What are these people on??
Tim Ward
They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for UKIP.
--
Tim Ward - posting as an individual unless otherwise clear
Brett Ward Ltd - www.brettward.co.uk
Cambridge Accommodation Notice Board - www.brettward.co.uk/canb
Cambridge City Councillor
Sapient Fridge
<t...@brettward.co.uk> writes
>http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>
>They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for UKIP.
Unfortunately they haven't tested it on firefox and the "Strongly Agree"
buttons wrap round and end up underneath the "Strongly Disagree" text.
If you don't spot that then your results will be way off!
--
sapient_...@spamsights.org ICQ #17887309 * Save the net *
Grok: http://spam.abuse.net http://www.cauce.org * nuke a spammer *
Find: http://www.samspade.org http://www.netdemon.net * today *
Kill: http://spamsites.org http://spews.org http://spamhaus.org
Chris Lamb
> http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>
> They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for UKIP.
Well, don't complain - it makes me a LibDem so it seems to
even things out. :).
Chris
Jules
> http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>
> They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for UKIP.
They tell me I should vote Green - hmm. At least they realise how much I
dislike Labour :-)
Stewart Brodie
I tried it a few times, each time giving answers which I thought would bias
the outcome towards a different party. I was quite surprised by the
readings it gave me: the Green party seemed to do well regardless of the
answers I gave :-/ When I tried the putting in the answers that I thought
corresponded to "a Conservative agenda", they came out 3rd favourite behind
UKIP and Greens (who won, by a distance). I can understand the UKIP/Tory
similarity, though.
It says: "The Green Party, which is of course strong on environmental
issues, takes a strong position on welfare issues, but was firmly against
the war in Iraq. Other key concerns are cannabis, where the party takes a
liberal line, and foxhunting, which unsurprisingly the Greens are firmly
against."
However, I said I agreed with the Iraq war, was neutral on cannabis,
strongly in favour of foxhunting and was neutral on welfare issues. Even
when I was strongly in favour of the Iraq war, anti-Europe, strongly wanted
to ban cannabis, and strongly in favour of fox hunting, they still won!
Only by a single point from UKIP though.
I finally managed to get the Greens to not be favourite by asking for a
police state (strongly agreeing with biometric ID cards & internment, wars
in Iraq etc.) Then the Tories came out on top, Labour just behind.
Of course, the site could just be logging the party choice at the bottom -
brings back memories of Sir H's predetermined opinion poll on the
reintroduction of conscription ... ;-)
--
Stewart Brodie
Paul Oldham
> http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>
> They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for UKIP.
<grin> And you're surprised by that?
I got pretty much the score I expected. Apparently I should vote for
your gang with Green a close second and although I achieved a negative
score for UKIP they still did better than Labour or the Conservatives.
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.miltonvillage.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"I presume you've tried curry, nipple stimulation, making love, long walks?"
Chris Brown
Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> wrote:
>http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>
>They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for UKIP.
Likewise, mine were:
Labour -22
Conservatives -11
Lib Dems 32
UKIP 12
Green 32
Not at all sure why it rated UKIP as positive when I was neutral on the EU
constitution, and answered 'agree' to joining the Euro.
Ian Cowley
> http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>
> They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for
> UKIP.
They want me to vote UKIP. I wonder if the site is biased towards UKIP and
the Greens? it's entirely possible that the website owners are biasing
answers that way to try to sway people into voting for who they (the
website) want them too. After all, if people are going to this website,
they're likely to be swaying voters who might take its advice....
www.how2vote.co.uk is a good one - it makes me come out as I expect, and
doesn't seem too biased. It's being updated with the party manifestos in
the next couple of days once they're all out.
--
Ian Cowley | Bishop's Stortford
email: ian@ | and
iancowley.co.uk | Cambridge
D.A. Galletly
>
>They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for UKIP.
Given that there are accusations flying around that this is an official
LibDem thing, I have to say I find that rather amusing ;-)
--
+ Diana Galletly <dag...@eng.cam.ac.uk> +
+ http://www.chiark.greenend.org.uk/~galletly/ +
D.A. Galletly
Paul Oldham <pa...@the-hug.org> wrote:
>I got pretty much the score I expected. Apparently I should vote for
>your gang with Green a close second and although I achieved a negative
>score for UKIP they still did better than Labour or the Conservatives.
