Biased and/or Selective Forum Polls

spackbace on 09/04/2022 - 14:53
Last edited 11/04/2022 - 15:40

I feel this has been bugging the community lately on here, strengthened by a handful of posters who's polls are obviously biased, and causing more reports for mods to action. I for one would like to see something done about this, either polls removed entirely when there's no need for them, or selectively used when necessary. All they do is create a false narrative for the OP's and just add more fuel to the fire in discussions/arguments.

So tempted to put an ironic poll up on this post but I won't!

Poll Options

  • 5
    Yes
Site Discussion

Comments

  • gimli on 09/04/2022 - 15:00
    +14

    what about just ignoring the biased/annoying polls/topics?

    • mapax on 09/04/2022 - 15:04
      +3

      Was going to say the same thing. People can just comment without selecting a poll option if they feel that morally outraged by the available choices.

      • gimli on 09/04/2022 - 15:06
        +1

        i just meant ignore the whole topic altogether rather than posting "stupid topic", "stupid poll", "don't care", "meh"

        I never understand why people waste time if they don't care lol

        • [Deactivated] on 09/04/2022 - 19:12
          -3

          posting to voice your disagreement is fine, but the people who say "don't care" or some variation, are fooling themselves, they do care, they just lack the maturity to voice it properly.

  • mapax on 09/04/2022 - 15:03
    +1

    Meh

  • TheBird on 09/04/2022 - 15:06
    +11

    Disappointed there isn't a ironic poll attached.

  • AustriaBargain on 09/04/2022 - 15:14
    +4

    Who cares.

    • CandyMan on 10/04/2022 - 21:06

      Obviously they don’t care in Austria

      • altomic on 11/04/2022 - 02:58

        you need to go further north……to Poland

    • Ghost47 on 11/04/2022 - 14:34

      People whose lives revolve around OzBargain, clearly.

  • Hithere on 09/04/2022 - 15:17

    If a poll has obviously biased options I just ignore it.

    Maybe there could be a compulsory poll option included saying "None of the above"?

  • holdenmg on 09/04/2022 - 15:42
    +1

    I'm for Polling (or lynching).

  • djones145 on 09/04/2022 - 15:44
    +3

    I think we need a poll

  • AndyC1 on 09/04/2022 - 15:56
    +3

    Add a poll for yes or no.

  • SBOB on 09/04/2022 - 16:02
    +3

    Just don't respond to the poll and point out to the poster any or all of the following are applicable

    • made up facts to support their argument
    • contradictory comments
    • binary choices that don't align with reality
    • cherry picked data or complelty misrepresentation of data
      Etc etc ;)
    • Gekov on 10/04/2022 - 12:55
      +1

      Did someone mention "cherry picked data"??

      This triggers my outrage at "scientists" CHERRYPICKING 1979 [A YEAR OF PEAK ARCTIC ICE] as the start date for their propaganda that the Arctic ice is melting away, with the non sequiter that we "evil humans " are responsible.

      1979 Was A Peak Year For Arctic Ice.
      FLASHBACK 1974 Support For The Theory of a Cooling World, Weather satellites sweeping across the northern hemisphere have come up
      with a surprise: the permanent snow and ice cap has increased sharply, Associated Press reported. https://trove.nla.gov.au/newspaper/article/110778517

      Recent reports of a melting polar ice cap are dismissed by Lindzen as an example of the media taking advantage of the public's "scientific illiteracy."
      "The thing you have to remember about the Arctic is that it is an extremely variable part of the world," Lindzen said. "Although there is melting going [on] now, there has been a lot of melting that went on in the [19]30s and then there was freezing. So, by isolating a section … they are essentially taking people's ignorance of the past," Dr. Richard Lindzen, Professor of Meteorology MIT and Member of the National Academy of Sciences

      Gekov on 10/04/2022 - 12:55 (Collapsed - Offtopic. Show)
    • Gekov on 10/04/2022 - 13:10
      -1

      "cherry picked data" …

      Ever Wonder Why Climate “Scientists” Like To Start Historical Temperature Graphs In the 1970′s?
      ANSWER: GLOBAL COOLING at the time exaggerates global warming and makes their highly tampered [cool-the past-heat-the present] historical temperature charts even scarier.

      http://stevengoddard.wordpress.com/2014/02/02/ever-wonder-wh…

      Gekov on 10/04/2022 - 13:10 (Collapsed - Offtopic. Show)
      • fritz and sauce on 10/04/2022 - 13:18
        -1

        Do you accept that climate change is happening rapidly. So rapid that its a serious concern. We will all be on the same page once this is accepted.

