Rob Ford's Toronto

[NoCleverName]

a Twitter called "Has Rob Ford shown up to work yet?" and just tweeting "No." every hour from 9 o'clock until he shows up each day.

I would follow that!

 

[EagleEye]

I would follow that!

Me too!!

Don Peat tweeted that Ford finally arrived and stormed past reporters.

 

[kbdid]

Me too!!

Don Peat tweeted that Ford finally arrived and stormed past reporters.

m

must be nice to show up for 3:00pm....and another follower if someone opens a Ford work watch Twitter!

 

[Pickles]

I'm seriously debating starting a Twitter called "Has Rob Ford shown up to work yet?" and just tweeting "No." every hour from 9 o'clock until he shows up each day.

How would you know unless you're at City Hall all morning or someone else tweets it first?

Maybe if you worked with the "RobFordMustGo" guy who's organizing a daily sit-in, it would be better. You could get him to Tweet you Ford's arrival time and -- instead of tweeting every hour that he hasn't arrived -- you could tweet once when he does arrive. On the weekend, you could give a summary for the week.

 

[Franks2000inchTV]

How would you know unless you're at City Hall all morning or someone else tweets it first?

Maybe if you worked with the "RobFordMustGo" guy who's organizing a daily sit-in, it would be better. You could get him to Tweet you Ford's arrival time and -- instead of tweeting every hour that he hasn't arrived -- you could tweet once when he does arrive. On the weekend, you could give a summary for the week.

jml's idea was much better.

 

[SecretSquirrel]

Assuming a completely random sampling method, a sample of about 1000 people is all that is necessary to determine statistics within a margin of error of +/- 3% 19 times out of 20 for a population the size of Toronto.

Look up "margin of error", "confidence interval", Google "confidence interval calculator" etc. Pollsters are not amateurs. They even try to account for sampling error (which varying levels of success...). But, the sample size is not the issue here.

That's not really an endorsement for Ford considering that if you look at the actual polls, his numbers are quite dismal - he is the incumbent and a sizeable majority would not consider voting for him. There's also the issue that there really aren't that many alternatives to Ford being pitched right now, personally I'm not really a huge fan of anyone in the mayor's race at the moment.

But the math works out.

You lost me at "completely random sampling method".

 

[mdash]

How would you know unless you're at City Hall all morning or someone else tweets it first?

Maybe if you worked with the "RobFordMustGo" guy who's organizing a daily sit-in, it would be better. You could get him to Tweet you Ford's arrival time and -- instead of tweeting every hour that he hasn't arrived -- you could tweet once when he does arrive. On the weekend, you could give a summary for the week.

I see this more along the lines of www.isrobfordstillmayor.com. The point isn't necessarily to convey new information, but to draw attention to the ridiculousness of a situation. The Twitter account could rely on the City Hall reporters' tweets.

 

[jml]

How would you know unless you're at City Hall all morning or someone else tweets it first?

Maybe if you worked with the "RobFordMustGo" guy who's organizing a daily sit-in, it would be better. You could get him to Tweet you Ford's arrival time and -- instead of tweeting every hour that he hasn't arrived -- you could tweet once when he does arrive. On the weekend, you could give a summary for the week.

The summary of the week idea isn't bad. I'd do it based off the tweets of Katie Simpson and Don Peat, sometimes retweeting them to drive it home. Point isn't to be the first one who tweeted whether he made it to work or not -- it's to focus attention on the fact that he's practically never at work for more than a couple of hours between 2 and 4.

Here's what I've got so far. He arrived at work just before I started it, so today it just has retweets of Don Peat and Katie Simpson... tomorrow the project starts in earnest:

https://twitter.com/FordWorkWatch

 

[jml]

I see this more along the lines of www.isrobfordstillmayor.com. The point isn't necessarily to convey new information, but to draw attention to the ridiculousness of a situation. The Twitter account could rely on the City Hall reporters' tweets.

Bingo.

 

[SecretSquirrel]

That would explain why one of my kids claims to see him quite often, and also puts some truth into another one of my kids' claim that he saw Ford stop at the Coffee Time (next to the LCBO) at Dundas/Roncesvalles a few weeks ago.

If you're not sure if your kids are telling the truth, perhaps you should force them to take a lie-detector test...?

 

[mdash]

Bingo.

So yeah, I can really see the value of relentless hourly updates. Who knows? Maybe this will get through to people.

 

[SecretSquirrel]

Also, let's look at the name Ford:

F (6), O (15), R (18), D (4)

6 + 15 + 18 + 4 = 41

4 (D), 1 (A)

So Ford will soon be charged by the DA!

Please, please tell me you're being tongue-in-cheek with this stuff. Remember: it doesn't always come through on the internet.

Funny theory. But, of course, we don't have district attorneys in Canada But still, A for effort!

Heh. Well, Robbie only has a criminal record in the US thus far, although that may change. I wish it coulda been 'CP' instead of 'DA', but I'm sure you'll understand why I wasn't willing to spend more than two minutes on this

 

[euler]

I think he was just joking, still. Unless you actually sit at City Hall and can tweet at the exact time he arrives, it'd be a bit of a pointless account even just for a farce, since anyone who follows an account like that probably follows other City Hall reporters too and it'll just be old news. I do like the idea of an end-of-week summary, though. Build up a nice data set, use it as a bit of anti-RoFo viral campaign propaganda.

 

[euler]

You lost me at "completely random sampling method".

In mathematics, we make assumptions, this is to isolate sources of error when talking about the theory. Clearly the older, often white male homeowners who are over-represented in phone surveys are a source of sampling error, but it doesn't change the fact that a sample size of >1000 is entirely sufficient. You wouldn't get better data if you polled 10,000 old white male homeowners, just slightly better error margin. The pollsters know about the sampling error and try to correct for it, and that's where I imagine a lot of the issues are in methodology. Again, all I was saying was that the sample size is perfectly fine.

 

[SecretSquirrel]

Using proper Numerology reduction would be as such:

F (6), O (6), R (9), D (4)

6 + 6 + 9 + 4 = 25 or 7

7 = G for Giroux or rather Det. Sgt. Gary Giroux

Numbers are fun!

Sorry! I must confess I'm something of a numerology neophyte - and I have the added drag factor of not taking that sort of thing very seriously, of course.

Also: 7 = G G Giroux! I knew it!