I’m afraid if you want to have a nebulous “other data sources” back your position they also need to be linked.
1 Like
They do, actually, because saying “response bias” doesn’t actually make it true that self-selection biases are going to necessarily weight the data one way or another. If you’re going to challenge data, then you need to be able to provide counter-data to substantiate your challenge. Per my second half of my post, without data to actually prove otherwise, how do we know that a self-selection bias in the forums doesn’t actually favor the RoleQ-haters? The honest answer is we don’t.
If you’re going to say, “well this bias and that bias,” okay. Show me how that’s actually affecting the data. Otherwise, you’re not actually contributing anything meaningful, and honestly have less of a basis to stand on than the polls you’re challenging.
Okay. Glad we can establish that you don’t actually know that the forums are biased in favor of RoleQ, which pretty much defeats a large part of your objection to RobotWizard citing the strawpolls.
Not… exactly the same thing, no. You’re claiming that these polls are biased. Okay. I’m asking you to actually substantiate that claim, and moreover, substantiate that said bias is in favor of RoleQ and not against it. It’s not sharing a “pool of your own,” because that’d be responding to data that’s purportedly biased in some direction that we’re trying to prove/disprove with data that is also admittedly biased in an unknown direction… That, however, doesn’t mean that we suddenly should immediately accept that the first data set was, in fact, biased in the direction that you claimed.
I… don’t think you’re using this phrase correctly. Fruit of a poisonous tree is more like tainted evidence due to illegal obtainment, not anything to do with self-selection biases… I think I understand how you’re trying to use the phrase, but it missed the mark.
So… you first claim that the forums are an echo chamber of those who believe that RoleQ is flawless, and now you say it’s evenly split between the lovers and the haters?
Do you understand why, then, I find it very difficult to accept your assessment of where the forums as a community stands on RoleQ?
I… can not agree with this at all. Firstly, the Overwatch community is huge–even if just 2% of the community opposed a change, that’s still hundreds or thousands of players, more than adequate to create “hundreds” (realistically, that’s a hyperbolic claim… I’d agree that there are a few dozen new threads each day, and that’s disregarding that some people will post multiple threads) of discontent threads each day.
Moreover, it’s been a month, thereabouts. That’s frankly not that long considering the scale and scope of RoleQ. Keep in mind that there are persistent controversies for much smaller-scale and “less controversial” issues that arose years ago. The time delineation here seems very arbitrary here.
Crux of the matter right here. I don’t think anybody had illusions that every single person would be thrilled by RoleQ. There are people who very much benefited from the capacity to abuse the freedoms and simplicity of non-RoleQ. Of course those people are not going to be happy. There are people who are just going to object to any change whatsoever. Of course they are not going to be happy.
But, sometimes you do need to make changes regardless of how certain groups may view it if it’s going to benefit the game and/or community at large. And I agree–you don’t make such a change lightly, which is why Blizzard spent over a year working on it and also added in QPC to try to accommodate people.
They’ll agree that the biases you suggest are potentially issues for strawpolls.
I do not think they would agree, without further evidence to prove so, that these biases have weighted the results in favor of RoleQ. Basically, your whole explanation here:
Actually needs evidence to support it, not just supposition and conjecture as you’ve provided. As it stands, you have done nothing to show that the various measures that RobotWizard is citing are actually biased in favor of RoleQ compared to the actual community opinion. Zero, none, nada. As it is, you’re talking about things that could be affecting results. Could be isn’t good enough, though, unless you’re content to simple engage in an academic discussion about the potential limitations of data without actually attempting to claim that his data is wrong.
2 Likes
If you want to link to ANY sources to back up your position free to do so.
And yes I will.
By the way, they are ALL positive by a large margin.
Let me go find the devs own post where they talk about the feedback they got.
6 Likes
So… if you’re so confident that it will completely blow there point out of the water just lead with it 0_o unless this is some sort of dramatic/social thing I don’t get…
Anyway, so you say that sampling errors are so great that it makes these points unuseable?
-
Reddit was pretty 50/50. I’m not digging it up again, but they did their own survey(s). One of which was close to the supposed forum results, a 2/3 majority in favour of 222. Another one was pretty highly opposed. Reddit has schills and votebrigate bots so both need grains of salt as well.
-
Dev comments should be irrelevant.
-
Social media was quite mixed and by 2nd/3rd degree it was negative towards 222. By that I mean graph-edges. The loud ‘content creator’ nodes are all schilled up with BlizzHQ and regurgitated the same 222 utopia. Meanwhile their followers (and followers thereof) were in protest.
There was a post on these forums where someone did a lot of work and sourced a lot of the so-called polls. For argument’s sake, I accepted the results (as a pro creative, anti jail supporter). The number I came to terms with overall was 2/3 majority in favour of 222.
But that was before this mess.
Have you taken a statistics class?
No I don’t. I just need to point out the bias. If someone goes to a store that only serves vanilla ice cream and gives them a poll that asks them what everyone’s favorite ice cream by asking them “is vanilla Ice cream your favorite ice cream”, I don’t need to make an entirely new poll to say that their survey is worthless.
4 Likes
Most of the players I’ve talked to are actually pretty happy about it.
I think its because the most VOCAL crowd are the ones that are unhappy. Those who are happy stay silent and those who arent scream about it.
2-2-2 for me has meant that I never solo heal or solo tank, and that now most people are creating and using the looking for group system and I find that I get better teams all around, not just in terms of skill of the players but in terms of communication and friendly discussion.
