Subject:
|
Re: Why sets receive a ZERO?
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Tue, 19 Nov 2002 23:35:27 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
3176 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.general, David Eaton writes:
> In lugnet.general, Ross Crawford writes:
> > In lugnet.general, Kerry Raymond writes a really neat statistical analysis
> > thingie which I snipped:
> >
> > My question here is "What are you using this information for which requires
> > such analysis?".
> >
> > I mean do you base your set purchases on these figures? And if so, how many
> > times have you been burned by false "0" or "100" votes??
> >
> > Come on people! Just get back to building!
>
> I'm not sure information impracticality is really an excuse for inaccurate
> or misleading information. I think the point is that if we *can* get more
> accurate information, why not do it? Clearly this topic interests some
> people who actively want better analysis (or who are intregued by the
> analystics challenge), and doesn't interest others. In light of that, maybe
> this thread should just go to lugnet.admin.general.
Then maybe Todd should just make the current votes available as a .zip
download (or whatever) and those who wish can play with it to their hearts
content.
ROSCO
|
|
1 Message in This Thread:
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
