Census 2016 - Time to tick NO

Absolam

Akrasia wrote: »

93% of people wouldn't answer that they 'have a religion' if the census form had that information on it.

93% did answer that they had a religion, when asked what religion they were.

Akrasia wrote: »

A subsection of people would read the notes. Many more people wouldn't bother and would just tick the box based on their own interpretation of the question. Some would write 'atheist', agnostic, pastafarian or 'jedi knight' in the box

So, really, putting information about the question into the notes is only going to reach a subsection anyway? Good to know. We should probably put it in other places too then, like websites and apps and suchlike.

Akrasia wrote: »

If the intention of the CSO is to measure religious belief in the population, they should write the question as something like
1. Are you religious
1a If yes, what religion are you

They could, but they can get the same information by asking "What religion are you" and leaving room for respondents room to say "none". Which is what they do.... By the way, does the CSO say it's their intention to measure religious belief in the population? I thought they just said it provides information on the number of people of each religion or religious denomination.

Akrasia wrote: »

That is the way to gather the information that they say they want.

That's two ways to gather the same information; one of them just does it with less questions. As to whether it's the information they say they want...

Akrasia wrote: »

Not the information you think I want, but the information the CSO wants by asking this question. You haven't got a leg to stand on Absolam.

Tell you what; you show me where the CSO says what information it wants by asking this question, and I'll see if we get that information from the question, how's that?

Choochtown

Absolam wrote: »

So we can immediately see why one would generate a result that says 93% of people have a religion, and the other would generate a result showing 53% are not religious; they're different questions with different answers.

They may be different questions (1 is misleading and the other leaves it very open for the respondent to decide for themselves) but there's no doubting the similarity. People who "have a religion" must surely "be religious" or at least the vast majority of them. There is no way your play on words can account for such a discrepancy.

[/QUOTE]Well, you haven't shown it is flawed, or ambiguous, or misleading, or unexplained ( 2 out of 3 ain't bad, as Meatloaf says), and as I pointed out before, they seem to be set out consistently with the potential logic to all the other questions. [/QUOTE]

I've just revisited that link where you claim:

[/QUOTE]"We can see then, that where a non answer has a higher % response than the highest potential % response of any of the answers, it's placed first, before potential answers to the questions. And where a non answer has lower % response rate than the highest potential % response of any of the answers, it's placed last, after potential answers to the questions.
Is there a question where that logical structure doesn't apply? [/QUOTE]

What about questions 14,19,20 and 25?

Your theory just does not stack up unless of course the majority of Irish people have no education (not even primary school), don't go to work school or college and speak Irish daily!!

I will repeat: question 12 is the only question on the form to

1. Have a long list of options followed by an "other" option followed by 20 white boxes to declare the other before the final option. For all the other questions with choices (questions 7, 8, 9, 11, 27) the white boxes are at the very end.

2. Have the 2nd most popular answer tucked away at the end.

3. Have a key word (RELIGION) printed in block capitals!! Why?


[/QUOTE]93% did answer that they had a religion, when asked what religion they were. [/QUOTE]

Here's where you've hit the nail on the head! Of course if you ask someone what their religion is, they'll probably answer with the name of a religion!! It's called a "loaded question" and it's negligent of the CSO to include it in the census

Absolam

Choochtown wrote: »

They may be different questions (1 is misleading and the other leaves it very open for the respondent to decide for themselves) but there's no doubting the similarity. People who "have a religion" must surely "be religious" or at least the vast majority of them. There is no way your play on words can account for such a discrepancy.

Of course there's a similarity; they're both about religion, they simply approach it from different angles. And there's no evidence that 1 is misleading; just that it doesn't provide the result that some people would like it to. That those who say they are a religion and those who say they are religious amount to significantly different percentages when surveyed only demonstrates that it's not a play on words; people perceive them as different things. Trying to pretend they're the same thing and therefore one result is misleading is simply desperation.

Choochtown wrote: »

've just revisited that link where you claim:We can see then, that where a non answer has a higher % response than the highest potential % response of any of the answers, it's placed first, before potential answers to the questions. And where a non answer has lower % response rate than the highest potential % response of any of the answers, it's placed last, after potential answers to the questions.
Is there a question where that logical structure doesn't apply? What about questions 14,19,20 and 25?