Well, that's only because they don't actually *have* any policy on a lot
of the issues for you to disagree with, I believe ;-)
Rachel Coleman
>In message <3c5ji5F...@individual.net>, Tim Ward
><t...@brettward.co.uk> writes
>>http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>>
>>They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for UKIP.
>
>Unfortunately they haven't tested it on firefox and the "Strongly Agree"
>buttons wrap round and end up underneath the "Strongly Disagree" text.
>If you don't spot that then your results will be way off!
Worked fine on Firefox for me ...
Rachel
Kevin Bracey
Chris Brown <cpb...@ntlworld.no_uce_please.com> wrote:
Presumably it is treating UKIP's other policies seriously, so from its point
of view, UKIP's European policies are only a small part of their overall
platform. Evidently you (and I) agree somewhat with their other policies,
whatever they are. Maybe they're anti-Iraq?
Mine were:
Labour -16
Conservative -22
Lib Dem 40
UKIP 12
Green 7
Which surprised me - other similar tests I've done showed Green first, Lib
Dem second. But I think the questions here were rather limited - they were
clearly "headline" policies from the various parties, rather than more
general questions about political philosophy.
I think their scoring is seriously open to question. They should make their
policy rating numbers public. I can't see any reason to conceal them.
--
Kevin Bracey, Principal Software Engineer
Tematic Ltd Tel: +44 (0) 1223 503464
182-190 Newmarket Road Fax: +44 (0) 1728 727430
Cambridge, CB5 8HE, United Kingdom WWW: http://www.tematic.com/
Alan
news:3c5ji5F...@individual.net:
> http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>
> They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for
> UKIP.
>
I see what you mean - they recommend I vote Liberal Democrat!
--
Alan
SPAM BLOCK IN USE! Replace 'deadspam.com' with 'penguinclub.org.uk' to
reply in email.
Rachel Coleman
>http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>
>They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for UKIP.
They think I should vote LibDem, with Green second place, and I don't like
anyone else, which is fairly accurate. There's some interesting
information in their FAQ here:
http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/faq.html, and I found the sections on
"How were the questions selected?", "How does the scoring work?" and "What
are the parties' actual policies on these issues?" fairly interesting. If
it does nothing else but get people to actually compare the stated
policies, I consider that a good thing.
I think it is biased but not intentionally so: it is explicitly focusing
on issues where the parties can be separated. The blog of the person who
wrote it can be found here http://www.livejournal.com/users/hatmandu/ and
the Tue, Apr. 12th, 2005, 02:51 pm entry (currently third from top) has
some comments about its bias. In particular, they had the Green party
position the wrong way around on the Euro, so I suspect if I retook it,
the Greens would get a less positive result for me.
(Yes, they did, but everything else remained the same).
Rachel
Paul Oldham
> In article <osg1j2-...@clive.the-hug.org>,
> Paul Oldham <pa...@the-hug.org> wrote:
>
>>I got pretty much the score I expected. Apparently I should vote for
>>your gang with Green a close second and although I achieved a negative
>>score for UKIP they still did better than Labour or the Conservatives.
>
> Well, that's only because they don't actually *have* any policy on a lot
> of the issues for you to disagree with, I believe ;-)
Well quite. The problem with this sort of "scientific" choice of party
is that it doesn't take the underlying philsophy of the parties into
account. To me UKIP come over as a bunch of zenophobic bigots whose only
saving grace was dumping The Orange One. In reality I'm more likely to
vote Tory than UKIP.
--
Paul Oldham ----------> http://the-hug.org/paul
Milton villager ------> http://www.miltonvillage.org.uk/
and FAQ wiki owner ---> http://cam.misc.org.uk
"Experience is something you don't get until just after you need it"
Ashley Stevens
> Labour -22
> Conservatives -11
> Lib Dems 32
> UKIP 12
> Green 32
It appears that virtually whatever you say it says "Green". So I think
there may be just a little bias in there.
My result was similar to yours :
Labour -28
Conservative 7
Liberal Democrat 15
UK Independence Party 16
Green 54
Ashley
Bonzo
wrote:
>They want me to vote UKIP. I wonder if the site is biased towards UKIP and
>the Greens? it's entirely possible that the website owners are biasing
>answers that way to try to sway people into voting for who they (the
>website) want them too. After all, if people are going to this website,
>they're likely to be swaying voters who might take its advice....
