Not Logged In Log In   Sign Up   Points Leaders
Follow Us    3:28 PM

Message Forum - Read Message

Category: Talk back to us! > Topics Add to favorite topics   Post new topicPost New Topic
Author Topic: Poll Results Discussion Back to Topics
jrsva

Champion Author
Virginia

Posts:13,451
Points:2,450,075
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Oct 5, 2009 11:38:00 PM

In a topic titled Suggest an Opinion Poll Question, a group of members work out the details of the weekly polls that appear here on GasBuddy. From time to time we have discussed various aspects of the results of past polls. Since that can get in the way of editing the next one, this new topic was created.

The idea is to be able to discuss any past poll, or a combination of past polls, with the idea of improving future polls. The focus here is on the construction of the polls and on their statistical significance or effectiveness, not on any individual result. Each poll has its own discussion thread and all can be found on the Past Polls page. If you want to discuss the issues addressed by the polls, please do it in those threads, not here.
 

REPLIES (newest first) Post a Reply
Profile Pic
ziyulu
Champion Author Austin

Posts:12,048
Points:2,528,325
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2015 1:18:55 PM

Advertisements always overstate facts.
Profile Pic
a5
Champion Author Ottawa

Posts:4,986
Points:2,816,605
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Apr 16, 2015 11:12:18 AM

I looked at that Advertise with us page and I wonder where they got that information from. Much of it could be gleaned from the weekly polls, but did any of us ever tell them whether or not we were married, had kids or what our income was? I think that most of the statistics are an exaggeration (statistics are always manipulated for the benefit of the quoter it seems).

For instance:
The advertise page stated that "94% Stop at Gas/C-Store for something OTHER then (sic) gasoline."

In Poll 2009-19, it asked: "On average, how often do you buy something besides fuel at a gas station?" 47% said NEVER
Profile Pic
a5
Champion Author Ottawa

Posts:4,986
Points:2,816,605
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 16, 2015 8:10:14 AM

Do you use real snow tires (not the all-season type)?

bit of a regional poll don't you think? not very relative to many in the south
Profile Pic
SUVFan
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:379,065
Points:2,538,430
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 9, 2015 10:31:33 AM

I'm very happy with the way this poll came out. Short & simple. Great job!

A5, only 8% are going with IDK. I guessed 19 just before answering, so I think it's accurate. I believe that the pols love the money these things generate and would have thought more folks would have been confused by the conflicting reports.

I stayed out of the discussion of that poll because I know I'm completely biased against the cameras.

[Edited by: SUVFan at 2/9/2015 10:35:22 AM EST]
Profile Pic
TxJeans
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:8,523
Points:940,115
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2015 11:06:11 AM

In retrospect, we should have worded this POLL differently to indicate if red light cameras reduce the seriousness of accidents, or reduces injuries due to red light accidents...quantification relative to value of red light cameras.
Profile Pic
WasabiPWRD
Veteran Author California

Posts:361
Points:795,670
Joined:Mar 2013
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2015 4:44:22 AM

1
Profile Pic
a5
Champion Author Ottawa

Posts:4,986
Points:2,816,605
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Feb 8, 2015 12:26:05 AM

"Do you think red-light cameras reduce accidents at intersections?"

Where's my get-out-of-poll-free choice? "IDK"
Profile Pic
SUVFan
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:379,065
Points:2,538,430
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Feb 2, 2015 8:45:53 PM

A post today in the Poll submission thread that really belongs here stated that the used car poll left them no option because they don't purchase used cars. Jrsva already responded there, but the activity in that thread will bury it quickly.

An opt out was not needed for that question because of the insertion of the word "if" into the question. That turned it into a pure opinion question that would not require any experience with used car purchases or any intent to ever purchase one.
Profile Pic
jerry972
Champion Author Denver

Posts:8,422
Points:2,047,420
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Feb 1, 2015 4:57:06 PM

Well the different grades - different mileage poll question is off to an interesting start. I am surprised at the absence of the diesel crowd. Let's see what the week brings.
Profile Pic
ziyulu
Champion Author Austin

Posts:12,048
Points:2,528,325
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2015 3:46:20 PM

Couldn't fast food also be entertainment?
Profile Pic
bugc
Champion Author Boston

Posts:18,750
Points:3,867,635
Joined:Mar 2004
Message Posted: Jan 24, 2015 12:52:43 AM

... and the poll results were:
The money I’m saving from lower fuel prices is going mainly into:
Savings/investment/retirement 14%
Entertainment/fun 4%
Debt reduction 25%
Shopping 6%
More driving 5%
Other / nothing in particular 43%
Total votes: 20387

I suppose "fast food and online purchases" would be "Shopping."
Profile Pic
SUVFan
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:379,065
Points:2,538,430
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Jan 22, 2015 8:44:03 AM

Regarding the poll about what folks did with the money they saved due to lower gas prices CNBC says they know how Americans applied their "savings" from lower gas prices". They spent it on fast food and online purchases.