Question 14 uses the binary logic you'd like to see on the religion question, which is consistent with question 15, but not with 19 or 20 (which are consistent with the religion question). As I said, 19 & 20 are consistent with the religion question; where a non answer has a higher % response than the highest potential % response of any of the answers, it's placed first, before potential answers to the questions. And where a non answer has lower % response rate than the highest potential % response of any of the answers, it's placed last, after potential answers to the questions.
Question 25 does seem to have a logic of it's own, though it's logical nonetheless; it lists all possible educational levels from lowest to highest regardless of previous response rates.

Choochtown wrote: »

Your theory just does not stack up unless of course the majority of Irish people have no education (not even primary school), don't go to work school or college and speak Irish daily!!

Well, it does seem to, though it's fair to say that Q25 on Education is a bit of an outlier, but it still seems logical. If anything, it demonstrates that a question which uses a logic particular to itself without being similar to other questions isn't necessarily misleading or inaccurate, since it's neither.

Choochtown wrote: »

I will repeat: question 12 is the only question on the form to
1. Have a long list of options followed by an "other" option followed by 20 white boxes to declare the other before the final option. For all the other questions with choices (questions 7, 8, 9, 11, 27) the white boxes are at the very end.
2. Have the 2nd most popular answer tucked away at the end.
3. Have a key word (RELIGION) printed in block capitals!! Why?

At the risk of repetition in answer to your repetition;
1) Q12 is consistent with Q19 & Q20, Q7 doesn't have an option for a non answer, so isn't directly comparable, ditto Q8, Q9, Q11 and Q27.
2) What you're calling the 2nd most popular answer is a non answer; No religion is not a religion, hence being separated from the answers, and placed after all answers because where a non answer has lower % response rate than the highest potential % response of any of the answers, it's placed last, after potential answers to the questions. Similar logic to Q19 and 20, where the non answer has has a higher % response than the highest potential % response of any of the answers, so it's placed first, before potential answers to the questions.
3) Well, on other questions where you're asked to fill something in, the something is in block capitals. Like Q6, Q7, Q8, Q9, & Q10. Maybe that's why; because they want the answer in block capitals to make it easier to read?

Choochtown wrote: »

Here's where you've hit the nail on the head! Of course if you ask someone what their religion is, they'll probably answer with the name of a religion!! It's called a "loaded question" and it's negligent of the CSO to include it in the census

However, if 93% of people have a religion, they'll answer with the name of that religion. The idea that lots of people will simply tell you they have a religion because you've asked them what it is, despite the fact that they know they don't actually have one is frankly ridiculous, sorry. Loaded question or not, respondents are not prevented or dissuaded from choosing the No Religion option. If you think a substantial proportion of the population are so witless as to be persuaded by a loaded question to claim a religious affiliation they don't actually have, placing no religious affiliation at the top of the list isn't going to better help them answer the question, at best it will move some of the witless into the non religious group, and some of them might actually be religious but are so witless they just tick the first box. That's not improving the census; it's just giving you a better chance at the result you want the census to produce, regardless of the facts.

Akrasia

Absolam wrote: »

Tell you what; you show me where the CSO says what information it wants by asking this question, and I'll see if we get that information from the question, how's that?

From the horses mouth:

People should answer the question based on how they feel now about their religious beliefs, if any. The question is asking about the person’s current religion or beliefs and not about the religion the person may have been brought up with.

http://census.ie//the-census-and-you/each-question-in-detail/

Absolam

Akrasia wrote: »

From the horses mouth:

People should answer the question based on how they feel now about their religious beliefs, if any. The question is asking about the person’s current religion or beliefs and not about the religion the person may have been brought up with.

http://census.ie//the-census-and-you/each-question-in-detail/

Where in that does it say "The CSO wants"?
Nice to see you're using information from the website by the way; some people were worried people wouldn't read it.

Shrap

I feel they could have dramatically reduced all the butt hurt here by the simple inclusions of the words "current" and "if any", then.

"What is your current religion, if any?", leaving the answer boxes as is. Seeing as given their explanation, it's clearly what they mean by the question.

