Subject:
|
Re: how to lie with statistics
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.off-topic.debate
|
Date:
|
Sat, 24 Nov 2001 18:46:36 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
2035 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur twists reality thusly:
>
> > I have said it before, and I will say it again: I've seen you have more
> > arguments on this forum (I mean the whole of Lugnet) than any other single
> > person. Refute that if you can.
My above comment stands.
Scott A
>
> I post a lot. So any metric ought to be on a per post basis. That winnows it
> down significantly. Else we're saying that Johnny one post gets the nobel
> peace prize because his one and only post didn't get any response whatever.
>
> Next... What is the meaning of "have" in this context? "start" or get
> dragged in to? If I happen to post something agreeing with someone else and
> an ensuing argumentative post references my post instead of the post I
> agreed with, who should get charged for the argument? Me? All I did was
> agree with somebody else! If so, then what you are saying is that whenever I
> post to any thread whatever it may well be an argument that you charge to me
> if someone somewhere in the thread disagrees with something. (the canonical
> example of this may well be the Eric Sophie thread in which he singles me
> out for agreeing with someone else that his post was way overcrossposted. He
> recanted but you'd still charge me with that one no doubt...)
>
> Finally, I'm a lightning rod for twits that disagree with anything and
> everything I say, just to disagree. If I post something perfectly innocuous
> and some twit comes along and snipes at it, does that count as an argument I
> started? Factor them out.
>
> What you're left with is nothing significant. No positive correlation.
>
> Now, on the other hand if we carried the calculus out for YOU, we'd get
> rather different results and everyone here knows it. As your DebateCard(tm)
> indicates.
>
> Thanks for playing.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | how to lie with statistics
|
| In lugnet.off-topic.debate, Scott Arthur twists reality thusly: (...) I post a lot. So any metric ought to be on a per post basis. That winnows it down significantly. Else we're saying that Johnny one post gets the nobel peace prize because his one (...) (25 years ago, 23-Nov-01, to lugnet.off-topic.debate)
|
64 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
