Get polled. It won't hurt a bit.
I've posted a poll in the sidebar. Go cast your vote. Let's see how it goes.
**UPDATE** I managed to mess up this first attempt at a poll by including someone who doesn't live in the district in the list. (DUH!) Consequently, I'm fixing that problem, which made it necessary to post a new poll, which means it's all starting from zero again. (Sorry about that.)
When I took the last poll down, Dennis Ahern had a commanding lead (200 and something votes) over second place Porter McNeil. I've also fixed a glitch that may have allowed some to vote more than once. That only works in Chicago. With people unable to game the system and vote repeatedly, it will be interesting to see if Ahern again piles up over 200 votes in a matter of hours when the average number of visits to the site in a 24 hour period is less than that.
So to those of you who had already voted, my apologies, but please vote again. And to those who hadn't, go vote.
I plan to post a similar poll with possible candidates for the 72nd District in the near future. (As well as others) So in the meantime, feel free to continue to suggest who should be included in that list. So far, we have Darrow and O'Brien, and of course, Vershoore.
posted by The Inside Dope @ 6/25/2005
9 comments
9 Comments:
Well, I can see I botched this first attempt at a poll. My apologies.
I wasn't aware that Darrow lived outside the district, so that's my error.
But I don't see the rationale of listing people who can't even run for the seat, no matter who they are.
At some time in the near future, I'll post a similar poll asking about potential candidates to challenge Pat Vershoore for the 72nd district.
I'm open to suggestions for potential candidates in that race.
None,
I have no control over the first name on the list being already filled in.
It would be that way no matter who appeared first on the list.
I trust that no one will just click to vote without first making sure that their guy's (or gal's) circle is filled.
Illinois one... you need to lighten up a bit... It seems obvious to me that None was having a little fun. Did you seriously think he was proposing that Jacobs hold two offices simultaneously?
Yikes!
And MS... please. Before you start pointing out that this isn't a "scientific poll", bear in mind that hopefully no one thinks it is.
(if they did, they'd be pretty damn stupid.)
Obviously, this poll doesn't have a representitive, completely random sample adjusted for demographics and party preference, etc. etc. etc.
It's just a poll that allows people who visit this site to vote once for who they prefer. Period. Not too complex. Take it for what it is. The results aren't going to be published in the newspaper or broadcast on the news.
If anything skews the vote, it will be those on the list contacting every live human being with a computer and grovelling for votes. It just shows who can go out and beg for votes the most effectively.
Another interesting tid-bit. Within perhaps 5 minutes of my posting the amended poll, Dennis Ahern already had 4 votes! They're out there laying in wait. ha!
And None... I take your point. It might be possible to accidently hit the vote button when trying to click the "view results" link.
But I'm thinking the incidents of that will be so small as to have little effect, if any. (and as I've said, I have no control over the way that works. Whomever was listed first would have that button filled in.)
Whoooah there little doggie. I have no idea, nor do you, if anyone voted multiple times. However, it is a bit hinky that Ahern amassed around 250 votes in a matter of hours when the average number of unique visitors to the site over a 24 hour period is less than that.
With the glitch fixed, this go-round should be an accurate reflection of one vote per person.
My advise to everyone? Vote. Sit back, relax, and we'll see what happens.
Hey, is that a list of dumbasses? Put Durbin on it.
Must be all those McNeil supporters in Australia, best as I can figure.
The poll was not supposed to allow multiple voting from one computer.
Has anyone been allowed to vote more than once?
If it appears that this poll has been hacked as well, I'll have to do some further research and testing and see if I can find a more secure poll program with no holes in it.
LL, you're letting your natural paranoia get out of hand. I don't know crap about who's posting here, and I certainly can't identify them.
That poll program is a single line of code that they provide and I paste into the code of my page. It's a java applet, so I don't get any "reports of IP addresses" or anything of the sort.
Here's the URL of the place I got the poll. Does it say anything about a "powerful program" that identifies voters? Put one up yourself and you'll see that it doesn't give you any info other than the same poll results everyone else can see.
http://www.blogpoll.com/index.php?action=build&step=1
You appear to present yourself as being knowledgeble about computer stuff, yet you didn't bother clicking on the "powered by blogpoll" link on the poll which would take you to the link above and you could actually figure out the truth?
Relax. Quit inventing stuff to scare people. It really sucks, especially when you don't know what you're talking about. What kind of boob makes a statement of fact when they're just taking a wild ass guess?
Based on that alone I can probably identify you, but I don't need an IP address to do it.
(But I do know where you live, where you work, how much money you have in the bank, all about that embarassing medical condition, and ... I know what you did last summer.) =insert scary music here=
Thanks LL... sorry if I came down on you a little harshly. But I don't want people getting it into their heads that I'm sitting here with my mysterious and powerful internet gizmos and tracking their identities.
And while it's possible for some tracking apps to log the IP addresses of people, that really doesn't mean a lot.
How identifiable is it if it shows that someone visited the site who was on Mediacom? Or AT&T? It's meaningless. There are so many millions of people on millions of ISPs that knowing which provider a visitor is using is like finding out someone visited the site from the midwest, say, or perhaps from Europe. Way too generalized to be of any use, and impossible to identify any individuals.
And why take the time it would take to try to monitor all that? Not worth it.
P.S. Yesterday the site showed a total of 299 unique vistors. (this means that it doesn't count the same person twice if they visit more than once.)
I'm sure the hell not going to bother looking to see which ISP they all use. It would be a waste of time and reveal nothing.
Post a Comment
<< Home