PDA

View Full Version : Sam and Jack Ship poll on Stargate Daniel Friendly Site



morjana
August 29th, 2004, 12:46 AM
The Stargate Daniel Friendly site is running a Jack and Sam poll at:

http://www.stargatedanielfriendly.net/html2/index.php

(Look on the right hand side of the page.)

**Apparently a poll was held a while ago, by TPTB, to let them know how many people were for ship, and how many were against it. Who wanted to see the kiss between S/J and who would be reaching for the sick bag. I must have missed it, and most people I've spoken to seemed to have no knowledge of it. It seems that the poll results were evenly matched. Anyway, it's about time this was cleared up once and for all. I've set up a poll where you can vote either for or against. IP's will be logged and so don't bother trying to vote more than once, you won't be able to. Other safeguards are in place. Let's make this the real deal. Let's find out once and for all where the fandom stands.

Whether you're a shipper or a non shipper, make your vote count. It takes a second, and as it appears this is an important topic for most people, every vote counts.**

******

That rumor of a poll being taken by TPTB just won't die.

Morjana

dpgiffin
August 29th, 2004, 07:02 AM
Morjana,

Wonderful idea. However, I cannot vote, as my option is not there. I have no true preference either way. Whichever way TPTB can create the best and most interesting stories, is the way I choose.

auralan
August 29th, 2004, 07:08 AM
Morjana,

Wonderful idea. However, I cannot vote, as my option is not there. I have no true preference either way. Whichever way TPTB can create the best and most interesting stories, is the way I choose.


Sadly, even if they listed it, there's no good way to capture apathy. The majority of people who don't care either way about ship just aren't gonna bother to go take a poll about it.

keshou
August 29th, 2004, 08:11 AM
That rumor of a poll being taken by TPTB just won't die.

Well considering that they mentioned the "kiss poll" in the DVD commentary for "Grace", it's not surprising. Don't think there *was* a poll, can't imagine we would have all missed it.

I think internet polls are pretty useless, except for entertainment value, even with safeguards in place. I'm pretty sure that people with access to multiple computers (work, home, whatever) that have different IP addresses and different internet providers can vote more than once. I don't know how you stop that.

Besides, this just takes fandom into account. I think we all know it's pretty split down the middle on the issue. As for the millions of casual viewers. Those who may not have the passion about this issue that online fandom has, who knows?

I didn't vote (once I figured out how to get AOL to stop saying I'd already voted) -- I didn't like either of the options. ;)


..........

Suz
August 29th, 2004, 09:34 AM
Pete Woeste said it in the Grace commentary:


PW: Showdown time. An interesting thing was attempted here. The shippers and many others, were interested in this relationship that's developed over the years, between Carter and O'Neill. They've sort of developed into two different camps. There's two main camps and they're saying, 'We'd like to see that relationship develop romantically.' The other camp says, 'No, it's a relationship that should remain professional and without a professional relationship, you can't have a show like Stargate.So it was decided to basically put this out to public opinion on the net and to see how people would like this particular scene to resolve itself. Do you want to see them kiss or not? What we actually did is we shot two different versions of this scene, giving the outcome of that poll.But what results here, is a little different from what was anticipated. Instead of having two different versions, we ended up with this singular version. I think it's addressed very interestingly. I'm not gonna give it away right now, cos it's about to happen, but it was a very much talked about event.

I think Robert Cooper was the one in a mag interview that said about the poll coming out even, but don't quote me on that because I'm still digging through trying to find it. That's the whole point really. If it is a rumour then TPTB have deliberately lied, by saying there was one. If they've lied, then why? I don't know anyone who participated in this poll. Which site hosted it etc. It's all a bit X-files'ish(Is that a word?)

I did it basically because it's the hottest topic on the net. It never goes away and no matter what side you're on, it's got to be giving everyone a headache. Horrible for the people who don't want Sam and Jack together and keep getting the subtle and sometimes not so subtle ship in most eps. Horrible for the shippers, who keep having this carrot dangled in front of them, and then taken away, only to have it brought back again. So I wanted to find out if this elusive poll was right. Were the two sides evenly matched. If it's proved they were, then surely both sides can learn to give a little more. Maybe understand that their viewpoint is not the only one, and maybe start discussing it without it coming to a bloodbath, or having to have seperate threads with guards at the door. Possibly naive, but there you go.