[Edited by: SUVFan at 1/22/2015 8:45:49 AM EST]
Profile Pic
SUVFan
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:379,065
Points:2,538,430
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Jan 22, 2015 8:39:07 AM

Time Magazine agrees with Gas Buddy's assessment (linked in my last post below) in one of today's GB articles that says the national average will dip below $2 very soon.
Profile Pic
SUVFan
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:379,065
Points:2,538,430
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Jan 19, 2015 10:26:16 AM

Regarding the recent poll about the national average falling below $2.00, today's GB Blog says GasBuddy still believes the national average will go below $2.00 and fairly soon.
Profile Pic
SUVFan
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:379,065
Points:2,538,430
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Dec 30, 2014 11:26:38 AM

Reducing fares might make sense in some cases. If the price point is too high, ridership will fall and lowering the fare might increase overall revenue. It works the same with income taxes. Too high of a rate will lead to cheating and evasion in addition to causing some folks to say they'd rather relax than provide jobs. With millions in the bank already, why work if too much of the profit (in the eyes of the investor/employer) go to the government?

Jrsva, I think most of the right wing recognizes the value and importance of public transportation and is willing to subsidize to a limited degree. But as Scout notes, when it becomes a government operation with no apparent cap on the expenses, transit workers tend to be overpaid and when unions enter the picture, they will demand that there be no route cuts even if there are no riders just to maintain jobs. But even if I'm wrong and most right wingers are as heartless as the mainstream media portrays them to be, that view point was not represented in the poll choices and the question was tilted in a way that presumed the respondent would desire to see the deficit funded in some manner.

"Make them live within their means" might have been a good option for that poll.
Profile Pic
scoutmaster
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:103,594
Points:4,180,515
Joined:Mar 2003
Message Posted: Dec 30, 2014 7:58:05 AM

I disagree. Higher fares is right on the money since keeping them the same would not help increase revenue.

Actually, SUV, it's a union mentality that is killing public transit in Pittsburgh. The operators are way over paid for what they do.
Profile Pic
ziyulu
Champion Author Austin

Posts:12,048
Points:2,528,325
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Dec 30, 2014 7:14:30 AM

I see now. We asked about the "main source". So the option of higher fares should only say "fares" and it would be accurate.
Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,451
Points:2,450,075
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Dec 29, 2014 11:34:43 PM

Yeah, the transit poll could have been set up better but transit is an essential public service in any city. It is rare that transit can pay its own way entirely with fares because a large fraction of riders are poor. The right-wing does not want to help support transit and does not want to support welfare. They want welfare recipients to work, which is a lofty goal, but without transit most of the urban poor would be unable to get to work.

Profile Pic
SUVFan
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:379,065
Points:2,538,430
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Dec 29, 2014 7:12:42 PM

Sorry, Z. That doesn't save it. The question asks, "What main source should be used to cover deficits in public transportation?" "Other" means some other source. Folks who are fundamentally opposed to these subsidies would not choose that either, whatever it might be. The concept of "covering deficits" means that public transportation is spending more than it takes in from fares and looks to someone else to pay the tab.

Profile Pic
jimbeaux53
Champion Author Kansas City

Posts:8,739
Points:1,894,010
Joined:Aug 2010
Message Posted: Dec 29, 2014 8:12:09 AM

Enough with the BS cheerleading.
Profile Pic
ziyulu
Champion Author Austin

Posts:12,048
Points:2,528,325
Joined:Aug 2007
Message Posted: Dec 28, 2014 11:11:51 PM

I don't think it was a poor answer set. The respondents could have selected "Other" if none of those applied.
Profile Pic
a5
Champion Author Ottawa

Posts:4,986
Points:2,816,605
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Dec 28, 2014 9:52:56 PM

I'm with you SUV
Profile Pic
Glew123
Champion Author San Francisco

Posts:1,124
Points:365,250
Joined:Aug 2014
Message Posted: Dec 28, 2014 9:28:23 PM

