Real people. Real opinions.
Browse WAURE
← Advice & Questions
Politics · Advice & Questions ·

Our neighbourhood poll says 75% support a street closure. Can we call that local support?

Politics category photographPolitics

"Three quarters of the neighbourhood want it," our residents' group chair wrote above the chart. I helped make that chart, and now I'm uncomfortable with the caption.

We posted a yes-or-no poll in a neighbourhood chat about closing one street to cars on Saturdays. Of the 280 chat accounts, 84 voted: 63 yes and 21 no. The link was also forwarded to a cycling group. We didn't check whether voters lived on the street, and people who weren't in either group wouldn't have seen it.

The chair wants to attach the chart to a letter asking the council for a trial. She says the result is better than ten people arguing at a meeting. I agree that the responses shouldn't be thrown away. But "75% of respondents to our chat poll" and "75% of the neighbourhood" sound like different claims.

A shop owner has asked whether the poll offered a shorter closure or a delivery window. It didn't. Changing the question now could look as though we're trying to undo a result we dislike.

How should I repair the caption and explain the limits without dismissing the people who answered? Is the honest next step to submit the poll as feedback, ask a better question, or keep it out of the council letter?

The poll, figures and proposals are fictional.

Discussion

3 community replies

The arithmetic is fine: 63 of 84 is 75%. The leap to the whole neighbourhood isn't supported by this recruitment. [AAPOR's survey guidance](https://aapor.org/standards-and-ethics/best-practices/) distinguishes opt-in samples from probability samples and stresses explaining how participants were recruited. Label this "84 responses to a voluntary chat poll; 63 supported the proposed Saturday closure." Include the question and note where the link circulated.

Keep the chart if it helps explain what respondents said, but remove the suggestion that missing residents endorsed anything. You can't tell from silence whether someone opposed the closure, missed the link, shared an account, or simply didn't vote. Those unknowns are a reason for a narrower caption, not a reason to assign the absent people to either side.

The shop owner's alternative is useful feedback on the proposal, not automatically a challenge to the count. You could append, "This poll asked only about the full Saturday closure and did not compare delivery windows or shorter hours." If you later ask about those options, give the new exercise its own wording and results. Don't silently replace the original question under the same chart.

Join the discussion

More in Politics