As to the security of the poll. I have no doubt that whichever side gets the least amount of votes, will say that it wasn't a fair poll. I've posted it in the groups I belong to, which are few. Spoilme, announcements, things like that. Have also joined Gateworld forums so that I was able to post it in the shipper and non shipper forums, as I knew a lot of shippers were here. I've posted it in Our Stargate, as that seems to be full of anti shippers. Scifi bulletin board. It's been posted by someone on the S/J shipper group, and forwarded to various others.

This is one of the most secure polls or voting systems you'll get. It's more secure that other polls and certainly more secure than awards voting. Which was open to people using proxy IP's. It not only logs the IP and then locks you out, it also has other safeguards in place, that I've programmed in, that checks other things, and will catch Proxy's. If you're in college, as far as I'm aware, certainly in the UK and a lot of places, no matter how many pc's you have there, it's still the same IP to the outside world. One internet connection to the building. Same for most work places. Aside from all the safeguards i have (And there's no point me saying what they are), I will be double checking each vote at the end of the poll, against known proxy lists . I have no interest in a poll that doesn't show the true answer, whether it's to my liking or not. I can only run the poll to include Online Shippers and Non shippers. I can't allow for people who have no view on it, or simply don't care enough to vote. The people who feel passionate enough one way or another, are the people that it is affecting on the show.

If you have a Govt poll over here, they sometimes poll around 1000 people and then take that as an average for the whole country. It's the same thing here. It's not an exact science and it is just a poll. It's not for TPTB, it's not being sent anywhere. It's for the online fandom to see.

auralan
August 29th, 2004, 09:58 AM
If you have a Govt poll over here, they sometimes poll around 1000 people and then take that as an average for the whole country. It's the same thing here.

Actually, no, it's not. Those thousand people are a carefully selected representative sample who take a poll designed by experts with carefully chosen language that attempts to avoid influencing the results. There are whole fields of study related to how to choose such samples, phrase questions, interpret results, and so forth to get truly representative data.

This is a self-selecting poll. Those are inherently statistically insignificant even if nobody cheats. All it tells you is how the people that responded to the poll answered the question asked. It can't be assumed to apply to a larger sample. You might want to study up a little on polling if you really want to capture the views of fandom accurately. It's a fascinating field and well worth the time. Although a little knowledge in the field will quickly make you realize most polls are bunk -- even the most carefully constructed ones done by experts. Getting polling language right and choosing a satistically representative sample is very, very hard.

LtLisa
August 30th, 2004, 07:08 AM
well, I voted <shrugs> but I agree with auralan. Theres also the issue of the online fandom vs everyone. I know a bunch of people offline (who for one reason or another don't participate in the online fandom). Four of my friends, my Dad and my brother watch. All but my Dad and one of my friends are shippers, and they just don't care (although they see the ship). None of them will vote online. I don't know any antishippers personally (offline). Its a good idea, but hard and maybe impossible to do. Maybe if it was on a neutral site like Gateworld where everyone had to sign in...but then people could cheat too.

ibwolf
August 30th, 2004, 07:43 AM
On the subject of 'poll security'. You expound a number of safe guards, mostly related to preventing 'proxies' etc.

But that has its own drawbacks since two users behind the same proxy will not both be able to vote! This as as discriminatory as the alternative is exploitable. For example I share an internet connection at home with my brother. We are two individuals with differing opinions. Why should only one of us get to vote?

I don't want to bash the poll, internet polls are always fun. But they are not especially reliable. Probably the best you could do was to restrict it to registered users (such as here at gateworld) with a mininum number of posts (around 50 should do). But that would then only reflect the opinion of people belonging to that particular web community. But then that is to some degree always going to be true since you will never reach the majority of SG fans.

Suz
September 6th, 2004, 09:14 AM
Reposted from the SDF Homepage.
Votes have been counted.

Shippers 47.72% Non Shippers 52.28%



Total of 1043 votes cast. 177 invalid votes. Leaving 966 cast over the 6 days the poll was online.


