There are certainly some problems with the way polls are conducted on HN that would make me question the results.
The way poll questions are worded could sway people to vote one way or the other.
The order of choices is always fixed, and this could also have some effect on the votes. I've often noticed that the first choice (at the top of the list of choices) tends to be the one that gets the most votes.
Finally and most damningly, votes on polls have the same problem that comments used to have: you can see how many people voted for each option before you vote!
This makes polls susceptible to the exact same thing that comments used to be susceptible to before pg took away visible comment scores: voting with the herd (ie. piling on to whatever option seems to be the most popular).
I wonder how different poll results would be were poll questions stated more neutrally, the order choices were displayed in was randomized for each person viewing the poll, and the vote totals were kept hidden until after you voted.
Although that is often the case in criminal cases, it's not generally true that unanimity is required for a US jury verdict.
And, regarding your main point - duh. What would the result of that poll have had to have been to make it a compelling (e.g., actionable) argument for comment points?
> And, regarding your main point - duh. What would the result of that poll have had to have been to make it a compelling (e.g., actionable) argument for comment points?
I'm not sure, because I don't have a clear view of all relevant data. For example, I might weigh obvservations of improved discussion against the poll results. I'm not sure how overwhelming the majority would have to be, but if there was one, it would probably at least sway me to to do some more investigation.
And pg's comment was:
I'm curious if there has been any drift toward a consensus.
It wasn't a referendum - pg never said that he would follow the poll. I'm assuming (standard disclaimer, ass, you, me, etc.) that it was simply an informational poll.
