clongton - 10/1/2008 12:32 PMQuoteJIS - 10/1/2008 5:59 AMThe major finding for myself is the confirmation that many people opposing Direct do not want to take part in the discussion. I can understand that.JIS;Not to put too fine a point on this, but how can you know that? You appear to be basing your statement on the fact that not many people have voiced opposition to DIRECT. It is equally possible that there simply are *not* many people who oppose it as well. You are citing the fact that not many people voted in opposition of DIRECT as *confirmation* that a large number of people do not wish to vote. The fundamental rule of a poll is you don't get to count votes that are not cast, nor are you allowed to draw conclusions from un-cast votes, because fundamentally you have absolutely no idea how many, or even *IF* there are any un-cast votes.Your "confirmation" is invalid.
JIS - 10/1/2008 5:59 AMThe major finding for myself is the confirmation that many people opposing Direct do not want to take part in the discussion. I can understand that.
kraisee - 10/1/2008 1:00 PMWith purely negative motives behind his actions there is zero benefit to us from engaging him any more. It is time to simply try to ignore him in reference to anything DIRECT-related from this point onwards.Should he persist, or attempt to pursue a vendetta in the future for being embarrassed by being called-out for his actions, I suggest we rely upon the forums moderators and managers keeping things under control.Ross.
JIS - 10/1/2008 5:59 AMThe major finding for myself is the confirmation that many people oposing Direct do not want to take part in the discussion. I can understand that.
tankmodeler - 10/1/2008 1:19 PMOn the other hand, if the number of regular members is under about 300, you can actually infer that a) the matter is of reasonably high interest (as polls regularly get less than 20% response) and b) that the results do accurately reflect the beliefs of the members of NSF (because the results are greatly skewed to Direct's favour).
JIS - 10/1/2008 8:18 AMQuotekraisee - 10/1/2008 1:00 PMWith purely negative motives behind his actions there is zero benefit to us from engaging him any more. It is time to simply try to ignore him in reference to anything DIRECT-related from this point onwards.Should he persist, or attempt to pursue a vendetta in the future for being embarrassed by being called-out for his actions, I suggest we rely upon the forums moderators and managers keeping things under control.Ross.If my comments are find to be inappropriate by forums moderators I would like to know that. I think that ignoring DIRECT by myself could be a good solution how to end this matter. I did it for some time and it worked.
CFE - 10/1/2008 2:21 AMQuoteclongton - 9/1/2008 2:09 PMTo all those who have either selected or are considering selecting option 3 (If accepted the DIRECT would require major overhaul), would you mind telling us what the things are that you believe would be so affected? That will provide us with the opportunity to take a look at them and then provide you with a considered response. Perhaps we have overlooked something. If so, we would certainly like to know about that.ThanksThere are no issues I know of surrounding DIRECT, but there's a general fear on my part that there's something I'm missing. I think of all the "off the shelf" solutions that have been proposed in the aerospace industry and how much they have changed between initial and final implementations. I think of all the work that was required to adapt the F-86 Sabre into the carrier-based Fury, or the required work to make the A-7 out of the F-8. In the end, you're left with a system that's quite different from the one you started with.
clongton - 9/1/2008 2:09 PMTo all those who have either selected or are considering selecting option 3 (If accepted the DIRECT would require major overhaul), would you mind telling us what the things are that you believe would be so affected? That will provide us with the opportunity to take a look at them and then provide you with a considered response. Perhaps we have overlooked something. If so, we would certainly like to know about that.Thanks
Jim - 10/1/2008 1:38 PMQuoteJIS - 10/1/2008 8:18 AMQuotekraisee - 10/1/2008 1:00 PMWith purely negative motives behind his actions there is zero benefit to us from engaging him any more. It is time to simply try to ignore him in reference to anything DIRECT-related from this point onwards.Should he persist, or attempt to pursue a vendetta in the future for being embarrassed by being called-out for his actions, I suggest we rely upon the forums moderators and managers keeping things under control.Ross.If my comments are find to be inappropriate by forums moderators I would like to know that. I think that ignoring DIRECT by myself could be a good solution how to end this matter. I did it for some time and it worked.Also JIS has yet to provide any evidence that he is an expert at anything to make any conclusionsHe did a poll to find other people who think like him and when there wasn't that many, he tried to come up with other explanations
tankmodeler - 9/1/2008 8:19 AMThe best you can say is that with only 131 responses (to this time) and X hundred members on NSF, this issue doesn't appear to greatly interest the majority of members. That's it. It's the last fact you can squeeze out of the poll. There's no way you can infer any leanings of the people who are too disinterested to vote. On the other hand, if the number of regular members is under about 300, you can actually infer that a) the matter is of reasonably high interest (as polls regularly get less than 20% response) and b) that the results do accurately reflect the beliefs of the members of NSF (because the results are greatly skewed to Direct's favour). Paul
James Lowe1 - 10/1/2008 11:26 AMWe average a couple of thousand members on the forum on any one day. About four times that in guests and many multiples are on the news site, that don't come through to the forum.
The best you can say is that with only 131 responses (to this time) and X hundred members on NSF, this issue doesn't appear to greatly interest the majority of members.
Your likely to have a strong feeling for or against Direct to a) look and find this thread, b) vote on it.
Regardless, as with the electoral polls, where millions vote, the polls work off about 1000 people, so it still has representative qualities, and from that, most *interested* people appear to be impressed/supportive of Direct.
CEV Now - 12/1/2008 1:15 AMI voted "If accepted the DIRECT would require major overhaul"
Yegor - 12/1/2008 11:00 AMHmm… All of sudden the number of people voted “If accepted the DIRECT would require major overhaul” doubled overnight (somewhere from midnight – in a very short time) from 19 to 38. When “If accepted the DIRECT would require only sensible, peer-studied changes” gain only 10% - 11 more votes at the same time.IMHO there is something fishy in this.
clongton - 12/1/2008 10:21 AMQuoteYegor - 12/1/2008 11:00 AMHmm… All of sudden the number of people voted “If accepted the DIRECT would require major overhaul” doubled overnight (somewhere from midnight – in a very short time) from 19 to 38. When “If accepted the DIRECT would require only sensible, peer-studied changes” gain only 10% - 11 more votes at the same time.IMHO there is something fishy in this.Why would you say that? It's pretty standard that when it comes to polling, a lot of people don't make up their minds until they see some of the early responses. There is something to be said for listening a LOT before you open your mouth. In actual matter of fact, DIRECT actually got its start that way. There was a WHOLE LOT of listening to people who know what they're talking about before the design even began to gel.