| Teeqoz said: Have I claimed otherwise? My opinion is my opinion, but what makes "my perspective" more limited than yours? |
Please look at my previous responses. I already explained, so I am not interested in explaining again.
|
The group in support of grid girls is evidently not sufficiently large to make F1 keep them. They may be larger, but that doesn't make my statement not objective - it just means F1 puts unequal importance to the two groups. Perhaps the group in support of grid girls is larger, but support them less adamantly, so they on average care less. Either way, that the group was sufficiently large to make F1 remove grid girls is empirically true and an objective statement. In addition - http://www.skysports.com/f1/news/12433/11231936/scrapping-grid-girls-divides-opinion-but-returns-f1-to-the-frontpages Sky sports's poll show a larger group supporting F1's decision to remove grid girls. |
However, this poll that I provided showed a larger disparity between the people who opposed the removal and those who supported it. In addition, the poll I cited specializes on reporting F1 news while Sky Sports has a more general sports focus. As a result, the respondents in the F1i poll are more likely to be fans of F1 and therefore, part of F1's target audience. Since the Sky Sports audience is less specifically focused, the proportion of respondents in the pool who are fans of F1 is likely smaller than that in the F1i poll. The respondents who are part of F1's target audience are more relevant than those who are not since they are the ones who will actually watch the tournaments and/or pay money to attend these events.
You can assert that that the group was "sufficiently large" and that's an objective statement, but as I showed above, there are some flaws in representing the Sky Sports poll as evidence and as a result, there is still contradicting evidence. You can easily throw polls around that happen to support your stance, but not all polls are equal so you have to dig deeper.
|
The link was just as a source that WEC did indeed stop having grid girls in 2015. Whatever opinions they've written in addition is irrelevant. WEC hasn't had grid girls since 2015. WEC is a formula racing tournament. Conclusion - grid girls aren't neccesary to have a formula racing tournament. |
So WEC has not made any statements about how the financial contributions from grid girls were declining and therefore, they decided to scrap the practice?
In addition, a more accurate conclusion is "grid girls aren't necessary to have in a WEC racing tournament". As you stated already, Formula E still uses grid girls, so that contradicts your original conclusion.
|
I've demonstrated that there exists tournaments that don't have grid girls. That alone proves that grid girls aren't necessary. It's not complicated. Formula racing tournaments that don't have grid girls exist. Thus Grid girls aren't necessary to have a formula 1 tournament. You can try and spin all you like, but that's a fact. Anyway, luckily for me, the end result is that F1 made their decision in favour of the view I support |
And you also demonstrated that there exists tournaments that do have grid girls, so that contradicts what you have concluded. For your statement to be true, then all racing tournaments would not have grid girls whatsoever.
Last edited by Aura7541 - on 22 February 2018