Invalid votes were either multiples (I.E: Multiple dial up connections, same building with PC's side by side, same time frame, same vote ), or public proxy's etc. Lot's more, but you get the picture. These were all triple checked by me, manually, and came from both sides of the debate. I will not give out percentages of invalid votes from both sides, as this serves no purpose.

This poll was fairly run and advertised. No poll can be 100% infallible, but this is as near as you can get it, at the present time.

These results simply state the percentages between what the shipper/non-shipper sections of the online fandom think. It does not represent the entire viewership of Stargate in general (I.E: Those without PC's, or those who don't care either way.) It represents the views of those Online Fans, who feel their enjoyment of the show is being spoilt, one way or the other.

Remember guys! No matter who has won the most votes, there are obviously a lot of people on both sides of the equation. Maybe we can all try and understand each others viewpoint, a little bit better. Disagree with someone's viewpoint by all means. But don't disagree with their right to have it.

If anyone has any ideas for the next SDF poll, then please forward them to the site.


Re the comments on the security of the poll and having more than one user in a house. There's no place you can do that, without opening it to abuse. So you have to weigh up a few people not being able to vote, against many people being able to vote 100's of times. As I've said many times before, and without picking out any one thing in particular. A lot of people have voted in other polls that have had no safeguards at all. Or in the latest awards, which were open to abuse by proxy's. Someone could have sat there and voted for themselves as many times as they liked, if they knew how to use proxy's. As far as I'm aware, no-one has complained or mentioned the vulnerability of that. The more secure I've tried to make this poll for everyone's benefit, the harder it has become to please. At some point you have to trust someone, to be able to do this fairly. Do not take the name of the site to mean that because I'm a Daniel fan, I couldn't possibly be a decent enough person, to do it fairly. Many non shipper votes were invalid, as well as shipper.

Lastly, there are no neutral sites. Every webmaster has his or her own personal preferences. It doesn't mean we're not capable of acting in a fair manner. I have not promoted it in any one side of the fandom, more heavily than the other.As I've said many times, there is as much Jack on SDF as there is Daniel. Actually more now, because the shanks subsite has moved to a place of it's own. Either way the result went, I expected a hue and cry, about the unfairness of it all. To say that it would have been fairer if it had been held here is insulting. As far as I can see, both sides are having the carrot dangled, only for it to be taken away at the last moment. None of the fans are to blame for this division.

Remember that this is just a poll about some fictional characters on a TV show. Not worth getting upset over.
Suzanna

morjana
September 6th, 2004, 10:24 AM
Reposted from the SDF Homepage.
Votes have been counted.

Shippers 47.72% Non Shippers 52.28%

Total of 1043 votes cast. 177 invalid votes. Leaving 966 cast over the 6 days the poll was online.

Hmmm...interesting.

The last time I checked the poll statistics at the site, the results were:

**** 9/5 at 11:22 pm

I'd rather chew my own arm off. 50.4%

Hell yes, they belong together. 49.6%

Total votes: 1079 ****

First ..if you substract 177 invalid votes from 1079 = that leaves 902 valid votes. Where did you come up with the 966 number?

Second...are you claiming that ALL the invalid votes came from the shippers?

I note that the shippers percent dropped from 49.6% to 47.72%, and the non-shippers vote went up from 50.4% to 52.28%.

Morjana

AgentX
September 6th, 2004, 10:39 AM
I'm going to venture a guess and say that there is a typo in the results. 1043-177= 866, but as you have indicated 1079 votes were registered as of last night, so perhaps the total vote count was 1143, not 1043 - because the totals can't go down before the removal of invalid voting (1143-177 = 966). As for the discrepency between the 1079 and the 1143... I'm just guessing more people voted.

DarkQuee1
September 6th, 2004, 02:13 PM
While Auralan's post made it clear that very few polls--and probably *no* online ones--have great validity in general, there is no question that this poll specifically does not even remotely stand for what is claimed for it. It not only doesn't represent Stargate fandom in general, but it also doesn't even represent online fandom, many of whom had no idea the poll existed.

