Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #114989
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Newsgroups | comp.os.linux.advocacy |
| Subject | Re: cc runs. Again. |
| Date | 2012-06-18 14:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <CC04EC41.38B1%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> (permalink) |
| References | (7 earlier) <d4d8048d-420f-4bef-afb1-cbbc5f9e7743@googlegroups.com> <CC04D96B.387A%usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> <963f7047-44d3-4b2a-932e-8313402cc026@googlegroups.com> <1df77cf0-f767-4990-8117-2c943768c2fc@f14g2000yqe.googlegroups.com> <3ccac6cf-f506-41b2-a5b5-93fee47e516f@googlegroups.com> |
On 6/18/12 2:09 PM, in article 3ccac6cf-f506-41b2-a5b5-93fee47e516f@googlegroups.com, "cc" <scatnubbs@hotmail.com> wrote: >>> Already been done, the original trendlines/dataset you posted and your >>> statement that they showed a clear increase in Linux usage which supposedly >>> supported your statement that there was a correlation between UI focus and >>> Linux usage. All have been proven false at this point. >> >> Well... they were actually proven false from start and the proof was >> self evident... which makes this all the more hilarious ;) > > This is true, but common sense eludes Snit. Then again, apparently undeniable > proof doesn't do the trick either. Hey, as you two make up stories about me and my views you are ignoring the facts: 1) cc was wrong to say I missed steps in the creation of a linear trend line in Excel. I did no such thing. 2) cc was wrong to claim the incorrect depictions I showed him of sigma lines were, in fact, incorrect. But they were. 3) cc was wrong to say I was pushing the correlations I noted as being proof of the causation I had spoken of earlier. I did no such thing. 4) cc was wrong to deny the fact that on a depiction of a normal distribution you can visually see where the sigma lines should be drawn based on the distance from the mean (specifically, the distance from the mean to the inflection points). 5) cc was wrong to deny I showed an upward trend in Linux usage, based on the data we were both using. The upward trend was in the latter half of 2011: <http://goo.gl/NhFuK>. There is no reasoned debate about any of these facts. -- 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
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