|
|
Post by Dale Malusi on Feb 21, 2017 21:34:29 GMT -5
A poll of members drew over 1700 responses. 97% of the respondents were in favor of MAPRs. Among the 3% who weren't, some said they were opposed because the MAPRs did not protect enough 2.5 year olds. LOL.
This is from Dr Jim LOL They poll their members. It is not slanted or anything.
Let's see.
21,000 members
!700 responses
Less than a 10% response rate.
Not valid.
|
|
|
|
Post by QDM MARS on Feb 21, 2017 22:39:44 GMT -5
You have to factor in the thousands they have admitted to banning from posting on their page . Those people still show up as members of the page . That is the way facebook works  It is all hearsay any ways as there is no way to confirm this so called poll and who really voted on it . There is also no is way to confirm the so called vetting any new members . For all we know there could be a big % of nonresidents , non hunters , hunters wives and children that do not hunt that are padding their membership . We know that was the case with the LPDMI page even though they lied and claimed other wise  so we already know they have no issues with lying if it fits their agenda ! |
|
|
|
Post by OTC-Archer on Feb 21, 2017 23:33:36 GMT -5
A poll of members drew over 1700 responses. 97% of the respondents were in favor of MAPRs. Among the 3% who weren't, some said they were opposed because the MAPRs did not protect enough 2.5 year olds. LOL. This is from Dr Jim LOL They poll their members. It is not slanted or anything. Let's see. 21,000 members !700 responses Less than a 10% response rate. Not valid. By all means, please tell us how many responses are needed for a 21,000 member group to obtain a 95% confidence limit. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by OTC-Archer on Feb 21, 2017 23:37:38 GMT -5
You have to factor in the thousands they have admitted to banning from posting on their page . Those people still show up as members of the page . That is incorrect. Banned members are removed and blocked permanently from the group. They are no longer included in the member count. |
|
|
|
Post by QDM MARS on Feb 21, 2017 23:51:14 GMT -5
You have to factor in the thousands they have admitted to banning from posting on their page . Those people still show up as members of the page . That is incorrect. Banned members are removed and blocked permanently from the group. They are no longer included in the member count. Again if any one wants to take your word for it they can ,that doesn't mean most are going to look at your track record and think other wise .............. |
|
|
|
Post by OTC-Archer on Feb 22, 2017 0:21:27 GMT -5
That is incorrect. Banned members are removed and blocked permanently from the group. They are no longer included in the member count. Again if any one wants to take your word for it they can ,that doesn't mean most are going to look at your track record and think other wise .............. Yes, of course, Chris. The typical personal attacks displayed here when shown to be wrong. LOL. Don't take my word for it, take Facebook's.  m.facebook.com/help/211909018842184 |
|
|
|
Post by QDM MARS on Feb 22, 2017 0:43:43 GMT -5
Is that who you think I am on you let em grow page ? Did my turd finally float to the top over there ?  Not sure what your link was supposed to show  Already different numbers being thrown around from different people on social media . Maybe you all need too get together and get your lies strait so they will seem more credible. |
|
|
|
Post by OTC-Archer on Feb 22, 2017 12:54:18 GMT -5
Is that who you think I am on you let em grow page ? Did my turd finally float to the top over there ? Not sure what your link was supposed to show Already different numbers being thrown around from different people on social media . Maybe you all need too get together and get your lies strait so they will seem more credible. Or better yet, you guys could keep wasting your time with personal attacks, conspiracy theories, and spreading libel. None of which helps your position in the least. Traditional deer management is on its way out. Just the way it is, whether you or I like it. |
|
|
|
Post by daappleknocker on Feb 22, 2017 14:13:02 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by OTC-Archer on Feb 22, 2017 14:43:41 GMT -5
You're pregnant? Congrats.  In all seriousness, if the NW12 re-survey fails the debate is over. If not, expansion of APR's in the near future would not be surprising at all. Pretty simple, really. |
|
|
|
Post by Dale Malusi on Feb 22, 2017 18:03:08 GMT -5
A poll of members drew over 1700 responses. 97% of the respondents were in favor of MAPRs. Among the 3% who weren't, some said they were opposed because the MAPRs did not protect enough 2.5 year olds. LOL. This is from Dr Jim LOL They poll their members. It is not slanted or anything. Let's see. 21,000 members !700 responses Less than a 10% response rate. Not valid. By all means, please tell us how many responses are needed for a 21,000 member group to obtain a 95% confidence limit. Thanks. It figures you would see that as a valid survey and want to argue about it. Think about it. |
|
|
|
Post by OTC-Archer on Feb 22, 2017 19:46:39 GMT -5
By all means, please tell us how many responses are needed for a 21,000 member group to obtain a 95% confidence limit. Thanks. It figures you would see that as a valid survey and want to argue about it. Think about it. No argument needed. I'll take that as you don't have a clue. Thanks. |
|
|
|
Post by ridge on Feb 22, 2017 23:35:57 GMT -5
OTC, 8% out of that potential in a closed or restricted poll represents a near zero when comparing it to any group in society at large. Bio is very much overplaying his hand with any claims about this poll.