Since role que came about Ive had mostly positive interactions with the community and its been really lovely.
1 Like
I know they did, because I went back and looked through their polls.
I found 5 and they were all positive. If you are able find one against, even just one. I’ll be surprised.
I have brought proof, I’ve given reasoning, I’ve shown methods. I’ve proven that the data is from source and untampered.
You have, done nothing.
I await your proof because I brought the goods.
It is time for you to gather the data showing there is a majority who don’t want roleQ
Best of luck, you will need a whole lot of it.
I fail to see why you are so concerned with how I reply
However it can also be seen
Like…
Extra wait time
vs
playing time in a ruined comp because of leaving penalty…
Sure just link those 5 reddit polls first. I CBA to dig up the alternative sentiment via social media or reddit audits.
In the end it was 2/3 majority for 222 anyway. Again, before people experienced it first hand.
Which is what I found in every source I could find.
Every single one.
I couldn’t find a single source which went any other way.
This, this right these is my point and it hasn’t changed since roleQ
2 Likes
I actually have a degree in math (double major in biology and math with a minor in psychology), thank you for asking! 
Uh, yeah, you do if you want to have any more of an argument than vapid disagreement.
What you’re saying is that you can essentially go up to someone making an argument, say, “You’re wrong because your evidence is invalid,” and claim victory without actually showing that their evidence is invalid. No, that doesn’t work.
You’re claiming that the data is biased. You have outlined specific biases you believe are skewing the results. You need to show that these biases are actually doing that, though–otherwise, what are we supposed to do? Take it on your word that the data is skewed the way you claim it’s skewed? or that the purported bias has even skewed the data at all?
That’s not gonna fly, chief. You need to show that this purported bias is actually affecting the data, and in the way that you or Nibelung or whoever claim.
Yeah this is a wholly specious comparison… last I checked, there wasn’t a stipulation on either the forums, Reddit, or YouTube that you had to be in favor of RoleQ to use them. Unless such a stipulation exists, which to the best of my knowledge it doesn’t, then your example isn’t even remotely comparable.
Also not to disappoint too terribly, but I’m heading to bed because I do work tomorrow and can’t spend all night arguing against bad statistical logic, so I probably won’t read your response, but you know… no promises either way 
You’ll get the notification if I decide to
1 Like
At the time I had made that response I had no polls to work with so I had no way of outlining EXACTLY how the polls were being biased. As of right now I am working on it.
Forums have bans, subreddits are incredibly biased (just look at the difference between r/antifascistsofreddit and r/The_Donald), and youtube polls are heavily biased by the content creator’s community.
Have a good one.
I just find it very strange/haven’t seen this sort of behavior where someone claims they can dismiss someone evidence/argument, then doesn’t…
Regardless,
Classic QP is da thing! 
1 Like
I never said they are unusable, I’m saying they are unreliable.
K, then where’s the evidence them being unreliable… See below for an example of where to begin.
If you want to say that the polls aren’t viable as evidence you also have to do show that it isn’t the case. Just saying the words doesn’t make it so =_= (I’m directing this at Socrates using your example of how you plan to discredit the evidence Felhelen).
How about providing the links to these polls (5?) to enable the others to disprove/discredit them if they can?
Impressive, although I’m going to need a link to the post/video containing them before I can test for bias.
They did.
No, no. You are mixing the arguments.
One argument is that strawpools are biased because not everyone is taking it, either by plain ignorance or because they don’t think it’s worthy the effort of responding to it.
The other is the the forum responses are pretty much equally divided, which show that there is enough vocal posters that are willing to discuss for and against that new mechanic.
They are somewhat correlated, but not directly linked. You can have a 50-50 division on discussion while also having a 66-33 division on pools. And outside of both you have a silent majority that are saving their opinions to themselves and don’t speak for or against any position in public.
It’s perfectly possible. English isn’t my primary language. Thanks for being more civil than RobotWizard on this specific part.
But as long as people understand what I meant, it’s ok. Which, just trying to be clear here to avoid further misunderstandings, is that if you start with bad evidence, you might reach a faulty conclusion simply for giving more weight to bad evidence.
What were the big dramas we had in OW before role queue? The ones that lingered for over a month without pause?
- Tracer being too strong on dive
- SR manipulation at GM tier via Mercy Rez
- Mercy rework
- Symmetra rework
- Brigitte… everything
Those were big issues, some still are, and they all have passionate people for and against them. The forums keep feeding themselves into a perpetual cycle of disagreements that prevents the fires from going extinct.
When the matter is just a reactionary outburst, or when it’s a minority complaining, it can arise again now and then, but they don’t linger around, and don’t dominate the frontpage for too long. Stuff like:
- <character> is OP
- <character> needs a buff
- <character> needs a nerf
- <Old meta> was better than <New meta>
- D.va/Lúcio/Torb/Hanzo rework
- Accessibility issues
And many others. Those rise and fall often, and are always cycling.
Role queue discussion, almost three months later (three months from announcement, two from PTR, one from live), seems more fitting to the first group than the second.
True.
But the usual posture of defenders of role queue being “go play QPC” and “then leave” is doing more harm than good, too. That compounds any criticism people who don’t like role queue already have.
But that’s an entirely different issue. One that I don’t think it’s worthy pursuing right now because it’s much more subjective.
I’ll just say that I stand that adding some kind of flex slot in the role queue (with limitations on who would be able to queue as flex) would solve a lot of community issues with the change.