On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Robert Rohde <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Thomas Dalton <[email protected]> > wrote: > > I'm not a statistician, someone else can work out how large a majority > > is needed from a sample size of 570 to be confident (at the 95% level, > > say?) that a majority of the population as a whole agrees. > > If the 570 people are a RANDOM sampling of the underlying population: > 307 people (53.5%) > If 307 out of 570 people (53.5%) agree with statement X, you can be > confident at the 95% level that at least 50% of the underlying > population would agree with X. > Thanks for the specific number. I was under the impression it was something like that, but it's far outside my area of expertise. > Of course the current sample is not random Far from it, though it pretty much confirms my suspicions (actually, I thought the number of people who wanted their name listed would be lower, around 5-10%, not 20%). > and I don't think rights should be apportioned by simple majority either. Thomas's latest statement suggests that he doesn't either, but then, that brings back up my question as to what *does* constitute a sufficient majority. _______________________________________________ foundation-l mailing list [email protected] Unsubscribe: https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/foundation-l