|
|
|
|
Post by OTC-Archer on Feb 23, 2017 0:14:28 GMT -5
OTC, 8% out of that potential in a closed or restricted poll represents a near zero when comparing it to any group in society at large. Bio is very much overplaying his hand with any claims about this poll. It's not meant to be compared to anything but the members of the facebook group. That's it, and nothing more. Bio, isn't over-playing anything. |
|
|
|
Post by ridge on Feb 23, 2017 0:59:18 GMT -5
Bio is stating on other forums that this poll shows that pro-MAPR folks will do more of this and that. My point is that it does not show anything of the kind. It simply shows what 8% of the people on that page (or less depending on the accuracy of facebook numbers) are willing to do. It really demonstrates nothing at all in comparison to what he said about hunters at large in some places on the web and at recent meetings. He is a master at mixing and mashing numbers!
|
|
|
|
Post by jbrown on Feb 23, 2017 5:29:14 GMT -5
That is incorrect. Banned members are removed and blocked permanently from the group. They are no longer included in the member count. Again if any one wants to take your word for it they can ,that doesn't mean most are going to look at your track record and think other wise .............. definately not taking your word lmao |
|
|
|
Post by OTC-Archer on Feb 23, 2017 8:05:33 GMT -5
Bio is stating on other forums that this poll shows that pro-MAPR folks will do more of this and that. Only in regards to data that has already been collected in the annual deer harvest survey. And yes, it does show something. But, by all means, believe what you wish. |
|
|
|
Post by OTC-Archer on Feb 23, 2017 8:07:36 GMT -5
Again if any one wants to take your word for it they can ,that doesn't mean most are going to look at your track record and think other wise .............. definately not taking your word lmao That's too bad. You could have been following the truth for once. Your loss. |
|
|
|
Post by Dale Malusi on Feb 23, 2017 8:38:02 GMT -5
A poll of members drew over 1700 responses. 97% of the respondents were in favor of MAPRs. Among the 3% who weren't, some said they were opposed because the MAPRs did not protect enough 2.5 year olds. LOL. This is from Dr Jim LOL They poll their members. It is not slanted or anything. Let's see. 21,000 members !700 responses Less than a 10% response rate. Not valid. By all means, please tell us how many responses are needed for a 21,000 member group to obtain a 95% confidence limit. Thanks. Arizona, in your zeal to impress us with your superior intelligence you again have missed my point entirely and instead want to focus on you. Forget about everything except the first sentence. "A poll of members drew over 1700 responses. 97% of the respondents were in favor of MAPRs. Among the 3% who weren't, some said they were opposed because the MAPRs did not protect enough 2.5 year olds." That is like going into a kindergarten class and surveying the students on whether they like the teacher or not. You know the outcome before you even ask. |
|
|
|
Post by OTC-Archer on Feb 23, 2017 9:12:18 GMT -5
LOL. I find it comical and sad that you don't have a clue why that poll was done, Dale. You'll know soon enough.
|
|
|
|
Post by jbrown on Feb 23, 2017 16:49:58 GMT -5
definately not taking your word lmao That's too bad. You could have been following the truth for once. Your loss. lmao typical response like you know who or what I follow.. ill be out to scottsdale IN 2 Weeks maybe you have time to show me around?? |
|
|
|
Post by swampy on Feb 24, 2017 2:29:05 GMT -5
By all means, please tell us how many responses are needed for a 21,000 member group to obtain a 95% confidence limit. Thanks. Arizona, in your zeal to impress us with your superior intelligence you again have missed my point entirely and instead want to focus on you. Forget about everything except the first sentence. "A poll of members drew over 1700 responses. 97% of the respondents were in favor of MAPRs. Among the 3% who weren't, some said they were opposed because the MAPRs did not protect enough 2.5 year olds." That is like going into a kindergarten class and surveying the students on whether they like the teacher or not. You know the outcome before you even ask. |
|
|
|
Post by swampy on Feb 24, 2017 2:31:56 GMT -5
Arizona, in your zeal to impress us with your superior intelligence you again have missed my point entirely and instead want to focus on you. Forget about everything except the first sentence. "A poll of members drew over 1700 responses. 97% of the respondents were in favor of MAPRs. Among the 3% who weren't, some said they were opposed because the MAPRs did not protect enough 2.5 year olds." That is like going into a kindergarten class and surveying the students on whether they like the teacher or not. You know the outcome before you even ask. And not only that, if you read their mission statement you have to support MAPR's to join...And still only 1700 responses |
|
It is all hearsay any ways as there is no way to confirm this so called poll and who really voted on it . There is also no is way to confirm the so called vetting any new members . For all we know there could be a big % of nonresidents , non hunters , hunters wives and children that do not hunt that are padding their membership . We know that was the case with the LPDMI page even though they lied and claimed other wise 
so we already know they have no issues with lying if it fits their agenda !
Already different numbers being thrown around from different people on social media . Maybe you all need too get together and get your lies strait so they will seem more credible.
