 | | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) Sorry. That was an inside reference to Dave! I was referring to the (URL) Democratic Underground>. (...) You could have a sample size of 1,000,000, but if it isn't random, then it is worthless. Berkeley is arguabley the most liberal place in (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) That's an inside joke between Mr. Neal and me. Nothing to do, incidentally, with discussions of the UN Embassy in Denmark, which we have all "let go." (...) I don't know about that last part, but a sample of 2,000 kids growing up in a famously (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
--SNIP-- (...) ???? (...) Disagree. One hundred people is a decent amount (error is proportional to 1/sqrt(sample size)). Besides, if the sample size was considered inadequate in a statistical sense by the experts in the field who review the paper (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) lol For the record, I signed up again with yet another email addy, and was summarily nuked; they must checking IPs. I have officially given up life in the underground. Pity. (...) Agreed. (...) I wasn't a whiney child (so I'm told), and I did (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) I read about this on a certain Other Forum and basically said "eh." It's a too-small sample size from a too-small geographic area. I'd say it's close to meaningless, and in any case the factors of adolescent life and parental leanings likely (...) (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
(...) Would you explain what points you disagree with? It seems a fairly narrow but objective study to me and a surpringly well written science article about the study. Tim (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | A Berkeley Study That Portrays Liberalism Positively?!!
|
|
I'm shocked. I'm also kidding. The most interesting thing to me about (URL) study> is the motivation of the researchers. When the day is done and the results are in, it simply amounts to patting oneself on the back. This is research? JOHN (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) What-- is it "Sarcasm Day" down there? (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Well good naturedness was certainly the overwhelming impression I came away with from your post. a (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Is this yet another example of your "obvious sarcasm"? JOHN (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Well, at least I was good natured enough to have made my sarcasm obvious. Your comment borders incivility. ROSCO (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Well, at least I was good natured enough to have included a smiley. Your comment borders incivility. JOHN (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Time to let it go. Really. ROSCO (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Time to let it go. Really. JOHN (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) The UN doesn't have embassies, as far as I know. (19 years ago, 22-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Are you serious, or is that just a turn of phrase? ROSCO (19 years ago, 21-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: Thoughts on the UN "Racist" poster?
|
|
(...) Dejure it's out of copyright/trademark, true, but defacto it will be LEGO that will be influenced the most by any ill will engendered. Most people's first thought, I would expect, would be "hey those are legos" (with some small subset thinking (...) (19 years ago, 21-Mar-06, to lugnet.mediawatch, lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament's entirely unnacceptable intellectual dishonesty
|
|
Just wanted to chime in again and say I appreciate your thoughtful response to my concerns. I also wanted to say I really enjoy your work, even when I don't agree with the commentary and editing decisions. And I look forward to more entries. Thanks, (...) (19 years ago, 13-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament's entirely unnacceptable intellectual dishonesty
|
|
Hi, Bruce. Thanks for the comments on this matter, too. I will probably redo the Acts story as part of my revamp of the New Testament part of the site, and will add the missing panels there as well. I think it's not just that it would be (...) (19 years ago, 7-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
| |
| | Re: The Brick Testament's entirely unnacceptable intellectual dishonesty
|
|
Hey Brendan, I appreciate the fact that you added the final two illustrations to the Canaanite woman story. I think that it was right to do so, as to leave those out seriously misrepresented the story. While your commentary on how everyone selects (...) (19 years ago, 6-Mar-06, to lugnet.off-topic.debate, FTX)
|
