Originally Posted by jillianleab
Ok, I'm going off topic to rant about statistics here, so forgive me, or skip my post!
There was recently a story about a girl in the UK who attends a private school which has a policy saying "no jewelry". Exceptions are made for religious pieces, such as a crucifix. The girl started coming to school wearing a "chastity ring" which she says is a symbol of her Christian faith and her committment to remain a virgin until she is married. The school instructed her to remove the ring because it violated policy. The school said the ring is not a part of the Christian faith, but rather a personal piece of jewelry. Blah blah blah, big lawsuit ensues, school wins, girl can't wear the ring to school. After the article there was a poll which people could respond to. The question was: "Should a girl be allowed to wear a chasitiy ring to school?" Well, most votes were "yes". Of course they were yes! The question didn't address the specifics of the article; it should have said; "Should a girl be allowed to violate a school's dress code by wearing a chastity ring?". But of course, that might lead the results in the opposite direction....
I use this example to illustrate how statistics are unreliable unless you know the group being asked, the specific question be asked, etc. I'm taking a statistics class right now and it's only taught me to hate statistcs more! :)
/Rant over.
Oh, I mean in no way to indicate ETW that you've posted something as unreliable as the case I mentioned in my rant!