goodbye AAWA--good luck (page 6)

Kallam

James: Cears is fairly good at identifying bad press when it's been pointed out to him several dozen times. You will probably see the "bird" pictures disappear shortly

Simon

There is much value to be found in surveys even if there is a serious flaw related to participation bias. Information that may at face-value appear flawed is very useful so long as it’s consistently collected at intervals. In the end this is where usefulness of Cedar’s survey is to be found.

Could you explain how exactly a seriously flawed inconsistent self-selecting biased survey provides value? Saying it has value does not make it so.

You claim that it does but immediate switch to talking about how the WTS may conduct them internally which seems completely irelevant to your point.

And the WTS does publish surveys publicly - information about memorial partakers, # of members in different parts of the world etc... That is more hard data that can be used.

Simon

Cedars is fairly good at identifying bad press when it's been pointed out to him several dozen times. You will probably see the "bird" pictures disappear shortly

They really need people who can see the obvious issues in advance, not in handsight.

Sadly, I think their response will be to try and control everything even more - no one will do anything until the board has discussed it.

james_woods

James: Cears is fairly good at identifying bad press when it's been pointed out to him several dozen times. You will probably see the "bird" pictures disappear shortly

Ironic. Once again, response to a contraversial AAWA issue is attributed solely to Cedars, when we were assured that Cedars was not the sole authority - rather that the board of AAWA decided everything.

We shall see if the picture is withdrawn - but isn't the guy who made it one of the AAWA board members?

I might note that Rick Fearon eventually withdrew the picture he posted of the mayor of some northeastern city (claiming some kind of JW connection about him).

Tylinbrando

JWsurvey and the surveys must have value in the most general sense. Like JWN, watchtowerdocument, JWFacts, Silentlambs, JWStruggle, Freeminds...all of them expose WT. All of them could be pigeon holed as having "no value" to a certain genre of viewer and many will dismiss them all as biased.

The fact remains, still many more review these sites in their efforts to research. The information presented in any context may help them to awaken to the TTATT.

Marvin Shilmer

-

Simon,

You entirely miss my point.

- I do not suggest Cedar’s survey offers a cross-sectional view of beliefs held among or agreed with by the community of Jehovah’s Witnesses.

- I do suggest that ANY survey that’s conducted consistently and at intervals will yield benchmarks that are useful, and Cedar's survey is no exception.

Folks should read what I’ve written and ask questions if they don’t understand.

“If I sit outside a Chrysler factory and ask people what the best car is what are they going to say? Any claims I subsequently make based on that about what factory-workers think the best car is will be seriously skewed.”

I don’t disagree with what you say above, but that does not mean the simple survey you depict is unuseful. If you don’t know WHY and HOW that simple survey would be useful then feel free to ask. I can tell you.

“Conducting meaningful surveys is incredibly difficult and a science.”

Wrong.

Conducting a meaningful surveys can be as simple as consistent collection of data at intervals.

The science is in how and what can be soundly extrapolated from that simple collection of data.

Marvin Shilmer

-

“However delusional or non-delusional, it is worthless as a scientifically sound survey because it is self-defeating in the collection of a true random sample.”

james_woods,

Whether Cedar’s survey represents something useful depends on two things: Was the data collected consistently in each instance and was it collected at consistent intervals.

Even bad information can provide for a useful survey if that information is collected consistently and at consistent intervals.

That you don’t understand this is evident.

Marvin Shilmer

-

“Could you explain how exactly a seriously flawed inconsistent self-selecting biased survey provides value? Saying it has value does not make it so.”

Simon,

Your question above represents a strawman.

I have not and do not suggest that any “inconsistent self-selecting biased survey” provides value.

Read what I’ve actually said, and ask questions of that if you wish. I have no need to respond to nonsensical strawman antics!

Marvin Shilmer

besty

marvin - give it a frigging break with the endless piffle.

Marvin Shilmer

-

“And the WTS does publish surveys publicly - information about memorial partakers, # of members in different parts of the world etc... That is more hard data that can be used.”

Simon,

The examples you offer above are not surveys; they are hard statistical collections.

Look it up.

Watchtower does conduct surveys. I’ve seen some. But to my knowledge it’s never once published one of them.

Marvin Shilmer

goodbye AAWA--good luck

Share this