Currently, the Guardian is holding one of those daft online polls to see which side of the homeopathy debate can muster the most clickers…
Hi Rochelle and all,
I doubt that there are really all that many people out there voting.
Here's how to log your votes -a tactic which I'm sure the skeptics are already using, so there's no need to be secretive about it- Some pro-enthusiasts on this mailing list may wish to use the same tactics.
I use Firefox, so I'm giving instructions for that. You can figure out other browsers easily enough.
1. go to the webpage and vote
2. then go to the menu – TOOLS – CLOSE RECENT HISTORY and set it to delete cookies and cache for the last 1 hour.
3. Close the browser.
4. open it again and vote again.
5. Repeat the same till you get really tired of this sham vote by the Guardian.
ADDITIONAL – if you want to invest $30 or so for a year subscription, you can buy one of those "hide IP" proxy softwares which will change your IP when you open up your browser – Easy Hide is a good one.
Then change your proxy with every vote – making it look like the vote is coming from somewhere else- just in case the survey is actually tracking your IP from their computers.
To speed up this tedious work, temporarily set your homepage to the poll page so to save yourself a click
==
Right now, it's about 8 AM in Nairobi as I write this and I've logged in about 20+ votes, only to see the "no" side climb as I do it.
That tells me that either (a) there's some earlybird/nightowl guys/gals in UK or USA also clicking away as fast as I'm doing it OR (b) Guardian is skewing the votes by registering all the "yes" votes as "no".
===
what do you think?
Sincerely,
Didi Ananda Ruchira | Director | Tels: +254 (0)733-895466 / +254 (0)723-869133 | www.abhalight.org
Good grief.Of course, they can waste their money on proxy software if they want, but what a long-winded way of doing what a modern browser could do with a couple of clicks!
Paranoid, whilst at the same time promoting a fraudulent vote. The irony is pronounced that my head is about to pop! Even though the vote is (currently) around 60-40 in the NO camp, I still think that if the everyday member of public really knew what homeopathy was and how it was ‘created’ the result would be significantly more overwhelming. Many people I speak to still see homeopathy as though it’s some sort of herbal remedy like St.John’s Wort and not the empty sugar pill that it really is. I’m not defending herbal remedies, but at least they actually contain some ingredients.
"either (a) there’s some earlybird/nightowl guys/gals in UK or USA also clicking away as fast as I’m doing it OR (b) Guardian is skewing the votes by registering all the "yes" votes as "no"."Naturally, it wouldn’t even occur to her that far more people are voting no, especially as this is The Guardian. Daft female.
Too slow. You’ll never be able to keep up using those methods.
Oh well, all that did was confirm my prejudices about the ethical conscience that is typical of proponents of woo.
Dear Anarchic Teapot – just wondering – how is her gender relevant?Best wishes
Dear Clare WilsonJust wondering: it isn’t relevant. That doesn’t deprive her of gender. It could just as easily be a dumlb male Weren’t you aware both sexes are equally stupid when they get goin?
Dear Anarchic TeapotIf it isn’t relevant then don’t mention it. I’m sure you don’t need me to explain why.Best wishes
Fine. Do you prefer dumb human or dumb fuck?