= 27d567bc2d48d9f40e9ccc20ea370b15)
[META] Make poll results accessible to people who have not voted
As far as I can see, the only way to see the results of a poll is to vote in it. If for whatever reason I don't want to participate in a poll whose results I am interested in, I vote randomly. Of the ~10 other LWers I know, at least 2 do the same. For the sake of accurate results, please let people see poll results without having to vote (and ideally without having to log in).
Response to obvious argument against: You can restrict people from (voting after they have seen the results).
= 783df68a0f980790206b9ea87794c5b6)
Loading…= b715d02e85f7b3b4ae65ca3d3e450868)
Subscribe to RSS Feed
= f037147d6e6c911a85753b9abdedda8d){kind=logo}
Comments (12)
crude but hopefully-easy alternative: add a "i just want to see the results" option to all polls automatically.
Many polls have done just this, and it's a common practice on LiveJournal polls. It looks to me like a sufficient solution.
This poll needs a third option: "I don't care, just show me the results".
I honestly thought that was the joke until I realized the actual results of this poll effect the likelihood of the change actually taking place. And this is, in fact, an actual for serious poll.
That's fine with me. Sometimes I might not be able to decide how to vote but still want to see the results.
You want us to upvote/downvote this article? Why not make this a poll?
Who bells the cat? Will you write the code?
Now accepting bids for this change.
ETA: not pointed directly at you, Eliezer.
Now that Trike has time to implement code written by engineers like Lucas, we could certainly implement this if we think it's important. I'm pretty ambivalent about it, though, because the proposed change would allow people to contaminate themselves before voting.
The final line of said proposal seems relevant:
Oops, yeah, I misread that sentence initially.
We could impose a penalty to look.