Shouldn't we expect just a little bit more of the Duchess of Cambridge.

[sweetgrape]

Never turned up for one single memorial service for the armed forces, but there at Center Court, Wimbledon, rubbing shoulders with a load of celebs,and entertaining Brad and Angelina Pitt at Kensington Palace. Is this what her royal life boils down to.

Data is meaningless. Processed data is information. Utilising that information provides knowledge

Yes ego if they have taken a fair sample from a wide variety of backgrounds that would be correct. However there will be a smaller proportion who can't stand the fucking monarchy and object to assumptions being made about them.
Jeremy Corbyn and my DH are over 65. Trust me they are not sitting around reading the DM.

I completely understand the point you are making Ego-just cautioning not to take stats so far that you make unfair assumptions.

Rousette what on earth are you talking about,I only mentioned they changed their minds because itwas said that they didn't have a nanny and i said that that was what they had originally said.Why are you Implying i meant something else.

It seems to me that data is pretty useless. You can say what is likely for a particular group but you have no way of knowing what one particular person in that group thinks. You could make a blanket statement that every 100yr old wants a telegram from the Queen. I know very few people who have reached that age- but enough to know that they don't all want that.

We are all individuals and therefore it is very irritating to be told ' you are X yrs old and therefore you would think that' etc.

It is rather like saying 'you are a MNetter therefore you would think that'.

I have seen threads on here saying 'What do we think about........' As if there is a collective MN voice, whereas you couldn't have a more diverse enough group.

I think you would have the same if you said 'what do 60+ yr olds think about.......' Someone could pop up and says 'data tells me.....' but you could actually have a whole hall full of people who are nothing like data suggests.

sweetgrape What I am saying is this. You bother to write a post criticising them for their number of staff. You said William changed his mind from saying they weren't going to get a nanny and now they have. Like there was something wrong with that. I found that petty. Everyone can change their minds about their arrangements with their DCs. It is a non event and it's hard not to take it as a criticism, given all your other posts about them.

I think what gets my goat about this spouting off with data is that it smacks of sweeping generalisations, pigeonholing people, expecting them to act in a certain way and you saying "Ahhh yes, that explains it, you're 60" doesn't dispel that view, Ego. No one is pigeonholing you and you shouldn't to others. It means to me that you stop listening somewhat and you discount someone's view because of their age. You will come back denying all this but that truly is what comes across to me.

I hate being pigeonholed. I don't do it to people.

A question:

If we do away with the monarchy and have a president/head of state (whatever you want to call them) who would you choose? Bearing in mind that you need somone that the majority would be happy about- and someone who wouldn't be torn to shreds by sites like MN.

Data is very important - it shouldn't tell you what to think but it should inform your thinking. Once you know more about a person, data can be very important.

Do you bring this thinking into everyday life? Friends? Relationships? When you meet someone new in a social group, are you looking at their age/career/where they live etc and immediately putting them into some sort of category? I don't think you are getting it Ego. It's the presumption that comes across in your posts and it's irrelevant to bring this data into this thread. I'm surprised you are not asking everyone's age and then marking yourself down as right in a "I knew it!" way !!

I think it's very different to be talking of medical data, of course someone would listen to a Doctor and likelihoods/risks and act on medical advice.

I agree ego. I remember when we had those terrible floods a few years ago and William and Harry both shown with shovels working hard while castigating the paparazzi for standing idly by.It was so staged and set up it was untrue but it did the trick. I could just imagine the palace PR laughing at how easy it was to "fool the peasants". They really do take us all for mugs. Its so predictable though, every time one of them does something that might not go down well with the public the the great big royal pr machine swings into action. Works every time.

But we have an institution whose only interest is being the best ambassadors for Britian.
They don't need the money. They are only powerful as long as their " job" exists and no real decision making role.
Someone voted in by it's very nature would have to " seek" the role. Which is when it all gets political and ends up being about power, money, charisma etc and less about the good of the country.

So we vote for a Head of State and democratically elect them? And this gets us someone the majority are happy with?
Is the same way that the majority of the country are happy with David Cameron?

You do surprise me.

He is our PM,but not voted for by huge swathes of the people. I can't see that is any better.
You seem to have ignored the second part of my question which was 'someone who wouldn't be torn apart by sites like MN'.

I can see that some people would want the job. They would get the majority of the votes but those who didn't vote would be highly critical and of those who did vote some would be unenthusiastic and just do it as 'the lesser of the evils'. Some would be so unenthusiastic they wouldn't even vote.
Even those who voted because they really supported would be highly critical.

Probably proportions are such that Kate would actually have more support than someone democratically voted in!