$2.25 fare for San Francisco...
Profile Pic
SUVFan
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:379,065
Points:2,538,430
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Dec 28, 2014 5:15:19 PM

Right, Scout! Due to the bailout mentality. They don't have to manage costs. They don't have to think about their routes or their equipment. Their drivers can be rude to passengers, as can other passengers. And instead of getting fired, management goes to the city or the county for more money and ends up with a raise.
Profile Pic
scoutmaster
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:103,594
Points:4,180,515
Joined:Mar 2003
Message Posted: Dec 28, 2014 4:26:10 PM

In Pittsburgh, the fares are already too high. Poor management.
Profile Pic
SUVFan
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:379,065
Points:2,538,430
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Dec 28, 2014 3:46:31 PM

Byte_Doctor, it's not the same. The fares may already be too high. It was a very poor question/answer set.

[Edited by: SUVFan at 12/28/2014 3:47:10 PM EST]
Profile Pic
Byte_Doctor
Champion Author Akron

Posts:7,992
Points:1,649,440
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Dec 28, 2014 1:13:09 PM

SUVfan, for those who think mass transit should survive on its own merit and not have deficits funded by tax or other government revenue, there was the "higher fares" option. That would not be a bailout, but would be in line with the concepts of capitalism.

It is not the polls fault that people did not see that option, though having it "higher fares / cut expenses" could have been a better option. Still, on the whole I think it was a good poll.
Profile Pic
SUVFan
Champion Author Columbus

Posts:379,065
Points:2,538,430
Joined:Oct 2008
Message Posted: Dec 28, 2014 11:11:58 AM

This week's poll about how to fund mass transit deficits is going about the way I expected since seeing it had been put up and loaded. In the first 10 comments 2 or 3 commenters noted that their preferred choice is absent. They don't think the deficits should be the taxpayer's problem.

Unfortunately, I was on the road and otherwise consumed with work while work resumed on that poll. I had commented back before it was shelved a couple of weeks ago that I thought it was a bad poll.

As a group, those of us who work on the poll are very aware of the conservative side of the site would believe nothing should be done to bail out public transportation deficits. The systems should be permitted to go broke or reorganize under the bankruptcy laws might be some folks' thoughts on the matter. I think I put it, "Let them fail" as a proposed answer. The concept of tightening their belt by cutting their expenses is also a novel approach that leaps to my mind.

But pursuit of 100 points will overcome nearly any poll deficiency in terms of attracting votes that produce absolutely worthless results.
Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,451
Points:2,450,075
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Dec 17, 2014 11:42:06 PM


I have been working on the polls for almost six years; this vanishing topic is a complete mystery to me. I have made inquiries and will report whatever I find out in the topic linked by Larry, just below.
Profile Pic
teafortwo
Champion Author Washington

Posts:29,245
Points:2,236,385
Joined:Feb 2009
Message Posted: Dec 17, 2014 10:08:31 PM


Interesting discussion.

Is it possible this one also belongs in the TAY section? (Talk Amongst Yourselves)

Wondering if it's possible only certain members' suggestions are welcome these days?
Profile Pic
LarryMarg
Champion Author New York

Posts:3,475
Points:828,475
Joined:Feb 2012
Message Posted: Dec 17, 2014 9:36:22 PM

Note that someone created a topic, What happened to the "suggest an opinion poll" thread?, but so far there's no answer posted.
Profile Pic
jerry972
Champion Author Denver

Posts:8,422
Points:2,047,420
Joined:May 2008
Message Posted: Dec 17, 2014 8:20:34 PM

Can anyone have any news as to why the topic labeled "Suggest An Opinion Poll Question" disappeared?


[Edited by: jerry972 at 12/17/2014 8:20:54 PM EST]
Profile Pic
a5
Champion Author Ottawa

Posts:4,986
Points:2,816,605
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Dec 17, 2014 12:41:16 PM

You know jrsva, the poll doesn't change much from year to year. The only thing I see is that 5-7% of the people who were driving less and less every year seem to have stopped traveling altogether.

I see that PD's article touches on holiday spending as well.
Profile Pic
scoutmaster
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:103,594
Points:4,180,515
Joined:Mar 2003
Message Posted: Dec 13, 2014 4:42:33 PM

I saw that jrsva. Wonder what happened to it? It wouldn't surprise me if CC just deleted it so they didn't have to deal with it.
Profile Pic
TxJeans
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:8,523
Points:940,115
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 13, 2014 12:49:22 PM

"What’s really weird is that I posted the poll for CC just before midnight ET Thursday and saw it there with my own eyes. Now it is gone. ????"