>
The UKIP scores do seem out of line. I got +64 for LD (who I've never
voted for, but have considered), -45 for the Tories, fair enough, but
+6 for UKIP.
Ashley Stevens
> www.how2vote.co.uk is a good one - it makes me come out as I expect, and
> doesn't seem too biased. It's being updated with the party manifestos in
> the next couple of days once they're all out.
Yes, this came out as I expected, so it appears to be unbiased, unlike
the other one which comes out Green no matter what, it would appear.
Ashley
Jón Fairbairn
> On 14/04/05 09:50 D.A. Galletly wrote:
>
> > In article <osg1j2-...@clive.the-hug.org>,
> > Paul Oldham <pa...@the-hug.org> wrote:
> >
> >> I got pretty much the score I expected. Apparently I
> >> should vote for your gang with Green a close second and
> >> although I achieved a negative score for UKIP they still
> >> did better than Labour or the Conservatives.
> > Well, that's only because they don't actually *have* any
> > policy on a lot
> > of the issues for you to disagree with, I believe ;-)
>
> Well quite. The problem with this sort of "scientific"
> choice of party is that it doesn't take the underlying
> philsophy of the parties into account. To me UKIP come over
> as a bunch of zenophobic bigots
What have they got against Jupiter, then?
--
Jón Fairbairn Jon.Fa...@cl.cam.ac.uk
http://www.chaos.org.uk/~jf/Stuff-I-dont-want.html (updated 2005-02-09)
A Plagued Lighthouse Keeper
> http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>
> They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for UKIP.
Oh dear I ended up as +58 LD -42 Tory and completely neutral to Labour
or UKIP with a curious +19 for the Greens...
Paul Bullough
> Unfortunately they haven't tested it on firefox and the "Strongly Agree"
> buttons wrap round and end up underneath the "Strongly Disagree" text.
> If you don't spot that then your results will be way off!
You need to buy a bigger monitor.
Paul Bullough
> I tried it a few times, each time giving answers which I thought would bias
> the outcome towards a different party.
I tried to get a LibDem result by clicking "neutral" to everything.
It came out a Labour, with LibDem last!
Mike W Miller
I appear to be very strong Lib Dem (+84), or Green (+38), with slight
Labour (+11), UKIP (+6)(!), and don't like Conservative (-54) one bit.
Which, barring the positive marks for UKIP, seems pretty accurate[1],
given my distaste for some of the things the Labour party has been
doing lately.
Mike
[1] Though looking at the manifestos, in la-la-anyone-could-get-elected
land, the Greens are probably closer to me. There were specific
questions there relating to Lib Dem policy though, didn't catch
anything specifically Green-related.
Sapient Fridge
Coleman <rac...@lspace.org> writes
Ah, I see. The page fits the width of the browser and wraps when too
narrow! Works fine if I stretch the browser out.
Mike W Miller
Ian Cowley wrote:
> Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> burbled:
> > http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
> >
> > They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score
for
> > UKIP.
>
> They want me to vote UKIP. I wonder if the site is biased towards
UKIP and
> the Greens? it's entirely possible that the website owners are
biasing
> answers that way to try to sway people into voting for who they (the
> website) want them too. After all, if people are going to this
website,
> they're likely to be swaying voters who might take its advice....
>
> www.how2vote.co.uk is a good one - it makes me come out as I expect,
and
> doesn't seem too biased. It's being updated with the party
manifestos in
> the next couple of days once they're all out.
Hmm, reasonable, but needs an update - 'the minimum wage should be
raised to 4.20GBP an hour' ?!
Again it seems, unsurprisingly, I'm strongly Lib Dem. Anyone want to
remind me why I'm in the Labour Party? :-//
Mike
Mark Ayliffe
Sapient Fridge <use_repl...@example.com> illuminated us with:
> In message <slrnd5sbri...@chiark.greenend.org.uk>, Rachel
> Coleman <rac...@lspace.org> writes
>>In article <nxonNHXn...@example.com>, Sapient Fridge wrote:
>>>In message <3c5ji5F...@individual.net>, Tim Ward
>>><t...@brettward.co.uk> writes
>>>>http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>>>>
>>>>They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for UKIP.
>>>
>>>Unfortunately they haven't tested it on firefox and the "Strongly Agree"
>>>buttons wrap round and end up underneath the "Strongly Disagree" text.
>>>If you don't spot that then your results will be way off!
>>
>>Worked fine on Firefox for me ...
