User:MisterPepe/Polls are evil

Polls are evil. Don't vote on everything, and if you can help it, don't vote on anything.

Or, rather, polling isn't evil in itself, but when you try to distill an essay's worth of thought into a single phrase, that's the sort of oversimplified, divisive statement that happens. A bit like trying to distill an essay's worth of thought into a single "yea" or "nay".

Polling discourages consensus

Having the option of settling a dispute by taking a poll, instead of the careful consideration, dissection and eventual synthesis of each side's arguments, actually undermines the progress in dispute resolution that Wiki has allowed. Wikipedia is not a democracy. This is a strength, not a failing. Dialectics is one of the most important things that make Wiki special, and while taking a poll is very often a lot easier than helping each other find a mutually agreeable position, it's almost never better.

Polling encourages the community to remain divided by avoiding that discourse; participants don't interact with the other voters, but merely choose camps. Establishing consensus requires expressing that opinion in terms other than a choice between discrete option and expanding the reasoning behind it, addressing the points that others have left, until all come to a mutually agreeable solution. No one can address objections that aren't stated, points that aren't made.

Yes, establishing consensus is a lot harder than taking a poll. So are most things worth doing.

Polling encourages groupthink

Seeing a list of participants in a poll encourages people to add their names. It's easy to just add your name, especially if one side is clearly "winning". Polling factionalizes users who might not even have been that strongly opposed—or that strongly in agreement. Discussion toward consensus requires participants to state their reasoning, and to read and understand the reasoning of others, to see where the situation is headed; polls give a falsely simplified picture. Not to mention that it's difficult to place yourself on the opposite side of users you respect, or on the same side as users you don't.

When the vote is strongly unbalanced, those on the "losing" side feel marginalized, and those on the "winning" side will sometimes feel as though the results of the poll give them license to do as they wish without taking into account the views of the minority, though nothing has been resolved.

Polling isn't fair, either

• mathematics of voting: all systems are broken. see voting system.
• bringing in outsiders -- who is the community?
• what segment of the community participates? (also, do only those who believe in voting vote?)
• when do polls end?
• who frames the questions?

Polls are misleading and encourage confusion

As stated above, polling isn't in itself evil. Polls can be useful for a quick gauge of opinion. The problem is that people take the results of a poll as a mandate to do something based on the numbers that turn out—which it is not. It is explicitly stated that Wikipedia is not a democracy—the saying that "what is right is not always popular, and what is popular is not always right" applies.

Yet the existence of polls often implies to editors—particularly new ones—that the result of the vote is what matters, which is why processes such as Wikipedia:Votes for deletion are so prone to abuse by sockpuppets. The belief that the result of the poll, and not the commentary that springs from it, is going to decide the fate of the work, is what leads to polls that develop into more and more complex beasts, holding every possible option, leading to no longer two opposing camps but a dozen and pages that look like nothing but a mess to anyone who hasn't been embroiled in the debate. Voters feel misled at the end of a poll if the numerically superior option is not the one acted upon. "But it won the poll!" they claim, and not realizing that a poll is no substitute for consensus, are understandably upset, feeling that their voices have not been heard.

Examples

• [[:sv:Wikipedia:Vad ska vara med?|"What should be included?" on Swedish Wikipedia]] - This page was used to vote on what should be included on Swedish Wikipedia, including books, movies, people, schools etc. It is today regarded obsolete and hated by many.

See also

• VotingIsEvil (Meatball)
• ArrowsTheorem (Meatball)
• Wikipedia:Wikipedia is not about votes and polls! Vote against polls today!

Are polls evil? (8/5/1/1/3+2i ends 25:97, 14 Grune, 17th year of the Century of the Fruitbat)

