Straw poll: do you like the lab? [UPDATED W. RESULT]

"

Turtledove wrote:

Second, you can easily create your own meaningless poll and word it however, your heart desires.

Do you realize, how stupid that would be ?

"

Fruz wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Second, you can easily create your own meaningless poll and word it however, your heart desires.

Do you realize, how stupid that would be ?

It would be meaningless, as I mentioned but if it made Mark feel better then it would be worth it.

Are you implying that him doing something that he considers meaningless would be make him feel better ?

That seems very unlikely.

I didn't say I was sad. I said it was sad. Sad that somebody could be proud of making a flawed thing look better because they made something even more flawed.

"

mark1030 wrote:

I didn't say I was sad. I said it was sad. Sad that somebody could be proud of making a flawed thing look better because they made something even more flawed.

Your projection of feelings on the OP are your own assumption made for literary convenience. The fact is that the thread/poll obviously made him feel better so it was worth it. I agree that the original poll was better worded and presented in a more even handed way. On the other hand they are both straw polls and it has been proven that quantitative conclusions are not really useful for this model of straw poll. This leads me to conclude that the primary purpose being served by the straw polls is making people feel better by allowing them a voice for their opinion.

"

PleiadesBlackstar wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Here's an interesting thread that should shed some light on the issue of how the community generally feels about Labyrinth. Changes to the Labyrinth

It doesn't give any indication of things like ascendencies being removed at any point in the future though, just that the progression to Uber is more streamlined and tutorialized in a way. And it could be fairly unrelated to how people feel outside of feeling that normal and such were too long considering nobody need bother farm them versus Uber where forcing the area to take longer amount of time can be justified.

What I found more interesting about the thread was the player comments. Over one hundred new names were added to the list of players supporting the idea that the labyrinth should be fixed, that's an average of around two new names per page of the thread.

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

mark1030 wrote:

I didn't say I was sad. I said it was sad. Sad that somebody could be proud of making a flawed thing look better because they made something even more flawed.

Your projection of feelings on the OP are your own assumption made for literary convenience. The fact is that the thread/poll obviously made him feel better so it was worth it. I agree that the original poll was better worded and presented in a more even handed way. On the other hand they are both straw polls and it has been proven that quantitative conclusions are not really useful for this model of straw poll. This leads me to conclude that the primary purpose being served by the straw polls is making people feel better by allowing them a voice for their opinion.

I thought about the design of the poll. Naturally I wanted a objective poll. And I'm fairly certain I succeded at this. There's been this discourse of anti-lab rhetoric only limited to a few zealots, and this poll proved otherwise. So I stand by my statement that another poll could be made to identify the issues there are with the labyrinth. This will only benefit the game in the long run.

"

Saltygames wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

mark1030 wrote:

I didn't say I was sad. I said it was sad. Sad that somebody could be proud of making a flawed thing look better because they made something even more flawed.

Your projection of feelings on the OP are your own assumption made for literary convenience. The fact is that the thread/poll obviously made him feel better so it was worth it. I agree that the original poll was better worded and presented in a more even handed way. On the other hand they are both straw polls and it has been proven that quantitative conclusions are not really useful for this model of straw poll. This leads me to conclude that the primary purpose being served by the straw polls is making people feel better by allowing them a voice for their opinion.

I thought about the design of the poll. Naturally I wanted a objective poll. And I'm fairly certain I succeded at this. There's been this discourse of anti-lab rhetoric only limited to a few zealots, and this poll proved otherwise. So I stand by my statement that another poll could be made to identify the issues there are with the labyrinth. This will only benefit the game in the long run.

I agree that at least that much can be gleaned from the poll. A straw poll no matter how well designed is going to suffer from the fact that it's a straw poll. The only way we could get solid percentages for the different categories would be something like a poll built into PoE start up that asked the question that had to be answered before going into the game. I think the chance that GGG would do such a thing is 0%.

"

Turtledove wrote:

"

PleiadesBlackstar wrote:

"

Turtledove wrote:

Here's an interesting thread that should shed some light on the issue of how the community generally feels about Labyrinth. Changes to the Labyrinth

It doesn't give any indication of things like ascendencies being removed at any point in the future though, just that the progression to Uber is more streamlined and tutorialized in a way. And it could be fairly unrelated to how people feel outside of feeling that normal and such were too long considering nobody need bother farm them versus Uber where forcing the area to take longer amount of time can be justified.

What I found more interesting about the thread was the player comments. Over one hundred new names were added to the list of players supporting the idea that the labyrinth should be fixed, that's an average of around two new names per page of the thread.

Except that pretty much means nothing. I respect the way you have been collecting names the way you do but you are at like what 900 or something total? That is just barely passing a healthy sample size with 95% confidence level. And this assumes you are taking from an unbiased source. And as repeatedly mentioned. People are much more likely to voice complaints versus compliments. Those who don't mind the lab or like the lab in general have no real reason to hop on the forums and discuss it. We know for almost near certainty that forum population is nowhere near representative of the game population as a whole.

So to get a healthy representation you need to factor in a ton of things. Do we care about how old an account is? Do we care if they literally tried lab for the first time and failed/succeeded? If we wanted to get a true sample, we need to find what incentive and form a questionnaire would need to be in to entice a wide range of players to answer giving detailed information about their demographics to compare to their answers on how they feel about the lab including various aspects of the lab.

Without going into those more advanced details and making sure the sample size is large enough to represent the population of interest (all players, all players that are lvl x+? Needs to be defined), Signatures for a petition or poll results are absolute shit for figuring things out. It's basic research methodology and while your attempts are certainly more sound despite being unfit, the poll here is extremely worthless for the things I addressed in older posts.

Note: My math may be absolutely shit right now because I just woke up and feel really off and groggy so my quick calculations could be off pretty badly. But the problems I list cannot just be ignored. It is basic research methodology and the only way a questionnaire could actually be of any sound use to GGG.