I saw it too-- along with the agreed upon question to CC.

Any other topics lose replies? If not, then I guess the didn't want to have that discussion....

The HOLIDAY poll was a dud as expected
Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,451
Points:2,450,075
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Dec 13, 2014 1:01:42 AM

Here is a summary of the holiday-driving poll for the past six years, for whatever it is worth:

Compared to last year, will your driving for holiday gatherings be:
Year-------------------2009 - - 2010 - - 2011 - - 2012 - - 2013 - - 2014
• A lot more--------------4 - - - -4 - - - - 4 - - - - 4 - - - - -4 - - - -4
• A little more------------5 - - - -5 - - - - 5 - - - - 5 - - - - -5 - - - -6
• About same-----------57 - - - 52 - - - -51 - - - 51 - - - - 52 - - - 54
• Less------------------19 - - - 21 - - - -20 - - - 20 - - - - 19 - - - 14
• Alternate means--------1 - - - -1 - - - - 1 - - - - 1- - - - - 1 - - - - 1
• I’m not traveling ------11 - - - 14 - - - -17 - - - -17 - - - -17 - - - -18


[Edited by: jrsva at 12/13/2014 1:05:01 AM EST]
Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,451
Points:2,450,075
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Dec 13, 2014 1:00:51 AM

Too much rum? I don’t know. It doesn’t really matter; CC picked up the poll we proposed last week to use next. It was just kind of silly to ask, “Are gas prices . . . forcing you to spend less than usual . . .” when gas prices are lower than they’ve been for years.

What’s really weird is that I posted the poll for CC just before midnight ET Thursday and saw it there with my own eyes. Now it is gone.     ????

Profile Pic
a5
Champion Author Ottawa

Posts:4,986
Points:2,816,605
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Dec 10, 2014 8:09:21 AM

jrsva, I see you guys did post the new poll in plenty of time. was CC off sick or did they have their Christmas party? who dropped the ball? It's a shame but I guess it's not the end of the world.
Profile Pic
TxJeans
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:8,523
Points:940,115
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Dec 8, 2014 7:53:49 AM

Too much rum again?
Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,451
Points:2,450,075
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Dec 8, 2014 12:35:25 AM


When no one manages to enter the new poll on Friday the system automatically defaults to the poll from one year ago. That has happened several times recently and it almost always results in an inappropriate poll.
Profile Pic
a5
Champion Author Ottawa

Posts:4,986
Points:2,816,605
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Dec 7, 2014 8:42:24 PM

Pretty stupid to re-run 2012 and 2013's pool this year verbatim.
Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,451
Points:2,450,075
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Dec 2, 2014 1:09:05 AM


I believe that the majority of price posts are now done via the mobile apps but I don’t think one can use the apps to vote in the opinion poll — hence the poll is sampling only a segment of the GB population, those who use the web site.
Profile Pic
bugc
Champion Author Boston

Posts:18,750
Points:3,867,635
Joined:Mar 2004
Message Posted: Dec 2, 2014 1:03:46 AM

"more members are posting prices than before" would apply only to members who vote in the poll. That percentage can also change.

Profile Pic
Gas_Buddy
Champion Author Maryland

Posts:31,101
Points:3,962,535
Joined:Aug 2004
Message Posted: Nov 24, 2014 1:35:57 PM

"6% of people don't post prices? What are they doing here then?"

According to the 2014 week 24 poll, I post fuel prices on GasBuddy:
Every day 39%
Most days 19%
About half 11%
Seldom 17%
Never 12%
.
According to the 2013 week 24 poll, I post fuel prices on GasBuddy:
Every day 38%
Most days 22%
About half 10%
Seldom 15%
Never 12%
.
According to the 2012 week 21 poll, On a day when you post prices on GasBuddy, how many prices do you normally post?:
1 - 4 31%
5 18%
6 - 10 28%
11 - 25 6%
More than 25 1%
I do not post prices 13%
.
It seems, if the current 6 percent is correct, more members are posting prices than before.

And, as indicated in a number of other threads, many members have said say explicitly that they only "view prices" or as can be determined by their low number of points and long time membership, along with the wording of their post (or the large number of discussion threads they've started over the time of their membership versus their low number of total points), that they're not active price posters.



