The Cheshire Town Post

~ by Craig Houghton - July 27, 2007 ~

On July 19th it was demonstrated that the Cheshire Herald web poll allows participants to vote repeatedly without detection. Two days later a staff member acknowledged the problem.

Unfortunately, the broken poll continues to run without modification, and the disclaimer printed in the recent issue remains untouched.

I know that the Herald means well, and I am thankful to have an independent paper in town. However, I think the current poll question adds insult to injury. How we respond as a community to the recent tragedy should not be influenced by a broken poll. I think the question is a good one, but it does a disservice to the town to ask it using bad polling software.

When the results of this current poll are printed, I hope the Herald includes a more accurate disclaimer. We have seen poll results misused by commission members in the past.

from A Conversation With The Cheshire Herald

The poll results are published in our local paper, and the staff member I spoke to noted how popular the poll has been. Is it any surprise that a Sean Strollo, a Planning and Zoning commission member, referred to the poll during one of the hearings as proof that the majority of Cheshire residents supported the mall?

Please call the Cheshire Herald to advocate for new polling software and a revised disclaimer. There are many free choices (their existing poll software is free) available on the web that guard against ballot stuffing.

Tell them that we deserve better. The main number for the Cheshire Herald is (203) 272-5316.

~ by Craig Houghton - July 21, 2007 ~

Two days ago I posted a piece on the Cheshire Town Post where I presented evidence that the informal Cheshire Herald web poll, which is then published in print, allows participants to vote repeatedly without detection. No one expects the poll to be accurate — you have to actively visit the site to participate. However, considering the amount of discussion the poll generates, few realize that anyone can vote again and again.

I just spoke to the advertising director at the Cheshire Herald. She was already aware of the problem and does not feel the current disclaimer should change. She’s expressed concern that to do so would be to invite abuse. I consider the current state of the poll to be an abuse of the community’s trust.

She told me that she realizes people will likely take the poll out of context, but it’s wrong to think of this in terms of a potential for abuse. After all, it’s just a web poll. She argued that people will take absolutely anything and run with it. She compared it to the ‘pass a message around the room whisper game’ — in the end a garbled message circles back around and everyone has a good laugh. I think that the message is certain to fail when the information going in is unclear or misleading.

The poll results are published in our local paper, and the staff member I spoke to noted how popular the poll has been. Is it any surprise that a Sean Strollo, a Planning and Zoning commission member, referred to the poll during one of the hearings as proof that the majority of Cheshire residents supported the mall?

The fact is, decision makers in our town government do discuss the polls. Much of that discussion happens on the blog Tim White Listens. The staff member I spoke with acknowledged that some people at the Cheshire Herald actually visit, just to have a laugh. I can only assume that she does not represent the paper in this, but she went on to laugh aloud about blogs in general, stressing that it’s all just opinion. Few bloggers are familiar with, or even attempt to uphold, journalistic standards for reporting, but I do not consider discussion among residents to be worth a good laugh. You don’t need to own a stylebook to speak the truth.

Thankfully, she said that the poll will be changing. She noted that the poll is “very rudimentary,” as it generated ballots via email submission. That is exactly what I pointed out in my post. Regarding my suggestion to change the disclaimer in anticipation of an upcoming change in polling software, she said she would, “pass that by the publisher.”

The main number for the Cheshire Herald is (203) 272-5316.

~ by Craig Houghton - July 19, 2007 ~

I appreciate the value of having an independent local paper. After all, democracy requires an informed electorate. Most of the time, they do a great job. This piece is not an attack on the Herald — it’s an attempt to spotlight a broken feature that’s been too often quoted and has serious potential for misuse. Please feel free to comment, discuss, or post your own front-page post in response. Bearing that in mind, I submit to you that the Cheshire Herald needs to fix their web poll.

I think we all realize that web polls are imperfect. We don’t expect the results to represent a fair cross-section of residents. We know that the results include only the voters that visit the Cheshire Herald web site and choose to participate.

However, few would assume that participants can vote repeatedly without danger of detection. And, they can.

Here’s the disclaimer:

“Note: This is intended as an informal public poll, reflecting only the opinions of those who choose to participate.”

We might be better served if it read:

“Note: This is intended as an informal public poll, reflecting the opinions of those who choose to participate and the poll author. The question may exhibit bias, and the participants may vote repeatedly. We will not disclose the number of votes received.”

Let me back this claim up. The Cheshire Herald web poll is driven by an email submit script, not web-polling software. Each time you vote, an email is sent to pollresults@cheshireherald.com. The content of the email is a simple ‘Yes’, ‘No’, or ‘No Opinion.’ There’s no unique IP address or sender info to identify the participant as a repeat customer. I think it’s necessary to note that I didn’t have to do anything sneaky to figure this out. One needs only to visit the poll, click View on your browser menu, and select the Source option. The Herald uses a free script from www.mindpalette.com, called NateMail, to drive the poll.

I wanted to see if participants could actually vote repeatedly without detection. So, I installed the software myself. I downloaded the same script they use. I installed it on my web site. I created a simple web page with a poll that submits data to the NateMail script using the exact same form settings they use. Then, I voted, repeatedly.

Click for bigger.

Click for bigger.

Click for bigger.

If the poll is worth including in the paper, they need to use actual polling software. Here are some of the comments on Tim White Listens that tipped me off:

selected comment excerpts from Tim White Listens

Anonymous said…
At least 90% of Cheshire residents don’t know that the entire 400 acres can become malls and big box stores and that can have a devastating effect on our current business owners who are also our neighbors.

Given a choice, most would prefer more shopping closer to the center or west main.

Don’t ever believe a Cheshire Herald poll and that’s what most people refer to when they say people don’t mind the stores. If everything is explained to the people and a real statistically correct poll were taken, you would find the results a lot different.

Friday, July 06, 2007 1:01:00 PM

Anonymous said…
The following Poll is similar to the type that the Cheshire Herald runs. You may vote as many times as you want.

Anonymous said…
“Herald poll, Herald editorials are that Cheshire residents are overwhelmingly against residential. ”

The Herald poll is crap. If the people of Cheshire were told the truth of what these changes will allow and a real poll were taken, then the entire project including retail would be rejected. The people of Cheshire have been manipulated.

Thursday, July 05, 2007 10:54:00 AM