Well ideally we'd have anticipated this and worked out some way of
centralising responses - but what I meant about push surveys is that
they're designed for pushing opinion to candidates, and hence they don't
really care about advertising the results.
If we were doing next time, do you think it'd be possible to make a
proper database of responses? We had some interest from various parties
in getting pledges recorded on YourNextMP (and it'd be really
interesting for accountability).
-t
On 16/04/10 18:36, Steven Clift wrote:
Sorry for the lack context ...
The ECF list has lots of e-advocacy folks in the UK on it.
One member's partner is running for parliament and he noted that they
have received some 250 candidate question surveys since the election
was called instead of before. So these are not push/pull surveys for
the public.
I've always been interested in what questions interest groups are
putting before candidates and how candidates are answering. Despite
the stronger party line approach in the UK, interest groups are
actually asking candidates one by one their views on a number of issues.
What good are all the questions and answers if hardly anyone sees them?
Steven Clift
http://stevenclift.com
@democracy
On Apr 16, 2010 12:26 PM, "Timothy Green" <[email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
Just to understand the psychology of it - do you look more favourably
on doing surveys which aren't push-polling, or do you feel it's not
worth the time to distinguish the two?
-t
On 16/04/10 17:16, Alexander Harrowell wrote:
>
> On Thursday 15 April 2010 18:52:48 Timothy Green...
_______________________________________________
Mailing list [email protected]
<mailto:[email protected]>
A...
_______________________________________________
Mailing list [email protected]
Archive, settings, or unsubscribe:
https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public
