Dear Paul,

It has already been explained to Is Mise several
times that of all eligible Australians who expressed
a view on - "Should the law be changed to allow
same-sex couples to marry?"
The majority indicated that the law should be changed with
61.6% (7,817,247) responding YES.
And 38.4% (4,873,987) responding NO.

Nearly 8 out of 10 eligible Australians (79.5%) expressed
their view.

The result was announced by the ABS - telling us that
61.6% of eligible Australians voting YES to same-sex
marriage and 38.4% voting NO.

http://www.news.com.au/lifestyle/gay-marriage/stunning-fact-that-shows-how-comprehensive-the-yes-victory-was/news-story/6e9173fef9322faa2cfd99ed9c58880a

It can't be made any clearer.

Oh how bloody tedious!

The very best estimate of the 20% that could not be bothered is that provided by statistically valid random sampling, therefore about 70% yes.
Next best is the survey itself, giving 60%.
Even a lazy 50/50 estimate is reasonable.

All of these give an aggregate "yes" higher than the survey itself.

Gripers who somehow think the 20% of non responders would be different than the very substantial sample would need better grounds than any so far provided. ABS demographic breakdowns indicate that that more young adults did not respond than the elderly. If anybody *really* thinks a full vote of all eligible adults would not return a "yes", they should offer to pay for it, just as they should have to pay for the last unnecessary survey. I would predict a reduced "no" and increased "yes", simply because some nos have died in the interim.

The only questions now are about how gays can go about getting married and conducting their lives in quiet enjoyment.

Rusty.

Foxy,

"The result was announced by the ABS - telling us that
61.6% of eligible Australians voting YES to same-sex
marriage and 38.4% voting NO."

I agree and I respect the result, but that is not the same as the untrue statement
"61.6 of the Australian population votes YES
38.4 of the Australian population voted NO"

Nowhere did the ABS make such a stupid statement and you cannot shew where they did.

Admit that you posted a misleading statement and that you are wrong.

Go on, it won't hurt.

Paul,

What don't you understand about the statement

"61.6% of the Australian population [of 24.13 million] votes YES"

Are you trying for a place in the thickness stakes as well?

"but that is not the same as the untrue statement" Issy you did not take my advice, which would be most effective; "Blow it out your whatever!"

There is nothing to be gained by your extreme "pedantacism", its making you look rather silly....er.

Foxy, do not worry about the dog with his bone, let him have it, he can chew on it all day long, and in that way he will not be chasing his tail as he normally does, or scratching his fleas.

cont

cont

This seems to be a trait found only in some Europeans. overly concerned about "what ifs".

Foxy, a little story.... Some 20 years back I accompanied a Fijian friend of mine, taking a small party of Aussie tourists up to his village by 4WD into the highlands of Fiji, 'CC', and the village could earn some much needed cash from it, make about $F200 clear, a lot of money to the village in those days, plus some handicraft sales, and cash gifts as well. We assembled in the village big house, meet the local tribal chief, and others, having some kava with the men, and a feed provided by the village women, they had gone to a lot of trouble with prep. The conversation came around to how was the Clan Chief appointed. The short answer is its taken in turn from one family to the next. There are 12 families in the district, and it goes around in a circle of men. Very simple you would think, but not for one Aussie tourists, he went on and on with what if... what if there is no male in the family etc etc, short answer, it passes to the next family in turn, what if they don't have a male, get it, he went on and on. Then it was why isn't he democratically elected. The Fijians were nonplus with this outrageous nonsense. 'CC' my friend was totally baffled by all this, and i had to tell the bloke, "we are the guests of these people, and it would be a very good idea if you would stop labouring the point," In short he was being a smart arse.
A common mistake is to think the old bloke in the group is the Chief, not always so, that day the Clan Chief was a young bloke about 30. not the old 60 year old everyone wanted to shake hands with.

Sloppy journalists and propagandists may continue to out themselves by their misquoting of the survey results. But that will not fool anyone and will always be a blot on their credibility.

The Australian Statistical Society issued a statement signed by SSA president, Professor Scott Sisson, and the chair of the SSA media and communications committee, Dr Peter Baker, on the limitations of the interpretation of the survey.

"The SSA is concerned that limitations in the Government direction to the Marriage Law Postal Survey mean that, whatever the result, there will still be considerable uncertainty about the actual views of all Australians on the matter."
"The SSA is not aware of any official statistics based purely on unadjusted respondent data alone," Sisson and Barker wrote.

"However, under the Government direction, there is no scope to adjust for demographic biases or collect any information that might enable the ABS to even indicate what these biases might be."

Sisson and Baker were concerned that the "sensitive and emotive" nature of the debate may lead to uninformed community groups misinterpreting the survey result — and ultimately, won't resolve the tortured issue.
http://www.buzzfeed.com/lanesainty/an-opinion-survey-would-be-more-appropriate?utm_term=.hol2dKL2z#.ysR7MN172

The facts, along with the restrictions on the interpretation of results,
"..slightly fewer than half of all eligible voters (49.0%) voted Yes and a little less than a third (30.5%) voted No. The rest did not vote or their preference was unclear."
http://theconversation.com/what-the-numbers-say-and-dont-say-in-the-same-sex-marriage-survey-87096