It was also compromised by several factors. Some examples: (1) the fact that different people who live in the same household or who work in the same office were denied the right to vote. If the only way you can allegedly protect the poll from cheating is to deny people the right to cast a vote, you should eliminate the poll right at that point. It no longer has any chance at validity (esp. as it does not stop people who can call friends and family to live/work elsewhere and ask them to vote for them from getting in multiple votes).

(2) People on aol were getting stopped from voting and told they had already voted. If they didn't happen to be in the right place at the right time to find out there was a way to get around this, they would have no reason to go back to try to vote.

(3) The site shut while the server was moved. Anyone who didn't know it had re-opened would have no reason to come back.

(4) The site owner apparently indicating that she did not permit votes by "public proxy's". Now, I'm not positive what she means by this, but I took this to mean public computers like those found in a library. However, for many, this may be their only way to get onto the Internet.

(5) The most serious factor: the removal of alleged duplicate votes by the owner. Obviously, the poll set-up did not initially see any problem, since it accepted the votes. It then became a personal decision on the part of the site owner as to which votes to eliminate. We are all human, we all have biases and there is no way to convince people that those biases did not come into play in the decision.

Especially as:
(a) It would appear that virtually all of the claimed suspicious votes were taken from the ship side, since the anti-ship vote made such a large jump--2 percent--and the ship side made an equally large drop. If the split had been even, the percentages would not have changed.

(b) The owner will not specifiy the alleged invalid votes or even the percentages.


I'm afraid that any poll that presumes to speak for even online fandom, must be, like Caesar's wife, above suspicion. *This* poll hardly qualifies.


J.

Jace021903
September 6th, 2004, 03:16 PM
I've voted in on-line polls for The Learning Channel and there are rules about one vote per household as well.


And the rules were the same for everyone for this one so my husband couldn't.

I don't think anyone is saying that it is representative of the entire fandom--actually Suzanna has been very careful to say that it isn't.

I think it is much more fair to run the poll like she did than those polls that let you vote as many time as possible--all that shows is who has the most time and frankly, I don't have that much. :D

The results ended up pretty close when you consider the sample size. There is not a poll in the world that doesn't have a margin of error.

Skydiver
September 6th, 2004, 05:57 PM
with almost 20% of the votes tossed out because they are suspicious (177 of just over 1000) that's enough of a margin to make the results 100% invalid.

let's say all those votes were ship, that'd be enough to swing it to a ship 'victory'...if just a percentage were ship, that'd still be enough to swng it closer, or enough to have it being a 'victory' for anti-ship

And there is also the fact that many folks were blocked from voting due to the isp issue, the poll was really nothing but a colossal waste of time and it proves nothing


ooh, and for the record, i'd say the same thing had the ship side 'won'

Jace021903
September 6th, 2004, 08:01 PM
...the poll was really nothing but a colossal waste of time and it proves nothing



I think it "proves" that a bunch of people like the ship and a bunch don't.

And I would say the same thing if the results were reserved. ;)

Bucky
September 6th, 2004, 08:34 PM
^^ Agreed, but as you imply, we already knew that a bunch of people like the S/J ship and a bunch don't. However, given the known bias of the site holding the poll against the S/J ship, it is interesting that the vote was so close despite the discrepancies.

Bucky

AgentX
September 6th, 2004, 08:48 PM
I don't know if the site's bias has that great an impact on the results. Granted people who go to that site will be more likely to vote against the relationship, but in this day of hyperlinking, all it takes is for one person to post a link to that site on a Pro relationship message board or whathaveya and the bias is relatively muted. I see it all the time with other divided fandoms.


the poll was really nothing but a colossal waste of time and it proves nothing

I could have told you that before the poll started, and I believe many here had the same opinion :)

Jace021903
September 6th, 2004, 09:30 PM
^^ Agreed, but as you imply, we already knew that a bunch of people like the S/J ship and a bunch don't. However, given the known bias of the site holding the poll against the S/J ship, it is interesting that the vote was so close despite the discrepancies.

Bucky



I think that the fact that the results were so close is interesting period. It show me that it was advertised to "shippy" sites as well as "not so shippy" sites.

Even if you toss all the disputed votes to the shipper side, the results are still close.

(This next part is to everyone)
Whatever your opinion on her methods, I think the owner of the site was trying to be fair.

