Unless you can do that with the raw poll data, but that just confused me.
Thankfully, the data is not quite that crippled! The data is reported in a... 'long' format, I think the term is, where each row is a single poll item response with a unique ID for the respondent. If you want to look at that sort of question, it's up to you to aggregate the data correctly (eg with grep). You can see this by looking at particular unique IDs, say that of Leonhart and anonymous respondent 11:
$ grep Leonhart poll.csv
"Leonhart","538","0","2013-07-14T21:05:29.027196"
"Leonhart","539","0","2013-07-14T21:05:29.118328"
"Leonhart","540","1","2013-07-14T21:05:29.292160"
"Leonhart","541","1","2013-07-14T21:05:29.244125"
"Leonhart","542","3","2013-07-14T21:05:29.178701"
$ grep \"11\" poll.csv
"11","538","0","2013-07-14T21:05:25.150240"
"11","539","2","2013-07-14T21:05:25.302881"
"11","540","0","2013-07-14T21:05:25.533486"
"11","541","1","2013-07-14T21:05:25.458408"
"11","542","2","2013-07-14T21:05:25.398273"
There's 5 entries for each, since there were 5 poll items, and and each poll item has its own unique ID as well. So if you wanted to know the relationship of an answer on poll item #538 and #541 based on how subjects answered #538, you'd get a list of everyone answered "0" in #538, and pull out their answer for #541 as well. That sort of thing.
(And now that I'm the topic, I wonder where my own writings fall, and how I would even know if I were insufficiently writing like Eliezer/Luke/Yvain.)
I like the your non-fiction style a lot (don't know your fictional stuff). I often get the impression you're in total control of the material. Very thorough yet original, witty and humble. The exemplary research paper. Definitely more Luke than Yvain/Eliezer.
For a long time, Eliezer has been telling me I should write more like he does. I've mostly resisted, preferring instead to write like this:
At the recent Effective Altruism Summit I tried to figure out which personal features predicted writing style preference.
One hypothesis was that people who read lots of fiction (like Eliezer) will tend to prefer Eliezer's story-like style, while those who read almost exclusively non-fiction (like me) will tend to prefer my "just gimme the facts" style. This hypothesis didn't hold up well on my non-scientific survey of ~10 LW-reading effective altruists.
Another hypothesis was that most people would prefer Eliezer's more exciting posts, while people trained in the sciences or analytic philosophy (which insist on clear organization, definitions, references to related work, etc.) would prefer my posts. This hypothesis fared a bit better, but not by much.
Another hypothesis was that people who had acquired an epiphany addiction would prefer Eliezer's style, whereas those who just want to learn everything efficiently would prefer my style. But I didn't test this.
Another hypothesis that occurs to me is that people with short attention spans could prefer my more skimmable style. But I haven't tested this.
Perhaps the community would like to propose some hypotheses, and test them with LW polling?