Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #114953

cc runs. Again.

Show all headers | View raw

On 6/18/12 12:42 PM, in article
d4d8048d-420f-4bef-afb1-cbbc5f9e7743@googlegroups.com, "cc"
<scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote:

> On Monday, June 18, 2012 3:26:36 PM UTC-4, Onion Knight wrote:
>> On Jun 18, 4:32 pm, Steve Carroll <fretwiz...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Jun 18, 7:19 am, cc <scatnu...@hotmail.com> wrote:
>> 
>>> Unquestionably, irrefutably... Snit's "prediction"  that the alleged
>>> correlation between rising Linux marketshare and UI improvements were
>>> something he labeled as a "trend", another term widely used in
>>> statistical analysis. Given the context his numerous statements are
>>> being made in (Statistics), a few obvious questions are:
>>> 
>>> 1 - Did Snit create a statistical model to make his prediction (an
>>> alleged correlation) and to claim this alleged "trend"?
>> 
>> Snit showed there was an increase in 2011 and a decrease in 2012. He
>> has admitted that he did not predict the decrease in 2012.
> 
> Snit showed there was an increase in the 2nd half of 2011 only, using an
> extremely small data set (which according to him isn't even "standard") of
> which over 50% of the small number of points were determined to be erroneous
> based on further examination against the full data set. But that was only
> Snit's latest attempt, and not even the original source of the argument. So
> while it contains numerous problems on it's own, it was never a point of
> contention because Snit never attempted to use it until he was thoroughly
> humiliated with his original attempt.

Can you quote what argument of mine you think I was wrong about?  And can
you back your claim that the data points from the latter half of 2011 are
any less accurate than the rest of the data set we used?  And will you
comment on your *clearly* erroneous comments about the depictions of the
sigma line on normal curves - when you insisted they were fine but they
clearly were not?

No.  You can only snip and run.  Not even you believe the BS you spew.


-- 
The indisputable facts about that absurd debate: <http://goo.gl/2337P>
cc being proved wrong about his stats BS: <http://goo.gl/1aYrP>
7 simple questions cc will *never* answer: <http://goo.gl/cNBzu>
cc again pretends to be knowledgeable about things he is clueless about.

Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy | Previous | Next — Previous in thread | Next in thread | Find similar

Thread

Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-18 06:19 -0700
  Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-18 09:25 -0700
    Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-18 09:43 -0700
    Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-18 09:52 -0700
      Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-18 10:55 -0700
  OT: Summarization of Snit's 'Statistical Analysis' argument  -  Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-18 09:32 -0700
    Re: OT: Summarization of Snit's 'Statistical Analysis' argument - Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-18 12:26 -0700
      Re: OT: Summarization of Snit's 'Statistical Analysis' argument - Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-18 12:42 -0700
        cc runs. Again. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-18 13:11 -0700
          Re: cc runs. Again. cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-18 13:23 -0700
            Re: cc runs. Again. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-18 13:42 -0700
            Re: cc runs. Again. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-18 13:56 -0700
              Re: cc runs. Again. cc <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> - 2012-06-18 14:09 -0700
                Re: cc runs. Again. Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-18 14:31 -0700
                Re: cc runs. Again. Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-18 16:04 -0700
      Re: OT: Summarization of Snit's 'Statistical Analysis' argument -  Re:Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Frederick Williams <freddywilliams@btinternet.com> - 2012-06-18 20:42 +0100
      Re: OT: Summarization of Snit's 'Statistical Analysis' argument - Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-18 13:18 -0700
      Re: OT: Summarization of Snit's 'Statistical Analysis' argument - Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-18 13:30 -0700
        Re: OT: Summarization of Snit's 'Statistical Analysis' argument - Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-18 13:48 -0700
          Re: OT: Summarization of Snit's 'Statistical Analysis' argument - Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-18 14:11 -0700
            Re: OT: Summarization of Snit's 'Statistical Analysis' argument - Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-18 15:45 -0700
              Re: OT: Summarization of Snit's 'Statistical Analysis' argument - Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Onion Knight <onionknightgot@gmail.com> - 2012-06-18 21:15 -0700
                Re: OT: Summarization of Snit's 'Statistical Analysis' argument - Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2012-06-18 23:02 -0700
                Re: OT: Summarization of Snit's 'Statistical Analysis' argument - Re: Visualizing where to draw the standard deviation line Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2012-06-19 09:12 -0700

csiph-web