But manbreasts... ;_; ~Goten
Statistics: Posted by Jackstick — April 23rd, 2012, 9:16 pm
]]>
]]>
]]>
http://www.ncpp.org/?q=node/6#2
And just as importantly.
The link(s) wrote:
There is no single ideal sample size. Samples of any size have some degree of precision. The question is always whether there is sufficient precision to draw conclusions as determined by statistical formulae.
So there's no single best size, larger samples are generally better, and the entire page has zero examples of points of something "always" or "never" being the case (excluding the question quoted above).
If I understand that correctly--that there's no single proper solution to figuring out just how many people to survey--it becomes... oh, I don't know, a matter of opinion? Hm, where have I read that before?
Statistics: Posted by Kikori — April 23rd, 2012, 5:00 pm
]]>
The link wrote:
ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 1,003 adults across the United Kingdom aged 18 and over by telephone on 15-17 April 2011. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults.
Wiki wrote:
Population (July 2010 est.)[2]
• London 7,825,200
• Density 4,978/km2 (12,892/sq mi)
About as okay as it is to suck at math, I guess. To a population that great, such a poll would be 0.0001281xx% of the CITY'S population's opinion, and only roughly 20% of the population in one square mile. This may be a matter of opinion, but those sound like values I wouldn't even trust to a high school project.
Like most things, you've got absolutely no idea what you're talking about.
http://www.ncpp.org/?q=node/6#3
Reputable research companies use roughly the same amount for polling views in America, which has a population of several hundred million. This is NOT an unusual number. Now stop being an immature brat and drop it.
Statistics: Posted by Magicana Drofulcus — April 23rd, 2012, 3:51 pm
]]>
Statistics: Posted by Nate — April 23rd, 2012, 3:48 pm
]]>
]]>
ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 1,003 adults across the United Kingdom aged 18 and over by telephone on 15-17 April 2011. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults.
Wiki wrote:
Population (July 2010 est.)[2]
• London 7,825,200
• Density 4,978/km2 (12,892/sq mi)
About as okay as it is to suck at math, I guess. To a population that great, such a poll would be 0.0001281xx% of the CITY'S population's opinion, and only roughly 20% of the population in one square mile. This may be a matter of opinion, but those sound like values I wouldn't even trust to a high school project.
Statistics: Posted by Kikori — April 23rd, 2012, 10:25 am
]]>
Can't we all just get along? If not, I'm flashing my hairy manbreasts. Now behave, children.
Everyone in this topic is a
idiot and I hate all their faces.Get to flashing, sexy.
Statistics: Posted by Christopher — April 23rd, 2012, 3:31 am
]]>
The link wrote:
ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 1,003 adults across the United Kingdom aged 18 and over by telephone on 15-17 April 2011. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults.
Ooh, 1,003 people were interviewed. Stop the press, they may have missed one of the few million other people with an opinion.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Opinion_poll#History
Quote:
Then, in 1936, its 2.3 million "voters" constituted a huge sample; however, they were generally more affluent Americans who tended to have Republican sympathies. The Literary Digest was ignorant of this new bias. The week before election day, it reported that Alf Landon was far more popular than Roosevelt. At the same time, George Gallup conducted a far smaller, but more scientifically-based survey, in which he polled a demographically representative sample. Gallup correctly predicted Roosevelt's landslide victory. The Literary Digest soon went out of business, while polling started to take off.
But it's ok not to understand polling.
Statistics: Posted by Magicana Drofulcus — April 23rd, 2012, 2:27 am
]]>
ICM Research interviewed a random sample of 1,003 adults across the United Kingdom aged 18 and over by telephone on 15-17 April 2011. Interviews were conducted across the country and the results have been weighted to the profile of all adults.
Ooh, 1,003 people were interviewed. Stop the press, they may have missed one of the few million other people with an opinion.
Statistics: Posted by Kikori — April 23rd, 2012, 2:23 am
]]>
If you're bringing up that waste of time quasi-essay, then I must have struck a nerve.
Get back on topic, son. We're here to talk about royalty and who cares about it instead of little snippets of literature and journalistic talent, or lack thereof.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uk/2011/apr/2 ... ay-britons
63%. Deal with it.
Statistics: Posted by Magicana Drofulcus — April 23rd, 2012, 2:12 am
]]>
Statistics: Posted by Kikori — April 23rd, 2012, 1:54 am
]]>
Well, Australian is an accent of English, not a variant, so I know it's not your country of origin's fault. And I know redheads as a whole aren't that illiterate. Not to mention you went to college and made a big deal about your English assignments... so it's odd. You spent all that trouble trying to be perfect in school, but suck so terribly at reading something as simple as "Hi, my name's Cam, I care about the monarchy and Ead doesn't so I'm gonna whine to him about it."
Where in any of the above three posts does the factor of "if I went around telling people on every imaginable topic ___" come into you being an idiot on this one?
Welp, did mis-read your changed quote. Regarding the rest of your response:
Let me just bow down and worship at your feet, given that you're better than me in every way. You can write 800 words of complete
in half an hour and that makes you truly a king among men (It wasn't English, it was a paper analyzing Thomas Müntzer's theology and overall impact on the Reformation - But you were too busy being a prat to realize that there is a difference in difficulty between pissing words against a wall and thoughtful analysis).Statistics: Posted by Magicana Drofulcus — April 23rd, 2012, 1:48 am
]]>
]]>
Most of those people are from America and Commonwealth countries or middle-ages women.
Statistics: Posted by Godders — April 23rd, 2012, 12:55 am
]]>
Where in any of the above three posts does the factor of "if I went around telling people on every imaginable topic ___" come into you being an idiot on this one?
Statistics: Posted by Kikori — April 23rd, 2012, 12:22 am
]]>
Magicana Drofulcus wrote:
Wah wah wah, my name is Cam, wah wah wah, I made another comment about how little I care about someone and now I can't handle someone calling me out for commenting about how little something matters to someone when it matters to me and I also can't see metaphors.
Fixed that for you.
I care about the monarchy
.That only works if I went around telling people on every imaginable topic about how little I cared for it. I don't.
Statistics: Posted by Magicana Drofulcus — April 23rd, 2012, 12:13 am
]]>
Wah wah wah, my name is Cam, wah wah wah, I made another comment about how little I care about someone and now I can't handle someone calling me out for commenting about how little something matters to someone when it matters to me and I also can't see metaphors.
Fixed that for you.
Statistics: Posted by Kikori — April 23rd, 2012, 12:09 am
]]>
Wah wah wah, my name is Eadwulf, wah wah wah, I made another comment about how little I care about something and now I can't handle someone calling me out for commenting about how little something matters to me and I also can't see metaphors.
Statistics: Posted by Magicana Drofulcus — April 22nd, 2012, 8:36 pm
]]>