Reply to: Northern Ireland is unimportant to Brexit supporters.

[vetran]

It's past 5. His mum will be back with her days takings and take over the 'puter now.

I bow to your greater experience!

[BR14]

With Swindon as its arsehole.

or bradford, portsmouth, northampton etc etc ?

[Old Greg]

Wales + England = Wangland

With Swindon as its arsehole.

[Old Greg]

1,000 will get you to >99% confidence and a margin for error of around 3.1%

For the population of the Republic of Ireland, you'd need only 385 people to hit the magic 95%

Thanks. I know my stats are rusty but I had a sense that I was on the right track.

[meridian]

Step 1, break up the so called "United Kingdom". We are not in anyway united. Give Scotland independence and let them apply for EU membership.

Step 2, Northern Ireland should become part of Scotland. Build the much mentioned bridges / tunnels from Scotland to NI. NI then becomes part of the EU. No Eire / NI border issue as they are both in the EU.

Step 3, Wales should be forced to join England in leaving the EU. Put a hard border up with Scotland.

All sorted, now where's the problem?

Wales + England = Wangland

[DimPrawn]

Step 1, break up the so called "United Kingdom". We are not in anyway united. Give Scotland independence and let them apply for EU membership.

Step 2, Northern Ireland should become part of Scotland. Build the much mentioned bridges / tunnels from Scotland to NI. NI then becomes part of the EU. No Eire / NI border issue as they are both in the EU.

Step 3, Wales should be forced to join England in leaving the EU. Put a hard border up with Scotland.

All sorted, now where's the problem?

[sasguru]

Bollox.

OG is interested in winding up everyone except SG who he fags for.

To be fair I think he only likes winding up proven cretins. As do I.

[WTFH]

My stats are a bit rusty so I'll let somebody else chip in, but I'll wager that 1,000 is significant.

1,000 will get you to >99% confidence and a margin for error of around 3.1%

For the population of the Republic of Ireland, you'd need only 385 people to hit the magic 95%

[sasguru]

Well, it was an interesting discussion while it lasted. Maybe we should resume it some time if we can gat a bit of peace to do so.

It's past 5. His mum will be back with her days takings and take over the 'puter now.

[sasguru]

but I'll wager that 1,000 is significant.
.

Not in a general population of 4.8 million (0.2%)

OG is right, Bean is wrong.

Your homework Bean is to find out why (BTW, it would have been smarter for you not to comment on statistical issues since it's clear to me that you haven't progressed beyond the level of a CSE* in mathematics).

*No not a spelling mistake.

[WTFH]

What was it that Churchill said about democracy and voters?

Well, it was an interesting discussion while it lasted. Maybe we should resume it some time if we can gat a bit of peace to do so.

[GreenMirror]

Hint:

OG is only interested in winding people up - ignore him, it pisses him off greatly.

Bollox.

OG is interested in winding up everyone except SG who he fags for.

[Bean]

Snip

What you have failed to address is: what would be a significant sample size, where the responses to a Yes / No type question are 100% for one response and 0% for the other. My stats are a bit rusty so I'll let somebody else chip in, but I'll wager that 1,000 is significant.

snip

Perhaps NlyUK

Not in a general population of 4.8 million (0.2%)

Is there anything to suggest people of different socio-economic backgrounds are excluded from being able to give views on the show that Pat mentioned?
(otherwise, that show too, can have the same assumption added and thus, validates his point to the same degree as yours.....)

The reason for bringing that up, as you tried to argue from 'supposed' authority (lived for >20 years, never (0) heard that, yadda yadda), is you took the claim to a level, not claimed by Pat, so YOU needed to define these things, otherwise everyone else can dismiss both your claims, and say with some confidence, that neither of you know enough to state either way.


HTH BIDI

[Old Greg]

Indeed, I have a knack for knowing when you're (and your other sockies) trying to make statistic-based assertions without the underlying fundamentals, or even realising the significance of 'your research' is close to zero


What do YOU think is a statistically significant sample size for a nation state, when trying to assert statements covering said nation state as a whole?
(since you were making the claim of not many, you must have already defined this...)


Unless you can prove otherwise, you've described yourself as a member of the 'metropolitan elite' - so that assumption (representative sample) will not have to be made (if anything the opposite assumption could be made) - it just gives an indication of how biased your sample could have been though


Still, keep going - you're getting 9/10 for effort and you may even learn something in the end -

**if you've already given up and don't want to play anymore; google - 'anecdotal evidence' and that should gently break your echo chamber

HTH BIDI

We need to make some assumptions in life based on our experiences. Otherwise, unless there is scientific polling to state that the original assertion (which I am challenging) is valid, then there isn't really a discussion to be had.

What you have failed to address is: what would be a significant sample size, where the responses to a Yes / No type question are 100% for one response and 0% for the other. My stats are a bit rusty so I'll let somebody else chip in, but I'll wager that 1,000 is significant.

While I do refer to myself as 'metropolitan elite' (you may note that I am mocking the position of JRM types when doing so), I talk to a range of people from a range of socio-economic backgrounds in Dublin, other cities and rural areas (where I have family connections). Not scientific, I know, but let's make some reasonable assumptions that it is broadly representative, seeing as you brought up the question of significance.

[Bean]

You seem to be all over this sort of thing. Let's assume that I have spoken to 1,000 people to an extent to which I am confident that none of them would support such a relationship with the UK. How would you evaluate the significance of this sample? We'll need to make some broad assumptions that they are a representative sample for the purposes of this discussion.

Indeed, I have a knack for knowing when you're (and your other sockies) trying to make statistic-based assertions without the underlying fundamentals, or even realising the significance of 'your research' is close to zero


What do YOU think is a statistically significant sample size for a nation state, when trying to assert statements covering said nation state as a whole?
(since you were making the claim of not many, you must have already defined this...)


Unless you can prove otherwise, you've described yourself as a member of the 'metropolitan elite' - so that assumption (representative sample) will not have to be made (if anything the opposite assumption could be made) - it just gives an indication of how biased your sample could have been though


Still, keep going - you're getting 9/10 for effort and you may even learn something in the end -

**if you've already given up and don't want to play anymore; google - 'anecdotal evidence' and that should gently break your echo chamber

HTH BIDI