I don't know if you thought I wouldn't or something, but sure here you go:
No I very much hoped you would
Because I sure as heck never said people from reddit voting is inherently bad. And if we have a communication barrier as you say, that needs to be removed.
Which begs the question, why the new thread and poll?
Which made a shift towards "yes" after being linked on reddit by the way. How unexpected
Yep, and this thread has been linked from reddit an hour ago.
Gee wiz, I wonder what happens next.
Captured for posterity
Where am I saying that a vote from reddit is inherently bad?
My point here simply is: the thread being linked in a reddit thread with 83% favouring guilds will adjust the results. And I was right. Coupled with the fact that people on reddit tend to be organised and drawn towards guilds.
We do know there are 3 threads advertising this thread by a player who supports guilds.
We do know since the thread was advertised on reddit, the voting behaviour changed radically.
We do know Yaffle spotted an immense increase in new accounts who only voted in this poll.
Again, nowhere am I saying that reddit is inherently bad.
This is simple logic.
A proponent of guilds is urging people to go vote in this thread. In the vote they are behind, so that's a strong incentiviser. Coupled with the completely not inherently bad nature of players on reddit (tending towards organised player interaction) it was clear from the get-go what this would do with the vote results. A large base was mobilised. And it's
inherently more easy to mobilise groups of players with a tendency for organised groups. Especially when promoted by a proponent of guilds.
Earlier on I used the example of 2 political parties during an election. Where only one party gets to campaign. This will of course skew the voting results.
So, with regard to the results, the advertising in 3 different threads that happened on reddit was bad for it's representation. If this had happened on any other medium, I would have stated exactly the same. If the yes/no roles were reversed, I would have stated exactly the same. I have studied statistics, and a part of that was related to public polling. I can talk for hours if you want on the difficulties of conducting a representative poll. Which is difficult in person, more difficult on the phone, more difficult via email and almost impossible on the internet. Which such a delicate balance, a sudden influx of likeminded individuals with the characteristics I described above, it really never stood a chance.
Mind you, the same goes for the earlier poll. I'm in this because poll results can be made to sit, roll over and fetch a newspaper if you know your way around them.
So no I do not see what you mean. What 'I mean' is, with neutrality, why is reddit inherently bad? As this is the suggestion I inferred from your post
What I mean is, nowhere in those quotes do you see me say: reddit is inherently bad. You read implications into it that I didn't express.
If you are wondering whether I'm implying this, ask. Don't assume. I'm right here and happy to clarify my position.
My misunderstanding your post has naught to do with my comprehension nor your intelligence, but I can't help feel like now I have agitated you somewhat.
It may have been less agitated if you had implied my favourite colour was yellow. But painting my position as "reddit is inherently bad" doesn't sit well with me.
Ah, the sympathy card. Clever. Well played. And it's working as well
No apologies necessary, but appreciate the gesture.