[Edited by: Gas_Buddy at 11/24/2014 1:37:13 PM EST]
Profile Pic
scoutmaster
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:103,594
Points:4,180,515
Joined:Mar 2003
Message Posted: Nov 24, 2014 7:53:06 AM

Looks like those that are doing the same thing is up a little but other than that, the numbers are about the same <yawn>
Profile Pic
Byte_Doctor
Champion Author Akron

Posts:7,992
Points:1,649,440
Joined:Apr 2011
Message Posted: Nov 17, 2014 9:35:03 AM

"6% of people don't post prices? What are they doing here then?"

Socializing and benefitting from the prices posted by the other 94%.
Profile Pic
a5
Champion Author Ottawa

Posts:4,986
Points:2,816,605
Joined:Sep 2005
Message Posted: Nov 17, 2014 9:18:47 AM

2014 47 When I post prices on GasBuddy I most frequently post:

6% of people don't post prices? What are they doing here then?
Profile Pic
jrsva
Champion Author Virginia

Posts:13,451
Points:2,450,075
Joined:Jan 2006
Message Posted: Nov 13, 2014 12:59:53 AM

None of those who were predicting results this week were very good at it, including me; however, looking back on it, the results seem logical. There were only three categories with significant numbers —

I seriously doubt that ‘savings/investment/retirement’ folks actually moved money into those types of accounts. To me, savings just means that I would have a little more left in my bank account or wallet at the end of the month and I did not spend it on other stuff.

Debt reduction probably means that one paid a few bucks more on the credit-card bill, not that one tried to pay off his mortgage.

There may be some specific uses in the “Other” part of the last answer but I’m guessing that for most of the 45%, ‘nothing in particular’ simply means that the very modest amount gained from lower fuel prices was simply hidden in the month-to-month variability of the family budget and, while appreciated, it could not be assigned to any particular category. That is certainly the case for me. Out of the several thousand dollars that comes and goes every month, an extra ten or twenty bucks is not even noticed. Nothing sad about that. If I was driving to two minimum-wage jobs, trying to make ends meet, it would be important. That’s sad, that folks are in that situation.

Profile Pic
scoutmaster
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:103,594
Points:4,180,515
Joined:Mar 2003
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2014 8:32:13 AM

"You said it was sad that they didn't put their money to (in your view) better use - that implies you are looking down at them as incapable or unwilling to make good financial decisions."

In your opinion that is what it implies. And boy that is a stretch. I never posted anything that said I was looking down on anyone or that anyone was a loser who answered other / nothing in particular. You, TxJeans, made that leap all on your own. And it is 100% incorrect.

"That is your common approach."

And yours is to find something wrong with everything I post.

"Saying it is "sad" that they didn't put their money to better use" is a negative judgement call.................."

In your opinion, TxJeans.

Sorry for tagging along on this derailing, folks.

Profile Pic
TxJeans
Champion Author Tampa

Posts:8,523
Points:940,115
Joined:May 2004
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2014 8:21:39 AM

You said it was sad that they didn't put their money to (in your view) better use - that implies you are looking down at them as incapable or unwilling to make good financial decisions.

That is your common approach.

If OTHER was the same as "Nothing in particular" we would have just put "Nothing in particular" which is still a valid response depending on the amount of "savings" a particular person made.

The only thing "sad" is that the savings is likely eaten up elsewhere with other rising prices for many folks.

Saying it is "sad" that they didn't put their money to better use" is a negative judgement call against those that chose that option, and I (and others) are pointing out that choosing that option does not mean folks aren't taking advantage of savings. They just aren't putting it where YOU think they should based on YOUR situation. You don't know if they didn't put it to better use for THEIR situation - such as charity, helping a friend, etc.

So, go on feeling sad about the 45% or so - it is your prerogative.
Profile Pic
scoutmaster
Champion Author Pittsburgh

Posts:103,594
Points:4,180,515
Joined:Mar 2003
Message Posted: Nov 12, 2014 8:00:49 AM

"So, unlike you, I do not see all folks that chose that option as losers that don't know what they are doing financially and something to be sad about."

Where did I call anyone in this topic a loser, TxJeans? Nowhere. Again your interpretation. I think it's about time you stop putting words in my mouth.

If the choice was titled just "Other", I would not have made the comment. But it is titled "other / Nothing in particular" which, in my opinion, gives the connotation of nothing being done. You might not agree but that is my opinion. Nowhere did I claim or state anyone was a loser.

And, TxJeans, just like me, you don't know the peoples situations that answered Other / nothing in particular. I never claimed I did and neither did you but you made the assumption I thought they were losers. I made no such assumption.
Post a reply Back to Topics