National Census

[Deleted]

Mar 5, 2009 0:57:33 GMT -6 Sir Alexandreu Davinescu said:

Why are things like religious preference and occupation listed the way they are? I mean, Protestant on top and Nonreligious at bottom; Managerial on top and Handler at bottom... can't we list these things in alphabetical order rather than what appears to be preference?

I agree with the spirit of Alex's argument. There are some, particularly those whose religious preference is often mocked or otherwise oppressed. For a group such as this, their appearing at the bottom could be considered insulting. Furthermore, I fear that we may miss somebody and offend them that way.

Here's a whacky idea....why does the religion need to be selected from a list? Can't we write it in ourselves like you do when joining the military?

Religion ________

If a person writes "Roman Catholic" or "Greek Catholic" you are certainly still free to record it as "Catholic" and likewise, if I list myself as a "Conservative Jew" and another lists him/herself as a "Humanist Jew" you can mark us both down for Judaism.

Then you can still generate statistical information concerning the population, but you aren't forcing everyone to choose their religion from a multiple choice menu.

[Deleted]

Again, in the survey the responses are randomized, and stated as such, so they appear in no particular order.

I'm not necessarily opposed to allowing a write-in, given the sample size of our population. However, it means the census-gatherer (i.e. me) will be making a judgment call, rather than allowing the individual to stipulate specifically for themselves. Having a list in the question clearly delineates the categories that will be in the final analyses, so that the person taking the survey can choose precisely where they should fit based on their OWN judgment.

In effect, it's either:

SCENARIO #1: "Here are the categories into which we, the census-gatherers, will be smushing everyone. Where do you want to be?"

SCENARIO #2: "Tell us how you identify, and we will split you up into un-stated categories later, based upon our interpretation of what you have listed."

Admitting the inherent imperfection, as a person taking the survey I personally prefer Scenario #1.

[Deleted]

Mar 5, 2009 7:53:08 GMT -6 Dréu Gavárþic'h said:

1 louis is equal to $1.5

Can you cite that from an official Governmental source (i.e. not Witt)?

[Deleted]

That's fair....however, without an open-ended option, if 1 person is a Reform Druid, you'd be in a position where it would have to be added. The alternative would be to have a block marked "Other" in which a person can then write in an un-listed faith group. My worry there is that I would be unhappy if forced to write my faith in as an "other."

I suppose what I am proposing is that the statistical representation follow your present list, but individuals can write in whatever they want and then for reporting purposes, are classified accordingly.

If a person puts that they are Anglican, you can classify them as Christian - Protestant. If they put that they are Greek/Russian/Ukrainian/Lithuanian or Albanian Orthodox, they'd go under Christian - Orthodox. I can't imagine that the classifying people by their preference into specific categories for reports would be any more annoying that attempting to create an exhaustive list of religions in such a way that nobody feels offended.

[Brad Holmes]

Or we all just grow thicker skins, realize that the goal of this Census is not to insult anyone, and just go from there. Keep the categories broad, listing every faction can never happen, there are always new ones. Will the "religion" stat really influence anybody or anything?

Too much tip-toeing is really hard on the feet and a ridiculous way to walk.

[Owen Edwards]

Brad, you think making people feel their religious choice wasn't important enough to have its own name in Talossan censu results is a good idea?

[Brad Holmes]

Not at all! I'm just way less concerned about people's feelings than I am about having a concise survey.

I say again: Besides just curiously collecting statistics, what does a person's specific, factional, possibly obscure, religious preference matter? Broad categories are more than sufficient.

If people are so inclined to differentiate themselves based upon religious preference, keep the "Other" option open. We can have 80% "Other".

(And before somebody assumes that my preference is one already listed, it's not.)

[Eðo Grischun]

How about simplifying the question altogether:
Q: Do you consider yourself as a religous person?

Then the final census report can show data such as;

70% of Citizens consider themselves religous
30% of Citizens do not consider themselves religous


This sort of data collecting can not offend anybody.

[Deleted]

Excellent comments here, folks! I find points of agreement with everyone. As Brad, I am interested in quantifiable, useful results, and recognize the impossibility of appeasing every conceivable desire. However, I think we should hold Talossa to a high standard in this endeavor, and not simply repeat the census of the U.S. or any other nation, simply for convenience sake.

Having said that -- this is, to the best of my knowledge, the FIRST Talossan national census, and hopefully won't be the last. Improvement should be expected.

[Sir Alexandreu Davinescu]

I agree with Brad; give categories and let people self-assign, so we can let them choose and get some sort of aggregate view. But a good compromise would be to list categories like you have done while also including a field for "Other: ________________ " that they can enter their own if they choose. It would be needlessly hard on our good and hard-working census-man here if we were to just have everyone do write-ins.

[Ieremiac'h Ventrutx]

If you don't knock on my door and give me a free pen, I probably won't be able to fill it out correctly....

[Deleted]

UPDATE

I have a draft version nearly prepared, and will be asking the SoS to review it shortly. I have incorporated the discussion listed herein, including the religious preference question, to the best of my ability, and believe randomized categories with a fill-in option is the best compromise.

However, the currency for income is still a sticking point. I would like to list income in our National currency, but as near as I can tell, there is no easy way for people to make the conversion from world currency to Louise. It was mentioned that 1 Louis = $1.50, but if people are going to have to convert first to US$, then to Louis from there, I don't necessarily like adding this step. I believe it would behoove the government to have the Louis, and it's value and conversion rates, clearly listed on the official Kingdom webpage. Until that is done, I am reluctant to use anything but the widely-familiar US$ for the census.

[Eðo Grischun]

Hope this helps, based on todays exchange rates;

1 Louis = 1.50 US Dollars (USD)

1 Louis = 1.05 UK Pounds (GBP)

1 Louis = 1.18 Euro (EUR)

1 Louis = 1.92 Canadian Dollars (CAD)

1 Louis = 2.34 Australian Dollars (AUD)

1 Louis = 53.60 Russian Rubles (RUR)

1 Louis = 6.34 Israeli New Shekels (ILS)

1 Louis = 1737.90 Iraqi Dinars (IQD)

1 Louis = 14853.00 Iranian Rials (IRR)

1 Louis = 1.73 Swiss Francs (CHF)

1 Louis = 13.76 Swedish Kronor (SEK)

[Deleted]

Mar 6, 2009 13:10:27 GMT -6 Eðo Grischun said:

Hope this helps, based on todays exchange rates;

1 Louis = 1.50 US Dollars (USD)

1 Louis = 1.05 UK Pounds (GBP)

1 Louis = 1.18 Euro (EUR)

1 Louis = 1.92 Canadian Dollars (CAD)

1 Louis = 2.34 Australian Dollars (AUD)

1 Louis = 53.60 Russian Rubles (RUR)

1 Louis = 6.34 Israeli New Shekels (ILS)

1 Louis = 1737.90 Iraqi Dinars (IQD)

1 Louis = 14853.00 Iranian Rials (IRR)

1 Louis = 1.73 Swiss Francs (CHF)

1 Louis = 13.76 Swedish Kronor (SEK)

Well, yes, it helps TODAY, but what about on the day a particular person fills out the census survey?

[Owen Edwards]

I'm not sure income is desperately necessary either way....

THOUGH I do think the main page should have up to date conversion rates.