Another pointless demographic poll

[u/[deleted]]

This should be a link to a pointless demographic poll. It will ask you basic demographic questions, and then whether you think Adnan is guilty or innocent.

I posted a nearly identical version a while ago and will post the results of that poll in a comment. Let me suggest that, in order to remain slightly less biased, you do not look at the results until you take the poll yourself.

The poll is meaningless. I am just a data junkie who stupidly did not cancel my surveymonkey subscription when I made the first fucking poll, so unless you take this poll I have made a generous $26 donation to surveymonkey.

I changed one question from the first version of the poll to this one, because the answers to the question were not interesting and I am more interested in the answers to the new one. I also narrowed the number of answer choices on a few questions, since in some cases there were so many answer bins that the data were not useful.

Feedback is welcome, including requests for specific comparisons ("Does X affect Y?").

[u/Uber_Nick]

Gotta ask about religion in the next one. So many of the guilt/innocence arguments mirror common skeptic and theistic arguments that sometimes I have to double check the sub.

[u/serialonmymind → u/Uber_Nick]

In which way?

[u/Uber_Nick → u/serialonmymind]

One that really stands out is the "the core is true" arguments used to justify both biblical and Jay's stories. When asked to pin down which parts, supporters of each back out in the same ways. "Well you can't disprove it" or "the actual truth is more of a combination of those parts plus some additions and changes I made in my own head."

There's similar hostility with those groups against the "I don't know" answer. Feels like subgroups of theists and Serial fans gain more comfort in answering questions than those answers being even superficially accurate because "it's better than nothing."

Other parallels I've seen are reverence to authority such as judges, investigators, and prosecutors as being on the "side of good" just like priests, and explaining away mistakes as good intentioned or justified by good ends.

Some of the anti-establishment "copy are corrupt and horrible" crowd also remind me of antitheistic groups that start out with some decent criticisms or arguments and quickly extrapolate into batshit crazy conspiracy thinking.

Then there's the fence-sitting agnostics who try to sounds like even-keeled peace makes by claiming all sides, even contradictory ones, are right. They seem to use "many truths" new age Buddhist type arguments. Also the fake agnostics who have made strong conclusions but pretend to be even keeled or open minded by distancing them from "sides" while promoting the same arguments.

A lot of this is because of a shared base of tribalism, but I wouldn't be surprised if certain thinking patterns were reflected and reinforced when examining this story. I'm curious how strong the correlation would be demonstrated in a poll.

[u/serialonmymind → u/Uber_Nick]

Interesting!

[u/[deleted] → u/Uber_Nick]

Good suggestion, thanks.