Support

1. Fennec 01:57, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
2. Yes, and they are prone to sockpuppet abuse. Raul654 02:12, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
3. I agree. Someone else 02:12, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
4. Me too. Nobody 02:12, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
5. I second the above. Anon 02:12, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
6. Well, deliberately mean, at the least. ✏ Sverdrup 02:57, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
7. Polls are evil. Administrative power should be in the hands of the few. Give them an inch and they take a mile, I'm afraid. Before we know it Wikipedia will be full of the Reds. We need to take action now to stop that happening. - Mark Ryan 03:13, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
8. Wait, if we all support polls being evil, does that mean they're gonna stay that way? -Etaoin 20:03, 1 Jul 2004 (UTC)
9. Yes! (see how this doesn't contribute to the discussion!) Nsh 04:47, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
10. I don't have a login, so this proves how all supporters are trolls! 131.211.50.218 16:12, 21 Apr 2005 (UTC)
11. ABCD 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
12. 127.0.0.1 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
13. Oh yes. Oh yes indeed. Filiocht 15:19, 26 Apr 2005 (UTC)
14. At least overused... /Habj 02:03, 12 July 2005 (UTC)
15. Yes -- Dominus 19:08, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
16. Yes... but are we not contributing to a sort of poll right now?? 213.187.48.149 14:03, 21 July 2005 (UTC)
17. Yes (and I hope this is not a poll) AnyFile 17:57, 26 August 2005 (UTC)
18. Ucucha 14:16, 16 September 2005 (UTC) And this poll too!
19. Duh. Matt Yeager 23:21, 12 October 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Keep. He is my Prophet. He will save the world. - Brisby
2. Polls serve an important function. Without polls, we'd never know where a discussion is going and it would keep going in all directions. Ofcourse sockpuppet abuse needs to be dealt with. --Hemanshu 15:22, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
3. Yeah, they're abusable. Yeah, they're not perfect. Yeah, they're NECESSARY. -blankfaze (too lazy to log in to meta)
   • So could they be a necessary evil, perhaps? - Fennec 02:30, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
4. Polls are necessary, and can keep the discussion to a manageable level. Arj 20:49, 30 Jun 2004 (UTC)
5. Polls poll. --Ben Brockert < 01:59, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
6. 32K talk pages are evil. Neutrality 03:11, 28 Dec 2004 (UTC)
7. I agree with Neutrality, and when is a full page of discussion no body knows whats going on so far. Get It 03:57, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC)
8. No! (see how without a rationale, a vote one way is just as good as a vote the other, and with a rationale a dialectic process can occur!) Nsh 04:47, 13 Mar 2005 (UTC)
9. Polls are beautiful, but not binding. 216.160.223.49 21:28, 14 Mar 2005 (UTC)
10. ABCD 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
11. 127.0.0.1 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
12. Oh No. Oh No indeed. I have proof of this. Polls unique disadvantage is that they are not ment for stupid ones...And we have a lot of stupids around... :-) 146.124.141.250 07:26, 9 May 2005 (UTC)
13. Why polls are so popular: Polls allow people who don't have an informed opinion or who cannot articulate a rational position to pretend like they are contributing to the discussion. Polls are inclusive, man, and that's what it's all about. Right? --63.18.144.208 15:39, 11 May 2005 (UTC)
14. Yes -- Dominus 19:08, 20 July 2005 (UTC)
15. User:Cantus
16. Maybe you'd be evil too if your country was always getting partitioned.
17. Polls are not evil. Denelson83 20:58, 30 August 2005 (UTC)
18. Consensus by definiton is the majority and the majority is the way in which a democracy works.--137.195.101.92 05:14, 31 August 2005 (UTC)
19. Polls are not perfect but necessary at least as last option. Some people dont get that there ıs a Consensus without seeıng a number. Polls can be dangerous for small wikis because of lack of statistical data. If 5 people can change the look, polls could harm the wiki. So kinda evil but sometimes only solution. --Dbl2010^talk 01:11, 13 October 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

• Polls are chaotic neutral. -- Cyrius 02:59, 28 Jun 2004 (UTC)
  • Best Comment Ever. -24.195.1.189 21:58, 4 August 2005 (UTC)
• Maybe! (see how sometimes people are in the middle, but they can still help the people at the extremes of the dispute come towards the middle ground!)
• ABCD 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• 127.0.0.1 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• Voting on whether voting is evil. Is that ironic? Post-modern? Both? Neither? - Vote now! 193.60.78.118 13:07, 3 August 2005 (UTC)

Ballot-stuffing

• Vote early. Vote often. - Brisby
• We are the GNAA. You will be crapflooded. Resistance is futile. Luigi30 20:16, 8 Jan 2005 (UTC)
• ABCD 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• 127.0.0.1 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Other

I can't decide, so please add to the following. -- Grunt 01:59, 2004 Jun 28 (UTC)

What should Grunt vote for?

Support

1. 24.91.125.90 20:38, 6 Mar 2005 (UTC)
2. ABCD 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
3. 127.0.0.1 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Oppose

1. Vote oppose, Grunt! 146.124.141.250 07:31, 9 May 2005 (UTC)

Neutral

1. Get It 03:58, 13 Feb 2005 (UTC) Don't vote :) Polls are evil!
2. ABCD 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
3. 127.0.0.1 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Other

• Yes, you should vote for Other! (Or was this spot for Other stuff about your voting?) - Fennec 02:15, 29 Jun 2004 (UTC)
• Polls are evil, so Grunt should not vote. No, not even declare neutrality. See [[Association of Apathetic Wikipedians]]. -- Paddu 03:35, 5 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• ABCD 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• 127.0.0.1 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)

Help!

I can't decide who to tell Grunt to vote for. Vote on who I should vote to tell Grunt to vote for below. Aquillion 02:25, 31 August 2005 (UTC)

What should Aquillion tell Grunt to vote for?

Support

1. Boivie 15:04, 24 October 2005 (UTC). Obviously Aquillion should tell Grunt to support that Polls are evil. And explain to him the benefits of joining the quest against polls.
2. Boivie 15:06, 24 October 2005 (UTC). I vote once more, to make sure Aquillion do the right thing.
3. Biovio 14:27, 26 October 2005 (UTC). I try signing with another name this time, to see if this could convince Aquillion to move Grunt towards the right direction. /Boivie

Oppose

Neutral

No opinion

Blockinblox but your pronouns are in the wrong case

Oppose the neutral supporters

• 24.26.93.10 03:33, 23 Mar 2005 (UTC)
• ABCD 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• 127.0.0.1 01:13, 22 Apr 2005 (UTC)
• "I hate these filthy neutrals, Kif! With enemies, you know where they stand, but with neutrals—who knows. It sickens me." Zapp Brannigan 15:38, 24 August 2005 (UTC)

Commentary

Personal attack on pollsters

• Grunt, you're a wishy-washy grunt, and you probably display your epidermis in public!
  • You insensitive clod, you have no right to make a fool of yourself! I move that you be banned immediately!
    • Done! Mwuahahahhaha!
      • No fair! I'm gonna complain on the mailing list!