OK, now that we're Actually Discussing this, I'd like to suggest that we total all the numbers for each question and divide by the number of votes.
;)
That's not what making out sounds like -- unless I'm doing it wrong?
Willow ,'Same Time, Same Place'
Bureaucracy 1: Like Kafka, Only Funnier
A thread to discuss naming threads, board policy, new thread suggestions, and anything else that has to do with board administration and maintenance. Guaranteed to include lively debate and polls. Natter discouraged, but not deleted.
Current Stompy Feet: ita, Jon B, DXMachina, P.M. Marcontell, Liese S., amych
Jesse - Mar 12, 2003 8:59:34 am PST #7245 of 10001
Sometimes I trip on how happy we could be.
Sophia Brooks - Mar 12, 2003 9:06:59 am PST #7246 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
My Actually Discussing comment is that I think we need to specify that while an abstention may count toward the "number of votes needed" that it shouldn't count toward the percentage needed for a majority.
I think that is what we mean.
Lyra Jane - Mar 12, 2003 9:10:23 am PST #7247 of 10001
Up with the sun
I'd prefer median to mathematical average. Mathematical average seems to be easy to skew.
Jon B. - Mar 12, 2003 9:14:36 am PST #7248 of 10001
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
Mathematical average seems to be easy to skew.
Not if we set a fixed range. Which we're doing.
In other words, we're saying choose between 10 and 100. If we said, "choose any number" then, yeah, someone could put in 10,000 and skew the results. With a max of 100? Not so much.
P.M. Marc - Mar 12, 2003 9:15:33 am PST #7249 of 10001
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear
I'd prefer median to mathematical average. Mathematical average seems to be easy to skew.
Not really, I mean, median *IS* a mathematical average. It's a narrow enough range that it shouldn't be skewed to badly, and it's simple enough to run the numbers for all three measures for a sanity check. (Not that anyone would want to use mode, it's just that mode is fun.)
Sophia Brooks - Mar 12, 2003 9:17:14 am PST #7250 of 10001
Cats to become a rabbit should gather immediately now here
HEY! I want to use mode!!! ; )
P.M. Marc - Mar 12, 2003 9:20:12 am PST #7251 of 10001
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear
If we said, "choose any number" then, yeah, someone could put in 10,000 and skew the results. With a max of 100? Not so much
Jon, would we be doing that adjustment for extremes, like in figure skating?
P.M. Marc - Mar 12, 2003 9:20:46 am PST #7252 of 10001
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear
HEY! I want to use mode!!! ; )
Oh, sure, just because it's so stylish...
Jon B. - Mar 12, 2003 9:22:56 am PST #7253 of 10001
A turkey in every toilet -- only in America!
Jon, would we be doing that adjustment for extremes, like in figure skating?
Hee! If that's a serious question, I'd say no. In figure skating it's more important to drop the extremes because there are only, what?, 10 or 15 judges? So an extreme score can have a large impact. We'll probably get 100 votes so dropping one "10" vote and one "100" vote doesn't gain us much.
P.M. Marc - Mar 12, 2003 9:25:00 am PST #7254 of 10001
So come, my friends, be not afraid/We are so lightly here/It is in love that we are made; In love we disappear
Hee! If that's a serious question, I'd say no. In figure skating it's more important to drop the extremes because there are only, what?, 10 or 15 judges? We'll probably get 100 votes votes so dropping one "10" vote and one "100" vote doesn't gain us much.
It actually was. *g*
I'm so used to doing it, because well, we did it all the time the year I took stats (it was important to do so with the data we were studying, to clarify), and I do it (or did it, as I'm no longer doing that) when adjusting data for horse racing information, that I tend to assume the correction.