Virtual Kilt Check

[Tony]

When it's flatly stated in another thread elsewhere that 90% go regimental I think this poll can help in showing that that's a falllacy.

[Kornkob]

When it's flatly stated in another thread elsewhere that 90% go regimental I think this poll can help in showing that that's a falllacy.

It seems to me then that you've built a poll that doesn't directly test your hypothesis because 60% of the options could be interpreted as either 'people who go regimental' or 'people who do not go regimental' depending on the speaker's desired result.

Additionally, you've omitted counting those who refuse to answer, which would be a partial measurement of your amount of error.

[Tony]

It seems to me then that you've built a poll that doesn't directly test your hypothesis because 60% of the options could be interpreted as either 'people who go regimental' or 'people who do not go regimental' depending on the speaker's desired result.

Additionally, you've omitted counting those who refuse to answer, which would be a partial measurement of your amount of error.

If by "you" you mean xman, and not me.... :wink

Polls always omit those who refuse to answer by default. Putting in a "mind your own business" answer would defeat the purpose.

"Of people who deigned to click on an anonymous poll, x% said they wear undies all the time, y% wear em some of the time and z% never wear em.
It is unclear how many people looked at the poll but declined to voice an opinion, couldn't be bothered to click, thought the poll was in poor taste or otherwise were disinclined to vote"

[Kornkob]

Except it would appear there are people who would participate in the poll, if they were given an answer they were comfortable with.

It would not defeat the purpose, it would provide some sort of data as to how many chose not to answer definitively, instead of excluding them entirely. With only 31 respondents (at this time), 3 people expressing an answer outside the range offered isn't insignificant.

[xman]

Freudian slip?

Freudian intent.

When it's flatly stated in another thread elsewhere that 90% go regimental I think this poll can help in showing that that's a falllacy.

'Xactly

[Tony]

but you have to bear in mind the old Victorian adage

"All online polls are crap"

It makes not one whit of a difference whether you have a MTOB option or not. You still don't know how many people didn't click it.

[MacRobert's Reply]

Kilt wearers of the 17th and 18th Centuries wore underwear with the kilt. Today we call it a shirt! Back then such garments were longer than most of our modern shirts and covered all the bits!

[Tobus]

Back then such garments were longer than most of our modern shirts and covered all the bits!

I've also read (although I cannot attest to the veracity of the claim) that when working in the fields or doing other hard work, men would often remove their kilts or belted plaids, and knot their shirts/tunics between their legs. Myth? Maybe. But it would stand to reason.

[Geoff Withnell]

I normally don't answer this question. I think that statements like "If I wore something under it, then it would be a skirt!" are counterproductive. Wear whatever the #$%@^$ you want under it.

I'm not answering either.

Geoff Withnell

[MacKay71]

No comment as well!!!