Concertina Networking

[JimLucas]

I was curious about "polls", and wondering why others weren't starting them, so I thought I'd experiment. The option doesn't seem to be available in the Test forum, so I decided to choose what I hope is a serious question, and I hope I'll get serious responses.

 

It looks like I have the option to allow responders to only select an answer, but I'm leaving it open for you to post comments along with your "votes". But please don't just suggest other questions that I *could* have asked. After all, *you* can start a poll, too.

 

I guess one thing I'll find out shortly whether I can also "vote" in my own poll.

[JimLucas]

OK, I'm adding my selection in the poll. Now it looks like I get to add a comment. Good.

 

I can further explain (if anybody else reads this) that what I had in mind when I said "players you know personally" was those you've had more contact with than a single, brief meeting. (I think a single, extended conversation might qualify, or multiple brief encounters, as.) And in particular, I'd prefer that you not count people you've "met" only on the internet.

 

Of course, a proper "poll" in my opinion should consist of several questions, so I could further ask you to provide separate counts for 1) those you haven't met face to face but have had conversations with via the internet, and 2) those you feel you know from their internet presence, even though they might not know who you are.

 

The possibilities are indeed endless.

[Richard Morse]

Interesting results though when I added my "vote" under the tabulation was

 

"you have already voted in this poll"

 

This is confusing. This was the first time I voted, so why should I get that notice? Did it mean that my vote wasn't counted? It should have said something like "Thank you for your vote" or Your vote has been included in the above results" .

[Sandy Winters]

Oh No!! How do I/you define concertina?? Here in the upper midwest USA I personally know many concertina players, at least that's what they call themselves. But they are all playing Chemnitzers. I'm assuming they don't count :-)

[JimLucas]

What? You mean they're all like Clever Hans?

 

Actually, I did think of that, and decided to see what the general populace would do/say about it.In one respect, I think they certainly should count. Those things *are* concertinas in my book. And if you play anglo, you can probably learn a lot of things from them that would be meaningless to someone who plays an English or duet.

 

But that's why it would be more useful to have a "questionnaire" than a single-response "poll". The multiple questions could then include things like:

1) How well do you play English concertina?

2) How well do you play anglo concertina?

... Etc. It's necessary to ask separately for each different kind, since some folks play more than one, and I don't think the polling mechanism allows multiple answeers to a single question.

x+1) How many other people do you know who play English concertina?

x+2) How many other people do you know who play anglo?

... Etc.

y+1) How many concertinas do you own?

y+2) How many different kinds (as listed in the above questions) of concertina do you own?

... Etc.

z+1) How many people do you know who own more than one concertina?

z+1) How many people do you know who own more than one kind of concertina?

... Etc., etc.

 

I suppose I could create a separate forum, containing a separate poll for each of those questions. Maybe someday I will. Or maybe somebody else will beat me to it. But I can imagine that it could be a pain for a responder to navigate through all those questions.

[Joyce]

Interesting results though when I added my "vote" under the tabulation was

 

"you have already voted in this poll"

 

This is confusing. This was the first time I voted, so why should I get that notice? Did it mean that my vote wasn't counted? It should have said something like "Thank you for your vote" or Your vote has been included in the above results" .

When I voted I got a screen thanking me for my vote, and saying it would be added to the results. Maybe Richard's computer is so fast he missed the screen?

 

Joyce

[RoyJanik]

My answer would have been zero if this poll were taking a month ago. But thanks to the Noel Hill class, it's now 13+.

[David Barnert]

It won't let me vote. First I read all the posts. Then I went back to the top of the page and clicked the "View Results (Null Vote)" button. Below the data bars, it said "You have already voted in this poll." I hit my browser's "Back" button and attempted to vote (13+) but I got an error screen that included this message:

 

> The error returned was:

>

> You have already voted in this poll

[Michael Reid]

It won't let me vote. First I read all the posts. Then I went back to the top of the page and clicked the "View Results (Null Vote)" button. Below the data bars, it said "You have already voted in this poll."

That's what "null vote" means -- if you click that button, you're essentially abstaining.