What bothers me and the reason I posted in the first place is the implication from a few people that the results were somehow fixed.

There are polls on the internet all the time. I don't understand why some are taking it so seriously if it doesn't mean anything and it is a waste of time.

Anyway, those are my final thoughts on the subject.

Night all, :)

jex_piperUK
September 7th, 2004, 05:34 AM
I'm shocked...who'da thought more than half the fandom hated the ship. Thank god...i thought about 70% or something was brainwashed. :rolleyes:

keshou
September 7th, 2004, 06:27 AM
(This next part is to everyone)
Whatever your opinion on her methods, I think the owner of the site was trying to be fair.

What bothers me and the reason I posted in the first place is the implication from a few people that the results were somehow fixed.
Yes I believe the owner of the site was trying to be fair.

However, just about anyone in fandom who ran this poll, especially when you have the power to eliminate votes because of proxy's or multiple IP's, or whatever, would be suspect. Anyone who has an opinion on the matter is not going to be perceived by most on the other side as "unbiased". It's like giving George Bush or John Kerry's campaign manager the right to monitor the counting of the ballots in the upcoming election. They might be the fairest person since King Solomon, yet still be perceived as biased because they've got a horse in the race.


There are polls on the internet all the time. I don't understand why some are taking it so seriously if it doesn't mean anything and it is a waste of time.
Polls are fun. That's all. We all knew fandom was split on this issue and whether it's 60/40 or 30/70 or 50/50 doesn't change the strong feelings on the matter. The only thing that helps is actual dialogue on the issue and a willingness to compromise and well....lighten up.

The poll was kind of presented in a manner that made it sound more serious than I think might have been intended. Suz's original announcement of the poll:
Anyway, it's about time this was cleared up once and for all. I've set up a poll where you can vote either for or against. IP's will be logged and so don't bother trying to vote more than once, you won't be able to. Other safeguards are in place. Let's make this the real deal. Let's find out once and for all where the fandom stands.

This doesn't sound like a "let's all have fun with this" type of poll, it sounds like it's a "let's settle this once and for all". I think Susanna's intentions were good but it just kind of served to stir the pot again. Of course it doesn't take much to stir this particular pot. ;)



Anyway, those are my final thoughts on the subject.

And mine as well. :D

brihana25
September 7th, 2004, 03:19 PM
However, given the known bias of the site holding the poll against the S/J ship, it is interesting that the vote was so close despite the discrepancies.

This is the only part of my post that's in response to you, Bucky... I don't want you to think I'm going off on you specifically. It's just that I've got a few things to say, and I've got a question to ask you specifically.

What exactly is the known bias of SDF, other than liking Daniel? Jack's on that site too. So is Sam. So is Teal'c.

My site is the same way. I personally prefer Daniel, but his being my favorite character doesn't mean that I somehow hate the other three. I happen to adore all three of them. Just because I happen to adore Daniel a little bit more, does that mean that everything on my site should be perceived as having a "known bias"?

This is a sincere and honest question, because I truly don't get it.

Now...

I've got a couple of other things to say.

What follows is a rant of epic proportion, so here is the disclaimer in advance.
* I am not directing these comments at any specifc person.
* I am not slamming anyone - individual or group.
* I am using the word "you" in the generic universal tense.
* I am not intending to offend anyone - but if you do get offended by what I say, then I probably am talking about you without knowing it.

On to the post:

1. I agree that it's interesting that it was close.
2. If you think the invalid votes were something Suz made up to justify "rigging" the results, I'd suggest you go browse around a particular thread here on GW and see how many people were *bragging* about having cheated.
3. The invalid votes were *not* all from the J/Sp side. There were a few dozen votes removed on the second or third day as well, and IIRC, something around 1/3 of those were anti-J/S votes.

People cheated, on both sides, and they got busted. They bragged about doing it, and they got smacked. If it is a fact (which none of us knows for sure, so this is all conjecture) that there were more J/S votes eliminated than anti-J/S, then that would prove nothing other than the possibility that more J/S people submitted invalid votes than anti-J/S people did.

Am I saying that all J/S votes should be invalid? No.

Am I saying that all J/S voters are lousy, rotten, stinking, cheating liars? NO - so don't even go there with me.

