Should we allow unofficial opinion "gallup" surveys ?

[Spiffor]

It seems some people missed the point. The question is absolutely not bout limiting freedom of specch, thread creation, and even poll creation at large.
It's only about unofficial pre-election opinion polls. This very poll is unofficial, and I posted it as a simple citizen, and anybody could have done this.

Anybody has tremendous ways to express himself (namely, anybody can post in an existing thread, post a new thread, or pot an official poll). I feel, like many others, that a "gallup" poll has nothing to do with free speech, but is a flaw of Democracy.

Sheik : please tell me if your freedom of speech has been limited in any ways here. I've never seen somene thinking about banning the "I'm with this one ! -No, I'm with that one" posts and threads. Contrary to opinion polls, they're a healthy form of Democracy IMO.
Anyways, the polls will decide if opinion polls are a good thing or not.

[Purple]

I don't really understand the threat. As long as official polls are labeled as such, what's the harm of unofficial ones? Who's hurt?

These polls are not scientific, the samplings are not representative, and therefore they cannot be predictive of an official ballot.

The argument that they can influence potential voters can be applied to official polls, too, since voters may look at poll results before voting!

[Verto]

Right now the polls in a tie...but I'm sure most people were for the polls, until their opinion was influenced

[GePap]

I think POLLS are fine when they don't interfere with VOTES. Holding unofficial polls about city names and techs we would like are OK, but when it comes to elections, since we have only one way of counting, either votes or poll opinions, unofficial votes may beome in the minds of many, the predetermined official results which is bad. So, I supported choice B.

[Purple]

Originally posted by LordImpact
especially if you start a pre election poll without the consent of the candidates...

Obtaining consent is courteous, but hardly necessary. Declaring a candidacy puts one in the public eye and makes one subject to all kinds of flattering and unflattering attention. Most celebrities understand this and try to develop a thick skin.

What we (the citizenry) must be careful about is whether the polling questions have a built-in bias.

[LordImpact]

But does one have the right to, and I admit, unwittingly, put forth a poll that may harm his chances of getting elected or give a better chance to his opponet without his consent?

--Impact

[Panag]

hi ,

option three , otherwise things get to complicated , ..

have a nice day

[Sheik]

Originally posted by Purple
I don't really understand the threat. As long as official polls are labeled as such, what's the harm of unofficial ones? Who's hurt?

These polls are not scientific, the samplings are not representative, and therefore they cannot be predictive of an official ballot.

The argument that they can influence potential voters can be applied to official polls, too, since voters may look at poll results before voting!

Well put!


Spiffor I do not feel that freedom of speech has been limited yet but feel that we may be setting a bad precedent.

Epistax you are right there are many limits to freedom of speech but this should not be one of them.

By the way have there been any objections from either of the canidates?

[Jon Shafer]

Jdd, what I said is that there was nothing in the Constitution against it. That does not mean I agree with it. If an amendment banning them was added, then I would say it's unconstitutional. We must abide by the document unless people elect to change it.

The threat is that it will affect elections in an irresponsible manner. Saying "Ninot Rules! Trip Rules!" won't affect elections unless someone is so stupid to say "hey, they rule, I'll vote for them both." However, that's not what opinion polls do. If someone is winning in an opinion poll right before the election, then someone may say "hey, the other guy doesn't have a chance, this poll says so." If they feel that their vote won't matter, then it's affecting the election in an unnatural manner that is not based upon the competance of the candidates. People aren't not voting because they don't like the candidates: they're not voting because they think what they say doesn't matter. That is destroying democracy much more than it assists it.

[notyoueither]

Well said Trip.

We don't need such polls posted in the forum. As has been said before they can do no good, but they can do much harm.

However, there would be nothing stopping the parties from PMing people and asking about voting intentions.

[Inverse Icarus]

forbid them at any time. same goes for "public opinion polls" two i can recall being nothing but slander fodder.

[jdd2007]

whether these polls are outlawed or not, i wont post any anymore. i had no intention of doing any harm, and still defend my actions, but if this many people disagree with me, then i will just leave it alone...

[Verto]

Seems like the citizens can't decide...all of you are influencing their votes!

[jdd2007]

[ThePlagueRat]

This is a democracy, right?
Then surveys are essential, and should be legal!
These consequences of spoiling expectations are of less importance.