        • Gekov on 10/04/2022 - 13:38
          -2

          'Do you accept that climate change is happening rapidly'

          Compared to what?

          FYI: WARMING HAS BEEN FASTER MANY TIMES IN THE PAST!

          This below chart displays the warming trend from 1912 through 1941 - as calculated by NOAA - which confirms the past warmed at a faster pace than the recent warming - +6.12°F per century rate versus the +5.54°F rate. Important note: Our society did not collapse, nor did our ancestors die off in droves as a result.

          US warming last 30 years 1912-1941

          And this faster warming period, ending in 1941, took place during a time when CO2 atmospheric levels increased an anemic 11ppm versus the robust 61ppm increase for the 30-year period ending in 2021. That's a 5-times difference, suggesting that the actual CO2 emission-warming factor is not the dominant climatic influence claimed by the doomsday alarmists.

          While a high warming trend at any given date might seem dangerous to the average politician or a mainstream news script reader, it is in reality not the case, since short-term accelerating trends always revert to a short-term decelerating trends. It is this natural ebb and flow of warming and cooling that maintains a very stable climate.

          For example, per NOAA, at the end of 1941 there existed a +6.12°F trend that would have produced a +4.9°F warming by the end of 2021, if it continued on uninterrupted from climate cooing periods. Instead, the average U.S. temperature increased by +1.9°F for that 80-year span of time. (Within 6 months of the end of 1941, the 5-year U.S. temperature trend had dropped to a minus 21.3°F.)

          Conclusion: The known empirical evidence indicates Earth has been warming since the end of the Little Ice Age. The warming has frequently been interrupted by periods of flat and/or cooling temperatures. As documented by NOAA climate scientists, the recent 30-year warming is not unprecedented. Nor does the current warming present an existential crisis or threat to Americans since future climatic patterns, oscillations, and cycles will very likely temper or reverse temperature increases.

          https://www.c3headlines.com/2022/02/the-last-30-years-us-cli…

        • Gekov on 10/04/2022 - 13:41
          -2

          'Do you accept that climate change is happening rapidly.'

          NO MORE RAPID THAN IN THE PAST, ACTUALLY SLOWER.

          Just look at our oldest thermometer record, the CET:
          A look at the same data shows several rapid warmings, ALL of which were faster than recently.
          1692 to 1733 change was from 7.73ºC to 10.5ºC for 2.77ºC in 41 years, or 0.068ºC/yr.
          1784 to 1828 change was from 7.85ºC to 10.32ºC for 2.47ºC in 44 years, or 0.056ºC/yr.
          1879 to 1921 change was from 7.44ºC to 10.51ºC for 3.07ºC in 42 years, or 0.073ºC/yr.
          1963 to 2014 change was from 8.52ºC to 10.95ºC for 2.43ºC in 51 years, or 0.048ºC/yr.

          http://www.debunkingclimate.com/no-rapid-warming.html#no-rap…

          Data is from Central England Temperature downloaded from the British Met Office:
          https://www.metoffice.gov.uk/hadobs/hadcet/cetml1659on.dat

          • fritz and sauce on 10/04/2022 - 14:46

            @Gekov: The 97% of scientists that are in the climate science field must of missed this. I would have thought you would have to go back further in time.
            I cant accept right wing versions of any facts. The GOP (US) and the LNP (AUST) don't have a lot of credibility. Thanks for replying.

            • Gekov on 10/04/2022 - 19:26
              -1

              @fritz and sauce: BELIEF IN MANMADE GLOBAL WARMING REQUIRES BELIEF IN PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITIES …
              Dr Ed Berry, PhD, Physics

              (1) That the 5% of human contribution to CO2 inflow into the atmosphere magically becomes 30% of the CO2 in the atmosphere – a physical impossibility.

              (2) That human CO2 magically stays in the atmosphere longer than natural CO2 – a physical impossibility because human and natural CO2 molecules are identical.

              (3) That we can control the CO2 level by restricting human CO2 emissions and by capturing CO2 – which contradicts IPCC’s own data.

              (4) That the CO2 level controls global temperature – which contradicts data that show historical CO2 changes come AFTER temperature changes.

