Author: Paulo Soares
Date: 15:25:28 04/05/99
Go up one level in this thread
On April 05, 1999 at 10:58:01, Dann Corbit wrote:
>I have some thoughts about opinion poll questions. The first thought is that
>frequently they serve little purpose. Here is what I mean by that:
>
>Q: Is Kasparov Stronger than Deep Blue?
>
>Well, certainly it is an interesting question and a lot of people will have
>opinions about it one way or another. But asking a poll for a question like this
>does not produce a valuable output. It is like asking a question about moon
>rocks, and none of us have any moon rocks to look at. We may be able to venture
>an opinion, but without real data, the opinions do not have value. Furthermore,
>it is possible to produce reliable data since moon rocks exist and are available
>to scientists, but quite likely none of the poll-takers can get access.
>
>Now, the reason I say that questions like this serve little purpose is that they
>do not answer the question they set out to ask. Even if there is a consensus, it
>means little. It could be just like the famous Indiana State legislature voting
>the wrong value for pi. They did not change the constant (nature gets to decide,
>not people) and only succeeded in making themselved into world famous buffoons
>for choosing the wrong answer.
>
>For this reason, I suggest that poll questions are more valuable if they can
>produce data of value with a purpose. For instance, Ed could ask what kind of
>features people want in a chess program. The current poll has some of that sort
>of thing couched in crevices. He could ask about various categories of things
>like interface, and strength in different areas, and many sorts of features.
>This data has a purpose, because Ed can use the data to make future plans for
>his product.
>
>The questions do not have to be about chess programs. They could be about other
>things of interest. What kind of contests would Rebel users be interested in?
>Which famous chess players would they like to hear an interview from (and which
>would they like to have tape over their mouth {rjf springs to mind} ;-))
>
>Questions like that have utility because they can capture the interest of the
>audience and lead to useful *actions* whereas silly opinions about how many
>angels can dance on the head of a pin can only lead to more debate and no
>answers.
>
>Just my two pennies.
Dann,
Nor everything in the life has to have a serious
objective, some things can also be amused
or funny. I agree that we must look objective
POOL QUESTIONS, but also some amused. An example
of this is the test suites, that do not serve to
say how strong is a program, but it's very amused.
Paulo Soares, from Brazil.
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.