On Thursday, October 13, 2016 at 8:58:56 AM UTC-7, jfitch wrote:

I do not think you should just look at the unfavorable, which is the only information solicited by the question.

I understand your point, but the purpose of the question was not to collect positive/negative "votes" about Flarm distraction, it was to understand what sort of distraction "events" might exist, if any. The comment box is the primary source of information, the Yes/No button merely sets this up, but it cannot be used as a statistical tool to make judgements about frequency of occurrence. We are collecting anecdotes to understand what, if any, meaningful scenarios might be occurring - nothing more. You can't make statistical inferences from anecdotes and the comment box(es) are the main source of data.

On reflection, we could have structured the question without the Yes/No selection entirely. It's main purpose is to tee up the comment box.

Against a background of dislike for Flarm by a majority of the RC as documented ad nauseum in other threads, this is how I, and others I have spoken to, took it. Do you have the same curiosity about the focus of attention on moving map displays, multicolor flashy varios, and thermalling assistants?

There's a diversity of views on the RC and issues are discussed vigorously and openly. Distraction is a generic issue so, yes, those devices (especially fiddling with computers which have become more complex) are of concern. It's just that Flarm is the new source of information that *might* attract additional attention. I wouldn't read too much into the question focusing just on the new thing.

9B