              (5) That climate models emulate nature – which is untrue because they make the incorrect assumptions listed above, wasting billions of dollars of taxpayer money.

              https://edberry.com/blog/climate/climate-politics/climate-fa…

              • SBOB on 10/04/2022 - 19:36
                -1

                @Gekov:

                REQUIRES BELIEF IN PHYSICAL IMPOSSIBILITIES …

                Plus all the models I've seen are using a sphere shaped earth…clearly their model is wrong
                The sooner everyone wakes up and realises that man has no impact on the climate and that the climate is attached to a flat earth, the better we all will be…

                • Gekov on 10/04/2022 - 19:45

                  @SBOB: 'The sooner everyone wakes up and realises that man has no impact on the climate and that the climate is attached to a flat earth,'

                  ROTFLMAO

                  Here comes the expected warmunist straw man 'argument'.
                  Admit it … you wh*ckos have no case.

            • Gekov on 10/04/2022 - 19:52

              @fritz and sauce: 'The 97% of scientists'

              FYI Science, aside from 'the science' is not democratic …… we're talking science not politics.

              If something relies on consensus, it is politics, not science.

              "Is scientific fact no longer necessary? In the absence of hard scientific fact or causal relationships, a majority vote of scientists can determine scientific truth." Jasper McKee, professor of physics, University of Manitoba and editor of Physics in Canada:

      • dmbminaret on 10/04/2022 - 17:46
        +1

        I thought COVID fixed global warming. Haven't heard about it in ages…or the ozone for that matter.

        • Gekov on 10/04/2022 - 19:33

          IT HAD NO EFFECT ON THE NATURAL RISE IN ATMOSPHERIC CO2

          Don’t buy Climate Alarmism
          Dr Ed Berry, PhD, Physics
          THE 20% DROP IN HUMAN CO2 EMISSIONS CO2 DURING THE PANDEMIC DID NOT SLOW NATURE’S CO2 INCREASE.
          If we removed all trace of humans on the planet, we would not stop nature’s unrelenting CO2 increase.
          And since our CO2 does not control the climate, we can’t “solve” or “address” climate change by turning off our CO2.

          The IPCC agrees CO2 inflow into the atmosphere is 95% natural and 5% human, BUT then fudges the data to push its agenda.

          Climate change alarmism is not based on science.
          It is based on money, politics, brainwashing, groupthink, and conditioned reflex as Pavlov did with his dogs.

          Far too many people, including scientists, incorrectly assume the UN IPCC is correct about climate change.
          They incorrectly think undesirable climate events prove our CO2 caused these events, which is not only nonsense but also logically invalid because events do not prove their cause.

          All claims that human CO2 emissions cause climate change begin with IPCC’s invalid theory that says human CO2 emissions have caused all the increase in atmospheric CO2 since 1750 (or above 280 ppm).
          All climate treaties, laws, regulations, taxes, green energy tax credits, and carbon capture, assume this false IPCC theory is true.

          Peer-reviewed publications, that the IPCC ignores, prove this IPCC theory is false and that IPCC’s own data prove NATURE, NOT HUMAN CO2, CONTROLS THE CO2 LEVEL.
          Therefore, efforts to reduce human CO2 emissions waste considerable time, money, and productivity.

          The few scientists (REMARKABLY ABSENT FTOM GOVT PAYROLLS!) who study the true causes of climate change find that nature, not human CO2, controls the climate.
          And since our CO2 does not control the climate, we can’t “solve” or “address” climate change by turning off our CO2.

          The so-called “solutions” to global warming make the poor poorer and the rich richer, and do not reduce CO2 emissions.

          The scientific method says we cannot prove a theory is true, but only one contradiction proves a theory is false and this one contradiction outvotes all claims that the theory is true.
          SCIENTIFIC CONSENSUS IS IRRELEVANT IN SCIENCE.

          Science becomes pseudoscience when people reject evidence that proves a theory is false, as they have done in climate science.
          IPCC’s pseudoscientists ignore evidence that proves IPCC’s theory is false.
          https://edberry.com/blog/climate/climate-co2-temp/dont-buy-c…

          • SBOB on 10/04/2022 - 19:41

            @Gekov:

            NATURE, NOT HUMAN CO2, CONTROLS THE CO2 LEVEL

            That must be why we have wide spread deforestation…. We must be trying to stop nature from killing us with climate change

            • Gekov on 10/04/2022 - 19:47

              @SBOB: 'wide spread deforestation'

              Are you referring to the wide spread deforestation to accommodate wind and solar farms?