Akrasia

Absolam wrote: »

Where in that does it say "The CSO wants"?
Nice to see you're using information from the website by the way; some people were worried people wouldn't read it.

Absolam

Shrap wrote: »

I feel they could have dramatically reduced all the butt hurt here by the simple inclusions of the words "current" and "if any", then.
"What is your current religion, if any?", leaving the answer boxes as is. Seeing as given their explanation, it's clearly what they mean by the question.

Probably; so far that seems like the closest to a sensible option. I have a feeling there might be some debate if the results came in about the same though; then the people who selected 'Catholic' (just as a for instance!) might be up for scrutiny on how well they understood the question still.

robindch

Absolam wrote: »

Akrasia wrote: »

From the horses mouth:

http://census.ie//the-census-and-you/each-question-in-detail/

Where in that does it say "The CSO wants"?

Absolam wrote: »

[...] I like to think my prose is more revelatory than obfuscatory.

I think most people would accept that an FAQ from the CSO concerning the upcoming census accurately describes the CSO's wishes concerning the upcoming census.

It's posts like the first one quoted here which help tip the balance in the ongoing moderator debate about whether or not you're trolling here in A+A.

Please contribute useful posts, not useless ones.

Thanking you.

Shrap

Absolam wrote: »

I have a feeling there might be some debate if the results came in about the same though; then the people who selected 'Catholic' (just as a for instance!) might be up for scrutiny on how well they understood the question still.

I disagree. Have just had this exact same discussion with my OH, who was unsure (from the way the question is worded) whether to put down that his religion is Jewish even though he doesn't practice it. Now I've explained to him that it his current religion they are looking for, he is completely clear that his answer is "no religion". I'm certain he wouldn't be the only one confused by how to answer, as a lapsed *insert religion you were signed up to*.

Until we had that conversation btw, he was under the impression I was being overly pedantic about the wording :rolleyes:

Bristolscale7

Meanwhile, in the U.S., religion has not been on the census since 1936:

Does the Census Bureau have data for religion?
The Census Bureau conducted censuses of religious bodies at 10-year intervals from 1906 through 1936. The results were published with statistics on topics such as the number of members in congregations, number of church edifices, seating capacity, value and debt on church property, and so forth. The census publications varied with the first two having volumes of reports and the 1926 and 1936 censuses releasing a Summary report and a second volume made up of individual reports on the denominations listed in the census. See our detailed listing of reports from past censuses (1790 on).

There also was a survey of religious affiliation done as part of the Current Population Survey in 1957 with the results published in a report entitled, "Religion Report by the Civilian Population of the United States, March 1957." The Census of Religious Bodies began as a few questions on the Social Statistics form of the 1850 census. When the Bureau became permanent in 1902, it became possible to separate some data collection from the decennial census. The Census of Religious Bodies was a stand-alone census taken every 10 years between 1906 and 1936. Data were collected in 1946 but the funding for tabulation was not forthcoming. The entire census was eliminated in the mid 1950's. Copies of the report are in the U.S. National Archives and Records Administration (http://www.nara.gov).

The U.S. Census Bureau does not collect data on religious affiliation in its demographic surveys or decennial census. Public Law 94-521 prohibits us from asking a question on religious affiliation on a mandatory basis; in some person or household surveys, however, the U.S. Census Bureau may collect information about religious practices, on a voluntary basis. Therefore, the U.S. Census Bureau is not the source for information on religion, nor is the Census Bureau the source for information on religious affiliation. Some statistics on religion can be found in the Statistical Abstract of the United States, Section 1, Population. In addition, we do provide a list of contacts for further assistance regarding religious information.

We do publish economic data on Religious Organizations down to the county and ZIP Code level in the County Business Patterns series. Religious organizations are comprised of (1) establishments primarily engaged in operating religious organizations, such as churches, religious temples, and monasteries and/or (2) establishments primarily engaged in administering an organized religion or promoting religious activities. Additionally, the County Business Patterns series provides data on used merchandise stores that are operated by religious organizations.
(FAQ29)

https://ask.census.gov/faq.php?id=5000&faqId=29

The law: http://uscode.house.gov/statutes/pl/94/521.pdf

"(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, no person
shall be compelled to disclose information relative to his religious
beliefs or to membership in a religious body.".

