You can login if you already have an account or register by clicking the button below.
Registering is free and all you need is a username and password. We never ask you for your e-mail.
People attempting to forum slide and disrupt this board in contravention of Q's call for unity through patriotism may be banned
What is Q related? Anything involving Trump. Politics, Fake news, Censorship, Pizzagate, lluminati, New World Order, Secret Societies, Mk-Ultra, False Flags, Q proofs, etc...
Also, corruption in the following areas...
Government, Entertainment industry, celebrities, charities, corporations, etc...
No Pornographic Material Allowed
Continually harassing users can get your post/comment removed and you possibly banned. Threats of violence against other users or their family members are not allowed on v/GreatAwakening
Those belong in the comment section. If you need help, you can ping a mod, or PM us.
Posts need to be Q related. Not for attacking other users.
GAM is the new place for all things drama/mods/other users pertaining to v/GreatAwakening.
No usernames imitating mods
Misc reasons
Voat Rules
Content violates spam guidelines
Content contains or links to content that is illegal
Content contains personal information that relates to a Voat users real world or online identity
I see no problem here as long the number is solely used for ranking the topics, as they did. The problem begins when "journalists" use these numbers without explanation. The "net satisfied" number is used to rank topics higher than they would do when just the satisfaction numbers count, in cases where many people are undecided.
Not only is the term "net satisfied" a total misrepresentation but the figure itself is no longer a fraction of 100 ie; "per cent" meaning per 100.
It's a trick of both language and mathematics producing a bogus result which is as you say - ripened fruit for journalistic misrepresentation - offered to them on a silver platter.
A ranking can be easily assigned (even using the same equation) if they so choose ... without describing it as a "net satisfaction" percentage - which it's not.
view the rest of the comments →
[–] verboten ago
I see no problem here as long the number is solely used for ranking the topics, as they did. The problem begins when "journalists" use these numbers without explanation. The "net satisfied" number is used to rank topics higher than they would do when just the satisfaction numbers count, in cases where many people are undecided.
[–] Flying_Gabriel99 [S] ago
Not only is the term "net satisfied" a total misrepresentation but the figure itself is no longer a fraction of 100 ie; "per cent" meaning per 100.
It's a trick of both language and mathematics producing a bogus result which is as you say - ripened fruit for journalistic misrepresentation - offered to them on a silver platter.
A ranking can be easily assigned (even using the same equation) if they so choose ... without describing it as a "net satisfaction" percentage - which it's not.