Page 1 of 1
Male : Female ratio on CAA
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2006 5:55 am
by Linksquest
What is the Male : Female ratio here on CAA?
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2006 7:09 am
by Mangafanatic
I think the only way to determine it would be through a poll, although I seem to remember such a poll having already been conducted. . .
*Searchs*
Ah ha! Found it! The poll was conducted
here and the guy to girl ratio was discovered to be (or atleast the ratio of those who took the poll was determined to be) 4:3.
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2006 2:30 pm
by Linksquest
Mangafanatic wrote:I think the only way to determine it would be through a poll, although I seem to remember such a poll having already been conducted. . .
*Searchs*
Ah ha! Found it! The poll was conducted
here and the guy to girl ratio was discovered to be (or atleast the ratio of those who took the poll was determined to be) 4:3.
but... there were only 80 voters... out of 3,000 + members... i demand a recount! XD
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2006 2:43 pm
by Bobtheduck
Maybe someone with access to the innards of CAA could to this more quickly... At least, provided someone's stated a gender... Not everyone does...
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2006 9:19 pm
by Mangafanatic
I don't think we have a comprehensive way to view the data members provide in the form of quick reference statistics. Or, atleast, if we do, it's one of the magical moderating secrets which has not been passed to this young padawan.
PostPosted: Thu May 11, 2006 10:21 pm
by Yahshua
Ah you so funny Osaka. and yes it is hard to do such thing on CAA.
PostPosted: Fri May 12, 2006 12:14 pm
by mitsuki lover
Besides what would be the entire point of such a project?
PostPosted: Fri May 12, 2006 8:24 pm
by Heart of Sword
Besides what would be the entire point of such a project?
Probably curiosity, but I dunno if it's worth all the trouble.
PostPosted: Sat May 13, 2006 9:39 am
by Mithrandir
It's not THAT much trouble...
Pulled from the messy innards of the CAA database:
Male: 1035
Female: 884
Undisclosed: 3984 - (1035+884) = 2065.
PostPosted: Sat May 13, 2006 12:59 pm
by uc pseudonym
So the formal answer to your question would be 117:100. Of course, with the undisclosed people, the proper answer is 117:100 +/-234.
PostPosted: Sat May 13, 2006 2:27 pm
by Heart of Sword
MATH!!! AUGH!!!
PostPosted: Sat May 13, 2006 3:43 pm
by Radical Dreamer
Heart of Sword wrote:MATH!!! AUGH!!!
Ditto.
Just for the record, I'm one of the females of the group, if it's even necessary that I say it. XD
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2006 7:33 am
by Mithrandir
uc pseudonym wrote:So the formal answer to your question would be 117:100. Of course, with the undisclosed people, the proper answer is 117:100 +/-234.
You couild probably go a step further and say that the data is not statistically useful, based on the idea that the margin of error is greater than the known (well, assumed) valid data.
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2006 10:58 am
by Linksquest
Mithrandir wrote:You couild probably go a step further and say that the data is not statistically useful, based on the idea that the margin of error is greater than the known (well, assumed) valid data.
Well you could say that the majority of the unknown = female as they are usually more secritive than males. XD them CONNIVING FEMALES!
PostPosted: Sun May 14, 2006 1:39 pm
by uc pseudonym
I'm just not going to touch that.
Mithrandir wrote:You couild probably go a step further and say that the data is not statistically useful, based on the idea that the margin of error is greater than the known (well, assumed) valid data.
I did those calculations pretty much to make that point, because I thought it was vaguely funny. However, I actually did find that data interesting, just to know how many people actually set their gender.