Choochtown

Absolam wrote: »

Question 14 uses the binary logic you'd like to see on the religion question, which is consistent with question 15, but not with 19 or 20 (which are consistent with the religion question). As I said, 19 & 20 are consistent with the religion question; where a non answer has a higher % response than the highest potential % response of any of the answers, it's placed first, before potential answers to the questions. And where a non answer has lower % response rate than the highest potential % response of any of the answers, it's placed last, after potential answers to the questions.

At the risk of repetition in answer to your repetition;
1) Q12 is consistent with Q19 & Q20, Q7 doesn't have an option for a non answer, so isn't directly comparable, ditto Q8, Q9, Q11 and Q27.
2) What you're calling the 2nd most popular answer is a non answer; No religion is not a religion, hence being separated from the answers, and placed after all answers because where a non answer has lower % response rate than the highest potential % response of any of the answers, it's placed last, after potential answers to the questions. Similar logic to Q19 and 20, where the non answer has has a higher % response than the highest potential % response of any of the answers, so it's placed first, before potential answers to the questions.

You've really disappointed me Absolam. If you don't agree with me that's fine but it's very annoying for me when I think I'm engaged in a rational debate to have the above posted in response.
Either
(a) you've received a different Census paper than the rest of the population or
(b) you have no rational reply to my points so you've decided to post a lie to either wind me up or test whether I actually have the census paper to refer to.

It's getting tedious now but here goes...

Question 12 is not consistent with questions 19 and 20. Questions 19 and 20 give the option "Not at work school or college" (which is not the most popular answer) first and then list all other options.

No white boxes for other

No "Not at work" hidden away after 20 white boxes. In fact nothing but a list of boxes to tick with the not at work one being first to counteract the leading "How do you travel to work" question.

No WORK printed in block capitals.

Very Very different. But then you knew that didn't you?

My point about questions Q7, Q8, Q9, Q11, Q27 was that they finish with the white boxes i.e no other choices after the white boxes. That's the format of the census questions; to fill in the "other" choice at the end of the question
... except for

Question 12! I suspect you knew that too.

The question is loaded and misleading and unexplained. You disagree. That's fine but please don't print lies just to try and "win". It's only a discussion on the internet.

Absolam

Shrap wrote: »

I disagree. Have just had this exact same discussion with my OH, who was unsure (from the way the question is worded) whether to put down that his religion is Jewish even though he doesn't practice it. Now I've explained to him that it his current religion they are looking for, he is completely clear that his answer is "no religion". I'm certain he wouldn't be the only one confused by how to answer, as a lapsed *insert religion you were signed up to*.
Until we had that conversation btw, he was under the impression I was being overly pedantic about the wording :rolleyes:

How many posters here do you think would say you ought not to say your current religion is Catholic if you don't regularly attend Mass? Despite the fact respondents may feel they are Catholic right now, regardless of not having received a sacrament in ten years.
And if your OH said that he feels that he is Jewish (religion wise), despite being lapsed and non practicing (and presumably having no intention of returning to the faith), would you object to him saying so on the Census?

Still, I get the impression that you're saying now that this explanation is available, those who do select a religion will have their selection respected by those who would have debated their understanding of the question if the results come in about the same? I'm afraid I don't share your faith; I think we will see a result which shows a decrease in Catholics, but that decrease will be touted as evidence that a few people but not enough understood the question, that it doesn't match the numbers attending Mass or who feel religion is important in their lives and therefore is a misleading, inaccurate and negligent result.
Though I could turn out to be wrong.

nomdeboardie

Bristolscale7 wrote: »

Meanwhile, in the U.S., religion has not been on the census since 1936:


https://ask.census.gov/faq.php?id=5000&faqId=29

The law: http://uscode.house.gov/statutes/pl/94/521.pdf

"(c) Notwithstanding any other provision of this title, no person shall be compelled to disclose information relative to his religious
beliefs or to membership in a religious body.".

Quite right, USA!