            • Gekov on 10/04/2022 - 19:56

              @SBOB: 'trying to stop nature from killing us with climate change'

              PURE SPECULATION … no deaths from 'climatechange®'

              Global warming has saved 500,000 lives in England and Wales in the last 20 years
              It’s official; a warmer climate has saved lives in England & Wales
              We won’t hear that on the BBC or any other “news” outlet with an agenda to push!
              https://notalotofpeopleknowthat.wordpress.com/2022/01/17/glo…

              Deaths due to climate change? Genuine, as opposed to made-up, climate related deaths are buried in the past!
              https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGL2cjnn7kM

  • pegaxs on 09/04/2022 - 16:17
    +4

    Put up a poll, my suggestion is;

    • I agree because I am weak and spineless and can’t make my own decisions.
    • I disagree because everyone who doesn’t vote disagree is a bloated, nazi loving, right wing boomer fatty cross dresser.
    • Neither, because I’m a fence sitting softie that can’t make decisions
    • bikies

    The only problem is, who becomes the arbiter of fairness when it comes to polls? Who gets to decide what is a fair poll and what isn’t?

    • [Deactivated] on 09/04/2022 - 19:14

      The only problem is, who becomes the arbiter of fairness when it comes to polls? Who gets to decide what is a fair poll and what isn’t?

      that's exactly why the suggestions in this post should not be implemented. it always ends up biased one way or another, as long as people are keeping discussion reasonably civil (though that is not always the case here), nothing should be moderated.

  • 7ekn00 on 09/04/2022 - 16:18

    The less responses to them, the less popular they will be ;)
    It's only the bored that like to waste their time arguing with brick walls :P

  • SF3 on 09/04/2022 - 16:25

    The squeaky wheel get the oil.

    Just give them enough rope.

  • Colin2905 on 09/04/2022 - 16:39
    +1

    This came to mind…. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=G0ZZJXw4MTA

  • brendanm on 09/04/2022 - 17:26
    +2

    There are being asked forum topics everyday. Don't like a poll, don't answer it, most of them are obviously put up with an agenda in mind, so simply don't answer it.

  • randomusername2017 on 09/04/2022 - 17:26

    someone is missing Lt

  • onetwothreefour on 09/04/2022 - 17:52
    +1

    It's the same people always complaining about the trolls but every time they post a new topic the same people comment on the thread.

    Everyone knows who the trolls are and most people don't agree with what they say so just ignore them.

  • JimmyF on 09/04/2022 - 18:48
    +2

    This needs a poll!

  • Savas on 09/04/2022 - 19:46
    +1

    isn't this post giving SlavOz even more attention? But I enjoy SlavOz posts.

  • ozhunter on 09/04/2022 - 20:19

    https://www.ozbargain.com.au/node/693624

    Was it this post that made you create this thread? Parents or government seem fair choices. First comment asked about a "both" option which I guess could be included.

    Or did you want the options something more specific like uncle, aunt, cousin, grandpa, grandma, etc.?

  • dust on 09/04/2022 - 22:48
    +1

    Come for the bargains, stay for the sh*tposts.

  • miwahni on 09/04/2022 - 23:26
    +1

    I ignore. Am amazed sometimes by the number of people who feed the trolls.

  • Lastchancetosee on 10/04/2022 - 08:12

    All polls, questionnaires, and surveys are biased. If you are genuinely trying to encourage a range of views, all you can do is try to counter or limit those biases when constructing them.

    The good thing about the OzB polls is that the comments function like a big "any other information " question, so people can express and debate their views more fully.

  • terrys on 10/04/2022 - 08:55
    +1

    May I suggest thst instead of stopping the polls, we remove the compulsion to open them and participate?

    What's that Skippy…?

  • Boogerman on 10/04/2022 - 09:36

    I guess simplistic thinking people hate self reflection.
    In other news, water's wet.

  • MontyMacaw on 10/04/2022 - 10:39

    O.M.G!

  • sss333 on 10/04/2022 - 11:09
    +2

    Just need to automatically add a bikies option to every poll

  • dmbminaret on 10/04/2022 - 17:47

    Ironic and useless polls? Like the upcoming federal government election?

    • gimli on 10/04/2022 - 18:34

      forum polls

  • Bad Company on 14/04/2022 - 11:23

    Your poll should have given people some choice, something like "yes" and "oh yes"!

Login or Join to leave a comment
Login Join