Talk:Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons controversy/Poll Old

Old Polls
Two polls have taken place on this page from February 2nd - 4th. I think it is time to conclude; the votes as such are quite clear and unlikely to change significantly over the next few days. I have moved the actual votes and comments to Poll Results.

Conclusion
Here are a the actual options and votes (important for understanding the following comments):

Poll 1
 * 202 votes for "Have picture in the article (size and placement to be determined)"
 * 26 votes for "Delete"
 * 19 votes for "Move to separate page and link the image"
 * 247 votes total

Poll 2
 * 10 votes for "Move to body of article with a link directly to the image on the top"
 * 20 votes for "Have picture lower down the article"
 * 86 votes for "Have picture at top of article"
 * 7 votes for "Don't care"
 * 123 votes total

The decision to have the picture in the article is clear, 82% of the votes in poll 1. The decision to have it at the top seems clear too, with 70% of the votes in poll 2.

However, a poll with many options is a difficult thing. We should be looking for a compromise that is acceptable to nearly everyone, rather than the solution favoured by the largest faction. Many voters may have been ready to accept two of the three alternatives in one of the polls, but have voted for only one option, and that option may be exactly the one most strongly oppposed by other voters. The best solution may actually be a compromise that is no-one's favourite option.

If we consider the 79 voters from poll 1 who have failed to take part in poll 2 although they voted for "Have picture in the article" as "Don't care"s, only 43% of the 202 voters insist on having the picture at the top, and that again is only 35% of the 247 voters total.

So, I believe the poll can be concluded in two ways, equally sound and democratic:


 * 1) Keep picture at top.
 * 2) Move picture down, with link from top.

Now, who decides...? If we need another poll, please don't start it till someone has thought up a better format for it than the two old polls! --Niels Ø 20:30, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Well, I do note that you voted for "Move picture down" in the poll yourself, and even though there were only 30 votes for that option, with 86 favouring the option of keeping it at the top, you think it's sound to move the picture down on the basis of the poll? That's a bit rich. Lankiveil 22:40, 4 February 2006 (UTC).

Good god...interpreting poll 2 using the number of voters in poll 1 is a silly way to interpretate two distinct data sets.--69.163.220.60 20:48, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * No it is not. As I hint above, multi-option polls raise complicated procedural questions. I think the intention with these two polls was: First we decide whether to have the pictures in the article or not, then (after concluding that we do want them) we decide where. However, the two polls have happened simultaneously, which is a procedural mistake. Very few voters who have voted against having the picture in the article have taken part in poll 2, but it is a fair guess that they don't want it at the top.--Niels Ø 20:58, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * The results are clear in both polls. I really don't understand how you can see picking a minority opinion in the second poll as an "acceptable compromise". Even if you connect the two polls you get the same result. Poll 2 had about a 50% participation rate of Poll 1. If we take 50% of the 26 votes for those that wanted to delete the image you get an additional 13 votes for the "not on top" group. That makes it 86:43 = 2:1 for having the image on top. So how on earth would moving the picture down, and going against a 2:1 majority be a compromise? --Denoir 21:33, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * Speaking as one of the 72 who completed the first poll but "abstained " from the second, this is not because I had intended to abstain, it was just because the poll was not laid out sufficiently clearly for it to be obvious that there was two polls. Although you may say this was not very clever on my part, the high rate of "abstentions" suggests that I was not alone . For what it's worth I would have thought it clar that the pic should be at the top. GregLondon 22:43, 4 February 2006 (UTC) 22:40, 4 February 2006 (UTC)


 * For what that is worth, I too think the drawings really should be at the top. But (as I wrote when I voted), I can live with having them further down, too. - Right now, I wish I had voted "top", as that would have given more credibility to my conclusions above. However, my reasons for voting "further down" as I did should be clear from the above. I think the layout of the poll was poor, which makes it difficult to draw conclusions. However, I guess we, for the time being, have to accept that the majority rules "Put them at the top!". I just can't help thinking that a poll with just two alternatives, "top" and "further down with link", might show a different result.--Niels Ø 23:11, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

This is a clear perversion of the polling data. We already had a poll on where to place the image and the result was obvious. Your attempt to rationalize some other decision by pulling in the results of another poll is noted with amusement, and discarded. --Cyde Weys 23:41, 4 February 2006 (UTC)

Who decided the polling is end!!!. Is that the "free" Encyclopedia???? What is the difference between Britanica and Wikipedia??? That is an imperialist Encyclopedia too. Allahu Ekber(Allah is the Greatest)

Whatever happened to Voting is evil? I think the discussion has just demonstrated that there are plenty of well-meaning, reasonable people on both sides, including Muslim editors personally very distressed at seeing the image placed in the most prominent position. A little courtesy in slightly shifting the placement of images is no vice, and there is really no great argument that putting it at the top rather than in the body in any way increases the educational content.--Pharos 05:46, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


 * So, my speculations on how to interpret polls 1 and 2 have been met with some scorn. I accept that, given the polls as they were, there is no alternative but to accept the majority rule for the time being, but I would like to ask your opinions on the following:
 * A poll with many options is a difficult thing. We should be looking for a compromise that is acceptable to nearly everyone, rather than the solution favoured by the largest faction.
 * Suppose a choice has to be made between options A, B and C. Suppose 70% prefer A, find B nearly as good as A, but find C absolutely unacceptable. Suppose another 30% prefer C, find B nearly as good as C, but find A absolutely unacceptable. A simple poll will give an impressive majority to option A, but is that the right decision?
 * Next time, don't start complicated polls till the design of the poll has been approved by a handful of participants having different views on the subject matter! --Niels Ø 10:03, 5 February 2006 (UTC)


 * As for my own views on this subject matter, I think some of the drawings are fun, others are just stupid, while none of them are truly offensive in the Danish context where they were published, as newspaper cartoons are expected to show just one angle on the subject matter, not a balanced view. But it appears that others do take offense, and if we don't have hardcore porn pictures in the articles on pornography at all, why must we have these drawings at the very top of this article?--Niels Ø 10:16, 5 February 2006 (UTC)

I agree with many of the above statements. I disagree with Niels' interpretation of the poll results. I don't think the votes of the 79 keep voters who didn't vote in the second article should be interpreted as "don't care" votes. They should be interpreted as what they are: no votes. It works that way in every poll or election: if you don't cast your vote, it won't be counted. It won't go to the party that you might have voted for. The reality is that 86 of 123 voters (70%) felt the cartoon needed to be at the top of the article. The second most popular option (lower down) got only 16.3% of the votes. This is a clear result, and it shouldn't be distorted. (For the record: I voted "don't care") Aecis Mr.Mojorisin' 23:15, 5 February 2006 (UTC)