>>
>>So why would you use an outside website with dubious numbers to validate something? How can an outside website determine the demongraphic make up of this site's users in such details as that when the users are not even being consulted by them to provide information that make up their numbers. seems fishy.
>>-----
>>DP

My data is certainly less "dubious" than the USGS range map. That thing is scary. And to think these people make REAL maps that people use! They probably gave Columbus all those maps that showed where he would fall off the edge of the earth.

Independent third party demographic information is often used, and sometimes required depending on what it's used for. Our userbase has been monitored by them, by Alexa, by Google, by Neislon Netratings, by dozens of companies, none of which have direct access to our data, or our users, through us. How do they do it? Web sites like Alexa Internet produce traffic rankings and statistics based on those people who access the sites while using the Alexa toolbar. Google does it by search queries, so does Yahoo and Amazon. People have been following you around on the internet since day 1.

Could we have done the same by asking you intrusive questions about your life and your habits? Yes, but why when there are a dozen places this data can be obtained already, publicly available, from independent third parties that have no agenda.

Are the numbers fishy? Numbers are always fishy. Statistics are easily produced, easily refuted. As an example, had I wanted to "cook" the local law data I could have just surveyed cities & towns where I knew the outcome, and given the totals. I didn't. I just went down a list of towns alphabetically.

[ Show Entire Thread ]