I object to the privacy infringement in the Irish census, and to the requirement for me to declare a position on what may be a veritable Schroedinger's Cat of existential fluctuations in my outlook (to mix metaphors, or whatever)! This is my response, Census: :P

Absolam

Dear me. I thought verbosity was being frowned on, but still the long version is;

Akrasia wrote: »

From the horses mouth: People should answer the question based on how they feel now about their religious beliefs, if any. The question is asking about the person’s current religion or beliefs and not about the religion the person may have been brought up with.

Akraisa what you've posted here is instructions on how a respondent ought to consider the question when answering. It says nothing about what the CSO 'wants'; (but then, the CSO 'wants' nothing). In fact, if they said they wanted something, I imagine someone would kick off about 'leading questions'.

Contrary to your notion that the CSO say they want to measure religious belief in the population, the CSO hasn't said any such thing (though I think you knew that yourself; you started with an 'if' then proceeded as though your 'if' were a certainty). I asked you show me where the CSO says what information it wants by asking this question, knowing such a request points out that they don't say what they want by asking the question, to demonstrate that even though you yourself want something from this question, it doesn't necessarily follow that anyone else, not least a government agency, does.
It appears my own leading question spectacularly failed to lead to you to what I thought would be obvious; I'll just have to try harder next time.

The CSO asks a number of questions (such as "What is your religion?"), and collates that data. In providing the information from the data generated by this particular question, the CSO specifies it is " information on the number of people of each religion or religious denomination." Not that it has measured the religious belief in the population, or that it wanted to (and obviously this would only be a measure of religious belief in the population; religiosity, whatever that is, might be another, whether people would say they are a religious person, as measured by Gallup, might be yet another, attendance at religious observances, one more), simply that this in the information on the number of people of each religion or religious denomination. They even went to the trouble of providing the explanation you quoted, which, whilst it doesn't say that the CSO wants to measure religious belief in the population by this question, does speak instead to how people should answer the question; based on how they feel now about their religious beliefs.
That you infer the intention of the CSO is to measure religious belief in the population doesn't mean that is the case; particularly when the information the CSO releases specifies that it has measured the number of people of each religion or religious denomination.

Of course, the only reason this really becomes at all relevant is that when we accept the idea that the CSO measured religious belief, someone proceeds to point out that it was done badly because it doesn't show how much people believe; many may not really believe at all since they don't go to regular services and they don't say they are religious, so the measurement was flawed; building a big nonsense on a small one. Best to stick to the facts; the CSO asks people what religion they are and publishes that information. It doesn't attempt to find out how religious people are, it doesn't measure the belief of any person.

TL: DR?

Absolam

Choochtown wrote: »

You've really disappointed me Absolam. If you don't agree with me that's fine but it's very annoying for me when I think I'm engaged in a rational debate to have the above posted in response.
Either (a) you've received a different Census paper than the rest of the population or (b) you have no rational reply to my points so you've decided to post a lie to either wind me up or test whether I actually have the census paper to refer to. It's getting tedious now but here goes... Question 12 is not consistent with questions 19 and 20. Questions 19 and 20 give the option "Not at work school or college" (which is not the most popular answer) first and then list all other options. No white boxes for other
No "Not at work" hidden away after 20 white boxes. In fact nothing but a list of boxes to tick with the not at work one being first to counteract the leading "How do you travel to work" question. No WORK printed in block capitals. Very Very different. But then you knew that didn't you?

I think you must have missed what I was saying so. Qs 12 19 & 20 (and Q10, to be fair) don't need to be exactly the same to be consistent; just consistent. And all four are consistent in not have a preceding yes/no answer, they all allow a non answer (no nationality, no religion, not at work school or college, not at work school or college), and they all place the non answer in a logically consistent place according to reasonably expected non answers % response vs the highest reasonably expected % response of any answer (10 & 12 after the answers, 19 & 20 before the answers).
The use of Block Capitals in 12 is not consistent with 19 & 20 sure; but they don't require respondents to fill anything in (whereas from that group, 10 does, and requires Block Capitals as well). And of course in this regard it is consistent with 6,7,8,& 9, which also require respondents to fill in a response.
I very much doubt you think there should be consistency in the number of white boxes allowed for responses; it seems obviously sensible to only have as many as may reasonably be needed for that particular question. The idea that any answer should 'counteract' a question is a bit too far fetched, so I think I'll just leave that alone.
I get the feeling you're trying to say that in order for questions to be consistent they must all follow exactly the same format, but that's obviously nonsense; they're different questions and different kinds of questions. You've noted, I'm sure, how Q25 isn't entirely consistent with the questions you've been pointing out either. It's still not misleading, inaccurate, or indicative of negligence as a result.

