On 27/09/2007, vijay chopra <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 26/09/2007, Brian Butterworth <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Remember that ALL the voting where you are asked to pay for the call or > > text are simply revenue collection systems, not statistically valid ones. > > The "adjudicators" (on Big Brother for example) simple verify that the > > number of calls have been made, not the meaning of the votes. As far as I > > know the only systems that the BBC uses on a regular basis that are > > statistically valid is the popular music chart and the BARB figures. > > > > That was my point, you could see how statistaclilly *invalid* they were. > Then correct accordingly using things like GeoIP and ISP data. > And since when are the popcharts valid, even if they're not rigged, > they're widely believed to be making them meaningless for most uses. >
For a start they are constructed from a considerable amount of "real" data from EPOS systems and other sales systems that represent real financial transactions. Then any dubious data is removed and then the results weighted so as to represent the entire market. This makes them much more reliable than any "online vote". > > > > There is no reason why the BBC could not use a table where random > > values are assigned to each IP address as they are encountered - as long as > > a reverse look up was not published > > > > > > That's a much better idea than actual IP aaddress, for the media anyway if > not for us. > > Vijay. > > > > -- Please email me back if you need any more help. Brian Butterworth www.ukfree.tv