>
> Ah, I see. The page fits the width of the browser and wraps when too
> narrow! Works fine if I stretch the browser out.
Shrinking the text using CTRL-SCROLLUP works/can help too.
--
Mark
Real email address | "It has been said that the primary function of schools is
is mark at | to impart enough facts to make children stop asking
ayliffe dot org | questions. Some, with whom the schools do not succeed,
| become scientists." - Knut Schmidt-Nielson
Naich
> http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
This site is more useful:
Naich.
--
http://www.fuzzyblobs.com .......... My blurry pics.
http://www.maggenhoof.co.uk/thoday . Improving our new dump.
http://www.veggiefoodguide.co.uk ... Time for some nice food.
http://www.sodwork.com ............. Right. I've had enough.
Motto: Nuke Unborn Gay Whales For Jesus!
Jules
> Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> burbled:
>> http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>>
>> They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for
>> UKIP.
>
> They want me to vote UKIP. I wonder if the site is biased towards UKIP and
> the Greens?
Or it's biased toward Labour in a sneaky way by telling people *not* to
vote Conservative...
Sam Holloway
The 'whoshouldIvotefor' came out Green for me, too. As I'm probably the
least Green person of anyone I know, this was rather surprising.
However, I was quite neutral over many of the issues, and it occurs to
me: if the Greens have the fewest specific policies, neutral matches
will score most highly with them? Depends how it's all coded up.
Eagerly awaiting the 2005 version of how2vote.co.uk now!
Sam
Colin Rosenstiel
(D.A. Galletly) wrote:
> In article <3c5ji5F...@individual.net>,
> Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> wrote:
> >http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
> >
> >They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for
> >UKIP.
>
> Given that there are accusations flying around that this is an official
> LibDem thing, I have to say I find that rather amusing ;-)
Don't recognise any of the resources used so I rather doubt that.
--
Colin Rosenstiel
Mike W Miller
OIC :-/ This was the 2001 version still. I thought it felt somewhat
familiar.....
> Again it seems, unsurprisingly, I'm strongly Lib Dem. Anyone want to
> remind me why I'm in the Labour Party? :-//
Hmm. I suppose the rather large rise in the minimum wage is a
reason....
Mike
D.A. Galletly
Oh, I didn't say I *believed* the accusations.
<troll>
You mean it was actually pretty rather than a Prater Raines site?
Of course, not *all* LibDem websites are Prater Raines sites, thankfully.
</troll>
Michael Kilpatrick
> In article <3c5ji5F...@individual.net>,
> Tim Ward <t...@brettward.co.uk> wrote:
>
>>http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>>
>>They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for UKIP.
>
>
> Likewise, mine were:
>
> Labour -22
> Conservatives -11
> Lib Dems 32
> UKIP 12
> Green 32
>
> Not at all sure why it rated UKIP as positive when I was neutral on the EU
> constitution, and answered 'agree' to joining the Euro.
Mine were:
Lab -46
Con -43
LibDem 74
UKIP 2
Green 13
Which seems to be pretty conclusive.
Michael
w.g.s.hamm
"Tim Ward" <t...@brettward.co.uk> wrote in message
news:3c5ji5F...@individual.net...
> http://www.whoshouldyouvotefor.com/
>
> They think I prefer Tories to Labour, and give me a positive score for
UKIP.
I have done so for the last 25 years.
w.g.s.hamm
"Bonzo" <k...@birchanger.com> wrote in message
news:gsds51d1v97pr4hs8...@4ax.com...
In both tests I answered honestly and didn't try to sway results. In both
tests it says I should be voting lib/dem.
Perhaps people woulds get more accurate results if they answered honestly
and gave each question a little thought.
Andrew Nightingale
about -79 Cons with Lab about -12.
I then put in the opposite to my own views and got +84 Cons, -126 LD and
a single digit for Lab.
--
Andrew Nightingale of Cambridge (UK)
Gareth Moore
> Eagerly awaiting the 2005 version of how2vote.co.uk now!
Well, the 2005 version of how2vote is now online - and this time round
it has more fun statistics too! If that's not an oxymoron...
Gareth
LNR
It doesn't have an awful lot of questions, but it does seem to cover
most key policy areas if not in huge detail, and I do like the fact you
can indicate that a particular issue is more important to you and have
its weighting increased in the overall results.
--
elea...@chiark.greenend.org.uk http://lnr.livejournal.com/