I am saying, flat out, that people cheated. Convince me that those votes should stand. Seriously. Convince me that any poll that has had its results intentionally skewed one way or the other could even come to close to being judged as valid in any way.

Those of you that say the fact that the invalid votes were removed nullifies the results - would you have prefered that they be left? Would you have prefered to see results that were clearly and without a doubt skewed?

Would you rather have a close approximation of reality (which Suz worked her butt off to make this be) or a result that shows nothing except which side had more people with nothing better to do than vote a dozen times?

They cheated - both sides - they got caught, and they didn't get rewarded for it.

Why is this a problem?

People cheating is in no way, shape, or form Suz's fault. The fact that she removed the invalid votes is in no way indicative of a bias on her part.

What it proves is that there are people out there - on both sides - who are so dedicated to proving that they are "right" that they will go to any lengths to prove it. This was never about the truth to some people. This was about "how many ways can we find around this so we can win?" <- and *that* is the problem.

Had no one cheated, no votes would have been removed. Plain and simple. Placing the blame for other people's misbehavior on the person that caught them doing it is irresponsible.

If you want to gripe about the invalid votes that got removed, then gripe at the people who put them there.

If you think that the votes should have been allowed to stay despite their invalidity, then you have no interest in fairness.

If you think any of this is the fault of anyone other than the people who did it, then you have no concept of accountability.

Brandie
September 7th, 2004, 03:24 PM
<snip>

What exactly is the known bias of SDF, other than liking Daniel? Jack's on that site too. So is Sam. So is Teal'c.

My site is the same way. I personally prefer Daniel, but his being my favorite character doesn't mean that I somehow hate the other three. I happen to adore all three of them. Just because I happen to adore Daniel a little bit more, does that mean that everything on my site should be perceived as having a "known bias"?

<snip>


I do believe the "known bias" on SDF is that they are extremely anti-S/J. Very extreme. Like a good portion of the people on that site have threatened letters and to quit watching the show if any S/J ship is acted upon.

Buc252
September 7th, 2004, 06:30 PM
1. I agree that it's interesting that it was close.
2. If you think the invalid votes were something Suz made up to justify "rigging" the results, I'd suggest you go browse around a particular thread here on GW and see how many people were *bragging* about having cheated.
3. The invalid votes were *not* all from the J/Sp side. There were a few dozen votes removed on the second or third day as well, and IIRC, something around 1/3 of those were anti-J/S votes.

People cheated, on both sides, and they got busted. They bragged about doing it, and they got smacked. If it is a fact (which none of us knows for sure, so this is all conjecture) that there were more J/S votes eliminated than anti-J/S, then that would prove nothing other than the possibility that more J/S people submitted invalid votes than anti-J/S people did.

Am I saying that all J/S votes should be invalid? No.

Am I saying that all J/S voters are lousy, rotten, stinking, cheating liars? NO - so don't even go there with me.

I am saying, flat out, that people cheated. Convince me that those votes should stand. Seriously. Convince me that any poll that has had its results intentionally skewed one way or the other could even come to close to being judged as valid in any way.

Those of you that say the fact that the invalid votes were removed nullifies the results - would you have prefered that they be left? Would you have prefered to see results that were clearly and without a doubt skewed?

Would you rather have a close approximation of reality (which Suz worked her butt off to make this be) or a result that shows nothing except which side had more people with nothing better to do than vote a dozen times?

They cheated - both sides - they got caught, and they didn't get rewarded for it.

Why is this a problem?

People cheating is in no way, shape, or form Suz's fault. The fact that she removed the invalid votes is in no way indicative of a bias on her part.

What it proves is that there are people out there - on both sides - who are so dedicated to proving that they are "right" that they will go to any lengths to prove it. This was never about the truth to some people. This was about "how many ways can we find around this so we can win?" <- and *that* is the problem.

Had no one cheated, no votes would have been removed. Plain and simple. Placing the blame for other people's misbehavior on the person that caught them doing it is irresponsible.

If you want to gripe about the invalid votes that got removed, then gripe at the people who put them there.

If you think that the votes should have been allowed to stay despite their invalidity, then you have no interest in fairness.

