Gateway 2000:Number one in customer loyalty
| Navigational map -- for text only please go to the bottom of the page ||Forums|
Readers' Choice Awards (siteadm) Fri, 13 Jun
Wow!!! 300 hundred people!! (dhmjr) Sat, 14 Jun
Statistical Validity (sdugan) Sun, 15 Jun
Another Inconsistency (Ron Findling) Mon, 16 Jun
Not inconsistent (rparker) Mon, 16 Jun
You Can't Have It Both Ways (Ron Findling) Tue, 17 Jun
Print and Electric readers represented (Sandy Reed) Wed, 18 Jun
Word Games (w nau) Wed, 18 Jun
Give me a break (Alan Laing) Today
Sorry for breaking in . . . (CRConrad) Today

No problem

Posted by: Alan Laing
Date posted: Thu Jun 19 8:17:28 PDT 1997

or apology required. On reflection you make a good point for the first statement.

However, if one accepts the fact that the poll was conducted for IW subscribers, then looks at whether IWE readers were excluded, the only possible conclusion is that they were not excluded if 60% of the responders were IWE readers. To believe that IWE readers were excluded, can only mean that the purpose of the survey is not accepted since you cannot expect to find a non IW subscriber who reads IWE within a group of IW subscribers.

You said: "Which is exactly what he said -- just because some of the tabbies (print readers) they sampled were also cats[1] (IWE readers), not all cats (IWE readers) are tabbies (print readers). " with this footnote "[1]: Yeah, so the analogy breaks down because not only _some_ but _all_ tabbies are cats, in the real world. But come on, man, be a little flexible -- or do you know a saying that fits _perfectly_? "

A better analogy, pick two intersecting sets where one set is not a sub set of the other. For instance, NT users and Infoworld Readers and say

Some NT users read Infoworld but not all Infoworld readers use NT or conversely some Infoworld readers use NT but not all NT users read Infoworld. Now would you argure that NT users were excluded? I mean, since not one non Inforworld reader who used NT was polled, you would have us believe that NT users were excluded? Isn't this what you are trying to do with IWE readers who do not subscribe to IW?

We both agree on whether the poll accurately reflects the opinion of IWE readers, it does not any more than the poll accurately reflects the opinion of NT users.


You guys are getting out of control (kdenehy) Today

Respond | Search | Help


For questions or comments, email the Forums Editor

kristin_kueter@infoworld.com