Choochtown wrote: »

My point about questions Q7, Q8, Q9, Q11, Q27 was that they finish with the white boxes i.e no other choices after the white boxes. That's the format of the census questions; to fill in the "other" choice at the end of the question ... except for Question 12! I suspect you knew that too.

And my point was that that's what you think the format for those questions is; the CSO hasn't provided you with the logic format. And what you think the format is doesn't work, because such a format would mean Q10 & Q12 are incorrectly formatted.
Whereas if you consider that Q7, Q8, Q9, Q11 & Q27 are distinct from Q10, Q12, Q19, & Q20 because the first set don't allow non answers but the 2nd set do, there's a logical reason for formatting the answers differently, yet consistently within those two sets. That works; if you're looking for a hypothesis of formatting to fit the facts mine fits better than yours. If you're looking for a hypotheses that doesn't fit the facts so that you can say the facts are wrong, yours fits better than mine, obviously.

Choochtown wrote: »

The question is loaded and misleading and unexplained. You disagree. That's fine but please don't print lies just to try and "win". It's only a discussion on the internet.

I certainly disagree with what you imagine to be the case about the question; I think I've pointed out why you're wrong, too.
It's as loaded and as misleading as 10, 19 & 20, which also offer a presumption.
It's as unexplained as H1, H2, H5 through 11, Q1, 2, 3, 5, 6, 9, 13, 14, 15, 17, 18, 19, 20, 21, 23, 24, 26, 28, 29, 30, 31, 32, & 33 (though it is explained on the website and app) which are also not explained on the back of the form.

You're going to have to point out what 'lies' (specifically) you claim I'm printing; I'm rather shocked you're weren't immediately specific with such a heinous allegation. It rather makes me think you're avoiding the facts to avoid showing how you're trying to bend them to fit your notions. Poor show there.


TL; DR Other than allowing multiple answers Q10 works the same way as Q12.

dr.fuzzenstein

Absolam wrote: »

blah blah blah

what the absolute fcuking fcuk are you blabering on about?
thread ruined by arseholery.

Absolam

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

what the absolute fcuking fcuk are you blabering on about?
thread ruined by arseholery.

Good to know you're getting it back on track so?

dr.fuzzenstein

Anyways, I won't be ticking no, since I am a proud Pastafarian. And all my admiration and respect goes out to all Jedi Knights who declare their faith! All you agnostics and atheists who tick no, I salute you! And if you are a Catholic and do tick the appropriate box, more power to you!
And to people who look at question 12 and have serious difficulties with question 12, I would advise a visit here and here.
It really is not that difficult, I can help anyone with some of the more difficult words, such as "what" and "is". Those can be tricky for those not used to communicating with language or putting letters into an order that makes sense.
Maybe some higher education is needed.

MrPudding

dr.fuzzenstein wrote: »

what the absolute fcuking fcuk are you blabering on about?
yet another thread ruined by arseholery.

FYP

MrP

Choochtown

Here's the 2 questions on the Census that are leading (ie. invite you to give an answer that may not be true if for example you don't have a religion or don't work or study)
One asks you to state your religion and the other asks you how you travel to work, school or college.
Note that the most common answer in 2011 for Question 12 was "Roman Catholic" so it appears as option 1. Note that the second most common answer (despite the leading question) was "No religion". (Option 7).
It has been claimed in this thread that these 2 questions are "consistent" !!!

[IMG][/img]

[IMG][/img]

Absolam

Choochtown wrote: »

Here's the 2 questions on the Census that are leading (ie. invite you to give an answer that may not be true if for example you don't have a religion or don't work or study)
One asks you to state your religion and the other asks you how you travel to work, school or college.
Note that the most common answer in 2011 for Question 12 was "Roman Catholic" so it appears as option 1. Note that the second most common answer (despite the leading question) was "No religion". (Option 7).
It has been claimed in this thread that these 2 questions are "consistent" !!!

