Community surveys: What's your take on off-topic political threads on the forum? (Page 6)

This post has been translated automatically

Falcon wrote on 13.03.2023 at 22:33:

So, in principle, I personally have no problem with it, as long as you can just discuss the topics now and then in the chat corner.


But, the 41% is already very creatively designed. The answer option was: "I abstain from voting because it neither interests me nor bothers me".
Just as well you could add the 41% to the yes votes because these users simply don't have a problem with these topics.

So the bottom line is that there is a minority of 36% who are bothered by these issues and a majority of 64% who either want to talk about them or have no problem with them being talked about.
Anyone who also had statistics evaluation and survey evaluation in the course of study would interpret this result this way.

As I said, basically no problem with it, but if you go purely by the survey, then it's the wrong decision because it says exactly the opposite.

This post has been translated automatically

Counter wrote on 14/03/2023 at 00:00:

I don't know if you actually looked at the results, but 41% voted "I think off-topic political topics have no place on GambleJoe and should be stopped by the GJ team". Now where is the named creativity in that?

This post has been translated automatically

Falcon wrote on 14.03.2023 at 06:27:

Did you read through my post, or where exactly is 41% the majority?

This post has been translated automatically

Falcon wrote on 13.03.2023 at 22:33:

So, in principle, I personally have no problem with it, as long as you can just discuss the topics now and then in the chat corner.


But, the 41% is already very creatively designed. The answer option was: "I abstain from voting because it neither interests me nor bothers me".
Just as well you could add the 41% to the yes votes because these users simply don't have a problem with these topics.

So the bottom line is that there is a minority of 36% who are bothered by these issues and a majority of 64% who either want to talk about them or have no problem with them being talked about.
Anyone who also had statistics evaluation and survey evaluation in the course of study would interpret this result this way.

As I said, basically no problem with it, but if you go purely by the survey, then it is the wrong decision, because this says exactly the opposite.

This post has been translated automatically

Falcon wrote on 03/14/2023 at 06:27: Did you read through my post, or where exactly is 41% the majority?

This post has been translated automatically

This post has been translated automatically

Counter wrote on 14/03/2023 at 07:41:
Moin Moin,

first of all you slightly twisted the numbers in your post. It was 41% on "I think off-topic political topics have no place on GambleJoe and should be stopped by the GJ team". But that's just by the way.

Basically, if 2/5 of the community has a problem with the topic, that's basically already very serious.
The mentioned 36% have no real interest in the topic because they clicked "I abstain, because it doesn't interest me and doesn't bother me". These can therefore not be directly assigned to the 23%, because there is ultimately no interest in this topic in the forum.

Since you throw the study of statistics into the room, you should know that the evaluation of a survey always depends on the question. One cannot simply tinker the results as one would like.

From the general question "How do you stand on off-topic political topics in the forum?" the following can be deduced first:
1. 41% of the votes are against political topics in the forum
2. 36% of the votes are not interested in the topic, even if it does not bother them
3. 23% of the votes consider the exchange about political topics in the forum important.

This means that after all 41% of the respondents have something against this topic, considering all opinions for themselves. In other words, the majority.
In the same way, one could also evaluate that 41%+36% have no interest in this topic in the forum. This quantity could also be added up. This would also be the majority.

For your example, the question would have to be asked differently. If you would ask directly if you are against political topics in the forum, your example would be correct. But that was not the question.

This post has been translated automatically

This post has been translated automatically

This post has been translated automatically

gamble1 wrote on 14.03.2023 at 17:37: those where it completely refuse can do without it for a short time to then use the next days again normally the chat corner.
Thus, all those who are interested can briefly exchange and others who actually have no interest

• if you are not interested in politics at all, should you avoid the chat corner / bitch corner, which you usually like to read, for a few days as soon as political stuff is posted in it? (read over is not really possible).


• what is meant by briefly touched? a few sentences? a few days? each interested may write once what to it? or if a mod is too hot then it is terminated?

This post has been translated automatically

RiverSong wrote on 03/14/2023 at 7:54 pm:

so you see the use of the chat corner for short term politics as not normal use of the chat corner!!!!
this is exactly the point that bothers me about your and gj compromise. think logically.

in summary: (generally valid for every user*in here)

• if you are not interested in politics at all, should you avoid the chat corner / bitch corner, which you usually like to read, for a few days as soon as political stuff is posted in it? (read over is not really possible).


• what is meant by briefly touched? a few sentences? a few days? each interested may write once what to it? or if a mod is too hot then it is terminated?

quasi take over the few hanseln politically interested the chatter / complain corner for a certain period of time until the individual thinks it's enough? a bit unfair to the majority of other users, or!

also find such people hypocritical who always give of themselves, I'll write something about politics then peace is? I do not see on the basis of recent events here at all. page-long quarrels, links in various threads that are supposed to move one to accept the opinion of others etc etc

politics is a complex too hot iron as that one could dismiss it here in a few sentences. besides, it has so far always degenerated into extreme quarrels here.

This post has been translated automatically

RiverSong wrote on 03/14/2023 at 7:54 pm:

so you see the use of the chat corner for short term politics as not normal use of the chat corner!!!!
this is exactly the point that bothers me about your and gj compromise. think logically.

in summary: (generally valid for every user*in here)

• if you are not interested in politics at all, should you avoid the chat corner / bitch corner, which you usually like to read, for a few days as soon as political stuff is posted in it? (read over is not really possible).


• what is meant by briefly touched? a few sentences? a few days? each interested may write once what to it? or if a mod is too hot then it is terminated?

quasi the few hanseln politically interested take over the chatter / complain corner for a certain period of time until the individual thinks it's enough? a bit unfair to the majority of other users, or!

also find such people hypocritical who always give of themselves, I'll write something about politics then peace is? I do not see on the basis of recent events here at all. page-long squabbles, links in various threads that are supposed to move one to accept the opinion of others etc etc

politics is a complex too hot iron as that one could dismiss it here in a few sentences. besides, it has so far always degenerated into extreme quarrels here.

sorry, but your new regulation that political topics can be briefly touched here is too vague for me.

it is also not a ban on talking, it should simply not be offered here due to the survey results, otherwise you could have saved the survey and immediately reinschreib the compromise as a new rule

gladly I tell you the only logical way after gj feel the need of each user*in just.

just open a new corner, name it (political, briefly touched) and delete immediately every post that is posted outside this corner about politics and moderate the new corner as you like.
then politically not at all interested can avoid this corner, do not have to stumble constantly in the other corners over it and the chatter / mecker corner is again normal readable for chatterboxes and everyday meckereien

This post has been translated automatically

refucs wrote on 14.03.2023 at 20:27 clock: No offense, but are not you, for example, in this whole "quarrels" been involved from time to time? what I here so mitbekommen hab the last few months. Always in the middle of it and then act as if it's none of your business and it's always some other, runs...

How can you get upset about something in which you do not want / need to participate?

Normally, you should then ban everything except gambling, this whole off-topic permanent spamming of some "Hanseln" here also extremely annoying...

This post has been translated automatically

This post has been translated automatically