it works. Apparently things are heating up in CT.
That's more than I can say for Texas - where the State legislature is AWOL on this issue.
M
McX
Guest
imported post
voted on the first link posted. hope it helps.
voted on the first link posted. hope it helps.
Rich B
Regular Member
imported post
HankT wrote:
I doubt the cumulative 'time and energy' spent on this poll was even significant enough to warrant the time and energy your posts have taken.
HankT wrote:
I doubt the cumulative 'time and energy' spent on this poll was even significant enough to warrant the time and energy your posts have taken.
Rich B
Regular Member
imported post
ccwinstructor wrote:
It is a lie, nothing more. No lie should ever go unchallenged.
ccwinstructor wrote:
It may not help our cause that the poll shows support for us, but it will hurt us when it shows support for the other side.
It is a lie, nothing more. No lie should ever go unchallenged.