So who was there?

[denny]

If you publicise this poll to your friends, we might get a headcount of UK LiveJournallers who went to the demos  :)


[Poll #103043]

Comments

[wildeabandon.livejournal.com]

It's not going to work terribly effectively, even if it does spread to within 1 degree of seperation of all the uk ljs, tracking it would be difficult, and whether not everyone is likely to have the sense to only answer 1 poll...

[wildeabandon.livejournal.com]

Oh, and Jo's already phrased it without the UK, which gets you an entirely different figure.

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

I was torn whether to count London only, UK only, or all. Probably should have done a better poll  :)

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

That's why you have to spread the URL of this poll, not do your own. The lj poll system will stop people double voting inside one poll...

[feanelwa.livejournal.com]

Argh *thunk* thanks for telling me it was the link not the poll i ought to propagate.
I've replaced my poll with a link now :)

[feanelwa.livejournal.com]

And also it would be more helpful if you took out the bit that says "You can include this poll in your own journal by..."

Silly! *hug*

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

No, that bit makes sense (I think). If you include that bit of code, the lj-poll thing, then it should embed my poll in your journal (if you have a paid account)

Test first. Propogate later.

[wechsler.livejournal.com]

Or you get:
[Error: this poll is not attached to this journal entry]

You'll need to do it by link, as Jo did.

Re: Test first. Propogate later.

[dennyd.livejournal.com]

Meh. What a load of poo. Wonder why they coded it like that then?

Re: Test first. Propogate later.

[wechsler.livejournal.com]

probably
1) 'cos friends/owner-only polls can only work that way
2) because the polls link back to one journal entry for discussion
3) 'cos they didn't think of sharing polls (generally the reason for most coding limitations ;)

Re: Test first. Propogate later.

[feanelwa.livejournal.com]

Because they smell.