You can't go doing things like THAT johne - putting a
'Proviso' into one of Nals' polls!!! That would destroy the whole concept of his ill conceived & badly formulated poll questions!!
I used to think that his polls were badly put together simply because he did not know how to do this correctly - I had not realised (until today when he responded earlier in this thread) that it was because he did not understand what a poll was supposed to do. It was suggested to him some 18 months ago that he should study some basic material on how to conceive & write a set of poll questions to illicit the responses needed but although he may have READ that material, it obviously would have made no sense to him as his basic understanding of what a poll IS was flawed before starting. To then 'waffle on' about newspapers doing it & trying to justify his inability to hear what others here are saying ..... just beggars belief!
I stopped my involvement with the actual polls some time ago on the grounds that I found them totally impossible to answer correctly (badly worded, ill conceived, contradictory are just a few flaws I noticed) but I would come in to look at the debates as I found some of the posters had some interesting points to make & I am always prepared to see the views of others, even though I may not always agree with them. As you so rightly say "Interesting how people can see a whole other way of looking at things". Following the above statements by the OP as to 'why' he puts polls together in the way that he does, I doubt I shall be visiting even the discussions in future!!
To answer the question posed however, I feel that DR1 posters WILL sensationalose when they have an agenda or wish to make themselves out to be more important than they otherwise would be. 90% of DR1 posters will tell it 'as they see it' & NOT sensationalise. Maybe THAT could/should have been the question polled ..... the % of sensationalising?? ~ Grahame.