Well you're really straining there. There are four questions that allow a response which is not a direct answer to the question; 10, 12, 19 & 20. You've skipped the question that asks you to state your nationality, and the question that asks what time do you usually leave home to go to work,
school or college.
I can see you're intent on using the criteria 'most common (or popular) answer' for setting out the responses, but your criteria doesn't work. The criteria I offered does.

Choochtown

Absolam wrote: »

Well you're really straining there. There are four questions that allow a response which is not a direct answer to the question; 10, 12, 19 & 20. You've skipped the question that asks you to state your nationality, and the question that asks what time do you usually leave home to go to work,
school or college.
I can see you're intent on using the criteria 'most common (or popular) answer' for setting out the responses, but your criteria doesn't work. The criteria I offered does.

I'm straining?!!

The pictures don't lie.

You think those 2 questions show consistency? I don't believe you.
Thanks for bringing up Question 20 and 10 also. They further prove my point.

Absolam

Choochtown wrote: »

I'm straining?!! The pictures don't lie. You think those 2 questions show consistency? I don't believe you. Thanks for bringing up Question 20 and 10 also. They further prove my point.

Which part of what I said is not consistent with the pictures? I get that you don't believe me, but we're not dealing with belief here, we're observing the facts. Since we're observing the facts, feel free to be as specific as you like; we don't want anything as nebulous as what you believe getting in the way. After all, you did say you thought you were engaged in a rational debate

By the way, are you going to provide any evidence for your outrageous claim that I was printing lies? Or should we just pass that off as something else you 'believe'?

volchitsa

Choochtown wrote: »

I'm straining?!!

The pictures don't lie.

You think those 2 questions show consistency? I don't believe you.
Thanks for bringing up Question 20 and 10 also. They further prove my point.[/b]

Stating one's nationality is nothing like stating a religion. It makes sense not to have "don't have one" near the top of the possible replies for nationality. That's not a good comparison for the religion question.

Not having a nationality is not only extremely rare, it's something which international laws try very hard to prevent happening to someone, and is certainly not a matter of a deliberate choice that someone may make.

Absolam

volchitsa wrote: »

Stating one's nationality is nothing like stating a religion. It makes sense not to have "don't have one" near the top of the possible replies for nationality. That's not a good comparison for the religion question.

It certainly makes sense if the number of people who previously said they had no nationality, which is to say, provided a non answer to 'What is your nationality?', was less than the highest number of any nationality previously specified as an answer. Because that would keep it consistent with the other questions. Like the religion question.

volchitsa wrote: »

Not having a nationality is not only extremely rare, it's something which international laws try very hard to prevent happening to someone, and is certainly not a matter of a deliberate choice that someone may make.

Which obviously has no bearing whatsoever on the Census question, though the idea that there should be some sort of differentiaton simply because it's easier to have no religion than no nationality, rather than sticking to a logically consistent answer formula is... fairly novel?

dr.fuzzenstein

I have just returned from a visit to my landlord
- the solitary neighbour that I shall be troubled with. This
is certainly a beautiful count
ry! In all England, I do not
believe that I could have fixed on a situation so completely
removed from the stir of society. A perfect misanthropist’s
heaven: and Mr. Heathcliff and I
are such a suitable pair to
divide the desolation between us. A capital fellow! He
little imagined how my heart warmed towards him when I
beheld his black eyes withdraw so suspiciously under their
brows, as I rode up, and when his fingers sheltered
themselves, with a jealous resolution, still further in his
waistcoat, as I announced my name.
’Mr. Heathcliff?’ I said.
A nod was the answer.
’Mr. Lockwood, your new tenant, sir. I do myself the
honour of calling as soon as possible after my arrival, to
express the hope that I have not inconvenienced you by
my perseverance in soliciting the occupation of
Thrushcross Grange: I heard
yesterday you had had some
thoughts - ‘

Cherry Blossom

Why are we quoting Emily Bronte now?

dr.fuzzenstein

Cause it makes as much sense as 10+ pages arguing over the meaning of a handful of words on the census form. Actually it makes more sense.
I might also have said half past three.

robdonn

Will Census 2016 get religion all wrong? - The Last Word with Matt Cooper

Worth a listen as an actual miracle occurs...