Pol.is is a real-time survey system that helps identify the different ways a large group of people think about a divisive or complicated topic. Here’s a basic breakdown of some terms you’ll need to know in order to understand this report.
Participants: These are the people who participated in the conversation by voting and writing statements. Based on how they voted, each participant is sorted into an opinion group.
Statements: Participants may submit statements for other participants to vote on. Statements are assigned a number in the order they’re submitted.
Opinion groups: Groups are made of participants who voted similarly to each other, and differently from the other groups.
This ait-polis.pdis.nat.gov.tw conversation was run by Audrey Tang. The topic was 'Global Taiwan: Promoting Taiwan’s Role in the Global Community / 數位對話：增進台灣在全球社會的角色'.
votes were cast
statements were submitted
votes per voter on average
statements per author on average
How divisive was the conversation?
Statements (here as little circles) to the left were voted on the same way—either everyone agreed or everyone disagreed. Statements to the right were divisive—participants were split between agreement and disagreement.
How to use this: Hover to see the statement text. Start on the far right to find out what the most divisive statement was.
Here's what most people agreed with.
60% or more of all participants voted one way or the other, regardless of whether large amounts of certain minority opinion groups voted the other way.
Across 214 total participants, opinion groups emerged. There are two factors that define an opinion group. First, each opinion group is made up of a number of participants who tended to vote similarly on multiple statements. Second, each group of participants who voted similarly will have also voted distinctly differently from other groups.
Group A: 57 participants
Statements which make this group unique, by their votes:
Which statements were voted on similarly? How do participants relate to each other?
In this graph, statements are positioned more closely to statements which were voted on similarly. Participants, in turn, are positioned more closely to statements on which they agreed, and further from statements on which they disagreed. This means participants who voted similarly are closer together.
Click a statement, identified by its number, to explore regions of the graph.
Group votes across all statements, excluding those statements which were moderated out.
35Taiwan needs to decide on its “identity” which is separate from the fact that it governs itself as a Democracy. This identity should align with Taiwan’s values in human rights and freedom. Identity, values, and democracy in principal are independent of China’s threats/promises.
36Taiwan should do more to promote Taiwan's Indigenous People's Rights. US and Taiwan should champion Taiwan's efforts in this. China does not recognize "Indigenous People" but instead only "Minority People". Indigenous people contribute to Taiwan's unique and independent identity.
48關心人權、言論自由跟收入不均等的美國人應該跟台灣人站在一起，並且多瞭解台灣這三十年的民主治理跟民權運動。 Americans who care about freedom of speech, human rights and income inequality should stand in solidarity with Taiwanese and learn more about the recent history of Taiwan's democracy & civil rights movement
49The US should assist or support Taiwan to join international trade agreement like TPP or other kind to confront China’s increasing negative influence putting obstacles in Taiwan’s way to economically survive in the unfair game.
55I lived in Taipei in 1966-67, and watched it blossom from pedicabs and rice fields to an industrialized country. I teach my students that the talent/creativity/determination of the Taiwanese helped to make its mark on the world- “Made in Taiwan”. They wear it proudly! Dr Lynn
67Do what your authority could do to expand and deepen the understanding among American people, other foreigners and Taiwanese. And your authority could arrange international spring picnic or summer hike on schedule as Taiwan people global participation.
72We can work together in many way,not only in economy issue,but also in Asia Pacific weak have common interesting, in the near further, we will be work in many way than before, and the relationship will more tie I believe .
90The U.S. should speak up for Taiwan because we are under a severe threat from China. If possible, Trump should meet Taiwan president Tsai Ing Wen at White House in DC instead of meeting a business man whose company had some workers suicide record.