On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 1:48 PM, Robert Rohde rarohde@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Mar 4, 2009 at 10:22 AM, Thomas Dalton thomas.dalton@gmail.com wrote:
I'm not a statistician, someone else can work out how large a majority is needed from a sample size of 570 to be confident (at the 95% level, say?) that a majority of the population as a whole agrees.
If the 570 people are a RANDOM sampling of the underlying population: 307 people (53.5%)
If 307 out of 570 people (53.5%) agree with statement X, you can be confident at the 95% level that at least 50% of the underlying population would agree with X.
Thanks for the specific number. I was under the impression it was something like that, but it's far outside my area of expertise.
Of course the current sample is not random
Far from it, though it pretty much confirms my suspicions (actually, I thought the number of people who wanted their name listed would be lower, around 5-10%, not 20%).
and I don't think rights should be apportioned by simple majority either.
Thomas's latest statement suggests that he doesn't either, but then, that brings back up my question as to what *does* constitute a sufficient majority.