Do you think it is right when Soda Head Management creates a poll that is biased?
ANGEL
2012/07/17 14:32:10
|
|
|||||
|
5 votes
|
|
14% | ||
|
11 votes
|
|
31% | ||
|
11 votes
|
|
31% | ||
|
9 votes
|
|
25% | ||
I think that Soda Head Management has an obligation to maintain neutrality. I have no problems if they create a poll on a topic they know will result in a great deal of debate. But when they create a poll, limit the options, and word it in such a way that they know will influence votes - I think they have crossed the line.
Recently they created a poll penning 2 religions against each other - pretty much asking, which religion is the better option. Which religions were being targeted is not the issue (It could have been Christianity vs. Judaism vs. Scientology vs. Wicca.) Which religions is not the issue. The point is that they only provided 2 options - Choose Religion X or Religion Y.
I found that poll highly offensive – particularly because it was created by Soda Head Management. Shouldn’t Management be at least somewhat unbiased? This poll in particular was rigged in such a way that it would fall in favor of one group - knowing that the other group had only a minority of members on Sodahead. Management has that information – having access to profiles that are hidden from the public.
The way this poll was created, with only 2 options, also made it impossible for other groups to even have a voice. They obviously didn't want Atheists or Agnostics to have a voice. If an Atheist wanted to respond - they were forced to select an option supportive of one religion or the other. Being that Atheists don't believe in any religion - I find this tactic to be particularly offensive. And by only providing 2 options, they were making members of other religions choose in favor of the religion the pollster obviously favored. I think it was intentionally rigged that way and I find that to be highly offensive and unethical that they would have created a poll so tainted.
I reported it as "abuse" and while I expect that they will ignore the complaint - I did ask for the courtesy of a response.
What do you think is the role of Sodahead Management when it comes to creating their own polls? Should the poll provide equality to both ends of the debate, or do you think it is OK for them to post a poll that is obviously biased and offers so few options that will obviously sway the votes?
NOTE: THIS IS NOT A POLL TO BASH ANY ONE RELIGION OR GROUP. PLEASE DO NOT USE MY POLLS AS A PLATFORM TO DO SO. I ALWAYS TRY TO RESPECT THE REQUEST OF THE POLLSTER AND LIMIT MY RESPONSES TO THE POLL QUESTION. I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU DO THE SAME.
THANK YOU
ANGEL
Recently they created a poll penning 2 religions against each other - pretty much asking, which religion is the better option. Which religions were being targeted is not the issue (It could have been Christianity vs. Judaism vs. Scientology vs. Wicca.) Which religions is not the issue. The point is that they only provided 2 options - Choose Religion X or Religion Y.
I found that poll highly offensive – particularly because it was created by Soda Head Management. Shouldn’t Management be at least somewhat unbiased? This poll in particular was rigged in such a way that it would fall in favor of one group - knowing that the other group had only a minority of members on Sodahead. Management has that information – having access to profiles that are hidden from the public.
The way this poll was created, with only 2 options, also made it impossible for other groups to even have a voice. They obviously didn't want Atheists or Agnostics to have a voice. If an Atheist wanted to respond - they were forced to select an option supportive of one religion or the other. Being that Atheists don't believe in any religion - I find this tactic to be particularly offensive. And by only providing 2 options, they were making members of other religions choose in favor of the religion the pollster obviously favored. I think it was intentionally rigged that way and I find that to be highly offensive and unethical that they would have created a poll so tainted.
I reported it as "abuse" and while I expect that they will ignore the complaint - I did ask for the courtesy of a response.
What do you think is the role of Sodahead Management when it comes to creating their own polls? Should the poll provide equality to both ends of the debate, or do you think it is OK for them to post a poll that is obviously biased and offers so few options that will obviously sway the votes?
NOTE: THIS IS NOT A POLL TO BASH ANY ONE RELIGION OR GROUP. PLEASE DO NOT USE MY POLLS AS A PLATFORM TO DO SO. I ALWAYS TRY TO RESPECT THE REQUEST OF THE POLLSTER AND LIMIT MY RESPONSES TO THE POLL QUESTION. I RESPECTFULLY REQUEST THAT YOU DO THE SAME.
THANK YOU
ANGEL
Top Opinion
-
Since they are Management they should not be so biased.
+7Being bias while managing a site isn't bright or productive. You lose more people who get feed up, and if the staff doesn't behave better than the people who log in daily; it's a problem. The most popular sites usually have management that is unbiased whether they agree with a certain group/ideology or not.
Sodahead management should be ashamed of their actions! That poll (and any other management-created polls like it) should be deleted immediately and I think that an apology to both religions is in order.
The owner seems to being trying to balance making money with an inexplicable desire to be one of the 'cool kids', and in doing so he narrows the scope of potential membership.
edit: typo.
:)
PS: I may be quite critical of SH Management with regards to the biased polls - but I love the animated pictures. Makes things fun and a lot less serious!
You're on point, of course; as is Latti.
That's what KEEPS this site third rate, IMO; the total lack of impartiality and equanimity...
But in the end, management acting no better than the members only impedes the overall success of the site.
You never see Zuckerberg posting 'hate and bait' threads...
However, my personal choice to not answer intentionally biased questions in no way negates the management's responsibility for posting them.
For instance; at the start of OWS movement, the OWNER of this site himself posted an incendiary question, asking people 'how much they'd pay to mace protestors.'
Such a post is a flagrant violation of the TOS, and it stayed up for quite some time... until someone with some sense finally realized that if some loon actually went and DID mace a protestor, then stated that they got the idea from here, that SH could be seen as engaging in criminal solicitation.
Spell check, capitalization and punctuation are your friends.