If you think any of this is the fault of anyone other than the people who did it, then you have no concept of accountability.

My only dispute is that it's very likely that some of the votes that were discounted *weren't* truly invalid. Two or more college students sitting next to each other, both voting, got invalidated because the ISP's were close. Six different people voting at the same internet cafe PC got invalidated because it came from the same ISP. People whose online service juggles ISP's and *happened* to be on using one that somebody else who'd already voted on got their votes invalidated. Some people - AOL members in particular - often couldn't get on to vote at all.

This is not the fault of any of those fans who voted. They didn't brag they cheated, they just tried to make their vote count. Those who cheated deserve to have their votes discounted. What if all but one of the people who vote in the presidential election in Florida were eliminated because their addresses were close to another person's who'd already voted.

Your post doesn't address these voters' situation, and it seems like there were a lot of them. Personally, I'd like to see the results with all the votes, including the ones declared invalid by human judgment, unless it's very obviously a cheat. (By obvious, I mean 30 votes from one ISP.) It wouldn't change anything in the grander scheme of things, but it would be interesting. But my understanding is that these figures will not be released by the pollster.

Skydiver
September 7th, 2004, 07:01 PM
I could have told you that before the poll started, and I believe many here had the same opinion :)


yep, which is why i didn't bother voting. In the end, it wasn't gonna matter so why waste my time

Skydiver
September 7th, 2004, 07:07 PM
I think that the fact that the results were so close is interesting period. It show me that it was advertised to "shippy" sites as well as "not so shippy" sites.


Actually, to the best of my knowledge, the only advertisement on 'shippy' sites was when folks like morjana forwarded the announcements.




(This next part is to everyone)
Whatever your opinion on her methods, I think the owner of the site was trying to be fair.


I'm sure she was


the crux of the 'issue' does still come down to one little thing, anything and everything like this will perpetually be seen as a competition and a 'we must win' level of commitment. There's not much acceptance in other views but a 'i gotta prove that *I* am right'

Whatever will folks do with their time when STargate ends and there is no longer things like this to argue about????

Madeleine
September 7th, 2004, 07:18 PM
Actually, to the best of my knowledge, the only advertisement on 'shippy' sites was when folks like morjana forwarded the announcements.

Suzanna turned up here in the S/J thread and the anti-S/J thread to post the details of the poll. I don't know about other sites.



the crux of the 'issue' does still come down to one little thing, anything and everything like this will perpetually be seen as a competition and a 'we must win' level of commitment. There's not much acceptance in other views but a 'i gotta prove that *I* am right'

Yup. Which is why it's a jolly nice thing that the result was virtually a draw :)

Jace021903
September 7th, 2004, 08:18 PM
I do believe the "known bias" on SDF is that they are extremely anti-S/J. Very extreme. Like a good portion of the people on that site have threatened letters and to quit watching the show if any S/J ship is acted upon.


Are you sure you are thinking of the right site?

I thought Stargate Daniel Friendly (SDF) was the place with transcripts and pictures of the show.

Tok'Ra Hostess
September 8th, 2004, 11:05 AM
**Apparently a poll was held a while ago, by TPTB, to let them know how many people were ....

Is it possible that the PTB simply took a look at various sites/conventions as well as the fan mail and based their decision on opinions expressed in these?

If that's the case, then perhaps they weren't lying, but PW simply used the wrong term. Perhaps census would have been a better choice of word than poll.


Pete Woeste said it in the Grace commentary:


PW: Showdown time. An interesting thing was attempted here. The shippers and many others, were interested in this relationship that's developed over the years, between Carter and O'Neill. They've sort of developed into two different camps. There's two main camps and they're saying, 'We'd like to see that relationship develop romantically.' The other camp says, 'No, it's a relationship that should remain professional and without a professional relationship, you can't have a show like Stargate.So it was decided to basically put this out to public opinion on the net and to see how people would like this particular scene to resolve itself. Do you want to see them kiss or not? What we actually did is we shot two different versions of this scene, giving the outcome of that poll.But what results here, is a little different from what was anticipated. Instead of having two different versions, we ended up with this singular version. I think it's addressed very interestingly. I'm not gonna give it away right now, cos it's about to happen, but it was a very much talked about event.