 

Evidently this is by design: If you peek at the results first, you forfeit your vote.

 

As I recall, this was made more-or-less clear in some additional wording that appeared on the same screen as the "View results (null vote)" button.

[Richard Morse]

It won't let me vote. First I read all the posts. Then I went back to the top of the page and clicked the "View Results (Null Vote)" button. Below the data bars, it said "You have already voted in this poll."

That's what "null vote" means -- if you click that button, you're essentially abstaining.

 

Evidently this is by design: If you peek at the results first, you forfeit your vote.

 

As I recall, this was made more-or-less clear in some additional wording that appeared on the same screen as the "View results (null vote)" button.

This sounds like what happened to me. I don't remember anything explaining that I would forfeit my vote by looking at the results first however, so either I spaced on that information or it was not clear. Of course there doesn't seem to be any way for me to look at that information now that I've already "voted", yet in reality I hadn't.

 

Poor poll design.... The instructions and results of intended actions should have been made clearer. Maybe Paul can improve things there? It's too bad that people like David and I are effectively kept for adding our experiences to the poll.

[Tom Cowell]

This sounds like what happened to me. I don't remember anything explaining that I would forfeit my vote by looking at the results first however, so either I spaced on that information or it was not clear. Of course there doesn't seem to be any way for me to look at that information now that I've already "voted", yet in reality I hadn't.

 

Don't worry Richard - your lost vote will be cancelled by my lost vote in the "zero or less" category.

 

Having fallen into this trap, I also find that I can't go and look at the poll results a SECOND TIME! (because I have "already voted").

 

On topic: I know a melodeon player, and my brother had a toy harmonica when we were children. Also, my grandmother has an old harmonium that my father and uncle renovated (or "renovated") when they were children.

 

But I'm the only concertina player I know.

[JimLucas]

Michael: As I recall, this was made more-or-less clear in some additional wording that appeared on the same screen as the "View results (null vote)" button.

 

Rich: I don't remember anything explaining that I would forfeit my vote by looking at the results first however, so either I spaced on that information or it was not clear.

 

JIM: I also don't recall seeing anything of the sort. But I didn't try to view the results first, since I had just created the poll and knew there was nothing to view.

 

Now I can see the results above all the posts on this topic. Is that not visible to those who haven't voted, yet?

 

So we know we're missing at least two entries in the 13-or-more category. (For Rich I should have 100-or-more )

[David Barnert]

Now I can see the results above all the posts on this topic. Is that not visible to those who haven't voted, yet?

Nope. I think he only clue that the vote is forfeit is the words "null vote" on the buttonthat lets you view the results.

[Tom Rhoads]

Like Roy, I know a lot more concertina players now that I've attended one of Noel Hill's classes. Outside of the folks I met there, I can only think of 6. Of these, 3 play English system and 1 plays MacCann duet. And the two who play Anglo, I've never heard them actually play, merely know them from other contexts. And one of them I haven't seen in a few years... for all I know he may have given up playing.

 

regards, Tom

[allan atlas]

GOOD FOLKS: and while we're talking about polls and surveys. . . . .please don't forget the one on the CSFRI website: http://web.gc.cuny.edu/freereed and scroll down to the "Survey" button............the more responses we get, the more meaningful will be the results..............many thanks..........Allan

[JimLucas]

Well, we're up to 55 responses (57, if you count the two who have said they were prevented from responding), and the general picture so far is that we concertina players -- at least those reading and responding to Concertina.net -- are pretty well connected, though there are a few who don't personally know any other concertina players.

 

And there is the assumption that those responding -- and in fact participating in Concertina.net -- are also concertina players. Maybe we have 20 responders who don't play concertina at all, but know more than a dozen concertina players (and maybe that's why they hang out here?)? I doubt it, but the way the poll is set up, it *could* be the case.

[Tom Hall]

Alan -- I took the survey just prior to the great blackout. Is there any way to know if it got through?

[JimLucas]

When I enter this topic I see the results of the poll at the top, along with the message, "You have already voted in this poll". What do you see?

 

If you don't see that, try voting. If it lets you do so, you'll know it didn't register your earlier attempt.