Subject:
|
Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Thu, 21 Jun 2001 12:42:08 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
636 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Christopher L. Weeks writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur writes:
>
> > Larry,
> > You really are being obtuse.
>
> Wellll, one of you are anyway.
>
> > Further, I find the straw poll you have taken above to spectacularly
> > ridiculous.
>
> How so?
Because it is laden with paranoia.
>
> > I could note that the consensus of views posted here is that you
> > did indeed fabricate the point I am questioning you on
>
> What consensus is that? What I think is that he made an educated guess. When
> you are quoting government statistics, those are also educated guesses. So his
> statistic is as valid as the numbers you pull off the web to justify any number
> of assertions.
Now you are being obtuse Chris. The stats you mentioned are derived
objectively. If, as you say, Larry did guess his stats, I would describe
that as subjective.
>
> > All I ask Larry is that you be willing to justify the points you make –
> > people may respect your argument more if you could justify yourself.
>
> What people? Since everyone here knows that he's right, no one is going to
> respect his claims about LUGNET demographics any more if he sends a survey to
> every human on earth asking about LUGNET and compiles the statistics from those
> few who return them. You are being absurd.
You are being absurd. You need to read again *why* I asked the question. The
comments I made above should be treated as general - not specific to this
point (although it is included).
>
> > Is it too much to ask that you be willing to justify yourself?
>
> Yes. When the point is obvious, it is. Current threads aside, Larry needn't
> justify the claim that the sky is blue either.
Who wants him too? I am only asking what his source/s of a statistic is. It
is that simple. If it was a guess, why did he not just say that? Why concoct
some asinine story rather than say “I guess” or “I assume”. Like you say,
the fact is obvious - we would all have accepted it without question.
Instead we get:
“When you challenged me I went off and counted noses at that point in order
to see if my hunch was right. It was, at least for the 20+ fests, meetings,
events, etc., I've attended in 6 countries on 3 continents... (a slightly
better sample set than yours) For the subset that I reviewed pictures, each
one ofthem was more male than 49% and more white than the population average
for the continent or the country or the state that it was held in.
(whichever is a good metric)”
Descibing that as a "guess" or a "hunch" *is* absurd!
Scott A
>
> Chris
|
|
Message has 2 Replies:
 | | Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
| (...) Blah blah blah...WHO CARES!! I see you've been totally ignoring the point of this thread (The Scott and Larry Show has been reduced to childish actions carried out to the nth nitpick - and a bunch of us are totally annoyed with it) and my (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
| | | Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
| (...) Below this line, you quote his stating that it was a hunch. What the hell more do you want from him. He stated clearly that it was just a hunch. (...) What the F are you talking about? What asinine story? Read the quote of him that _you_ chose (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
Message is in Reply To:
| | Re: Nothing personal, but...
|
| (...) Wellll, one of you are anyway. (...) How so? (...) What consensus is that? What I think is that he made an educated guess. When you are quoting government statistics, those are also educated guesses. So his statistic is as valid as the numbers (...) (23 years ago, 21-Jun-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
67 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
This Message and its Replies on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
