Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.advocacy > #460017 > unrolled thread
| Started by | -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2018-07-28 09:52 -0700 |
| Last post | 2018-07-28 12:50 -0700 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 106 — 8 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.advocacy
This discussion starts older than the indexed window; earlier articles aren't shown. The article labeled Started by
below is the oldest one visible, not the original post.
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-07-28 09:52 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-28 10:25 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-28 13:01 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-28 13:34 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-28 17:15 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-07-28 16:02 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-28 16:27 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-28 17:29 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 09:58 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-29 12:21 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 09:55 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 11:44 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-29 12:19 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 12:57 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-29 16:15 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 16:57 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-29 18:28 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 18:42 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 18:45 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-29 19:37 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-29 16:17 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-29 20:43 +0000
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 13:53 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 14:52 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-29 16:58 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia SilverSlimer <silver@slim.er> - 2018-07-30 13:29 +0000
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-30 08:32 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-30 09:02 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-29 16:55 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-07-29 17:13 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 18:27 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 19:01 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-29 19:06 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 19:25 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-29 20:09 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-29 20:34 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-07-30 05:01 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-30 05:25 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-30 08:57 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-30 09:42 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-30 12:52 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-30 08:57 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-30 09:09 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia -hh <recscuba_google@huntzinger.com> - 2018-07-30 09:30 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-30 09:45 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-30 10:06 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-07-30 18:56 +0000
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-30 12:48 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-30 13:02 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-30 20:40 +0000
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia GasPipe <vinnythegaspipe@motz.org> - 2018-07-30 16:40 -0400
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-30 12:58 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-30 13:13 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-30 13:43 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Kompyler <kompyler@toke.com> - 2018-07-30 20:49 +0000
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia GasPipe <vinnythegaspipe@motz.org> - 2018-07-30 16:49 -0400
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-30 13:53 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-30 14:07 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 09:08 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 09:28 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 09:45 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 10:34 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 10:54 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 13:28 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 13:52 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 18:32 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-07-31 20:49 +0000
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 17:44 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 18:09 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 18:38 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 18:56 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 19:06 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia vallor <vallor@cultnix.org> - 2018-08-01 02:47 +0000
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 19:58 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 20:35 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 20:19 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 18:02 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 18:35 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 18:55 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 19:06 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-07-31 19:59 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 20:36 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 08:50 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-01 10:55 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 11:28 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-01 11:31 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 11:36 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-01 11:43 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 11:57 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-01 12:05 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 12:15 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-01 12:31 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 12:36 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-01 12:40 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 12:49 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-01 12:54 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 13:18 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-01 13:25 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-01 13:35 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-01 15:34 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> - 2018-08-02 08:29 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-08-02 09:46 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-31 21:17 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Steve Carroll <frelwizzen@gmail.com> - 2018-07-30 10:22 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-29 18:54 -0700
Re: Less than 1% care about Russia Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> - 2018-07-28 12:50 -0700
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-31 19:59 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <63005f1b-0951-4c9a-84c5-13afe006aa70@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460651 |
On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 8:06:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: (snip boring rehash) > > You said chrisv is on the "analogy" list, so let's see a quote by him. Note: *Still* no quote of chris by you. > >>> You don't know what you don't know, > >>> that's quite unlike estimations of coin flipping. > >> > >> In both cases there are uncertainty > > > > No, fool, the number of flips is *known* in his coin flipping "analogy". > > Ah, the master of hair splitting So, in your mind, the difference between known and unknown is "hair splitting"?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-07-31 20:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fsco58F4lalU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #460658 |
On 7/31/18 7:59 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 8:06:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > > (snip boring rehash) > >>> You said chrisv is on the "analogy" list, so let's see a quote by him. > > Note: *Still* no quote of chris by you. > >>>>> You don't know what you don't know, >>>>> that's quite unlike estimations of coin flipping. >>>> >>>> In both cases there are uncertainty >>> >>> No, fool, the number of flips is *known* in his coin flipping "analogy". >> >> Ah, the master of hair splitting > > So, in your mind, the difference between known and unknown is "hair splitting"? > This is a direct lie about my views. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 08:50 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c766955b-f6a2-4d54-b650-0c756aff1d28@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460662 |
On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 9:36:12 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 7/31/18 7:59 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 8:06:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > > > > (snip boring rehash) > > > >>> You said chrisv is on the "analogy" list, so let's see a quote by him. > > > > Note: *Still* no quote of chris by you. > > > >>>>> You don't know what you don't know, > >>>>> that's quite unlike estimations of coin flipping. > >>>> > >>>> In both cases there are uncertainty > >>> > >>> No, fool, the number of flips is *known* in his coin flipping "analogy". > >> > >> Ah, the master of hair splitting > > > > So, in your mind, the difference between known and unknown is "hair splitting"? > > > > This is a direct lie about my views. What do you think I'm discussing here, that you're swimming upstream against? While stats is about attempting to 'account' for the unknowable, in certain cases there are unknowns that make it impossible. I'm talking about those kinds of unknowns, the kind that keep stats out of the courtroom for good reason.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 10:55 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fseagiFfqd0U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #460739 |
On 8/1/18 8:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 9:36:12 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 7/31/18 7:59 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 8:06:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>> >>> (snip boring rehash) >>> >>>>> You said chrisv is on the "analogy" list, so let's see a quote by him. >>> >>> Note: *Still* no quote of chris by you. >>> >>>>>>> You don't know what you don't know, >>>>>>> that's quite unlike estimations of coin flipping. >>>>>> >>>>>> In both cases there are uncertainty >>>>> >>>>> No, fool, the number of flips is *known* in his coin flipping "analogy". >>>> >>>> Ah, the master of hair splitting >>> >>> So, in your mind, the difference between known and unknown is "hair splitting"? >>> >> >> This is a direct lie about my views. > > What do you think I'm discussing here, You are lying about my views to try to obfuscate how -hh noted some stats that went over your head and when he very patently tried to explain them to you, your response was to lie, throw a fit, play victim, insist the lesson was not the right one because it was a simplified version, and otherwise make a complete ass of yourself. > that you're swimming upstream > against? While stats is about attempting to 'account' for the unknowable, > in certain cases there are unknowns that make it impossible. I'm talking > about those kinds of unknowns, the kind that keep stats out of the > courtroom for good reason. > -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 11:28 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fb685b7e-86be-4c96-ab1c-867a2a555c42@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460758 |
On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 11:55:34 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 8/1/18 8:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 9:36:12 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> On 7/31/18 7:59 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 8:06:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>> > >>> (snip boring rehash) > >>> > >>>>> You said chrisv is on the "analogy" list, so let's see a quote by him. > >>> > >>> Note: *Still* no quote of chris by you. > >>> > >>>>>>> You don't know what you don't know, > >>>>>>> that's quite unlike estimations of coin flipping. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> In both cases there are uncertainty > >>>>> > >>>>> No, fool, the number of flips is *known* in his coin flipping "analogy". > >>>> > >>>> Ah, the master of hair splitting > >>> > >>> So, in your mind, the difference between known and unknown is "hair splitting"? > >>> > >> > >> This is a direct lie about my views. > > > > What do you think I'm discussing here, > > You are lying about my views LOL! I'm talking about, and have been talking about, the difference between known and unknown. Your "view" is that I'm hair splitting", which is absurd.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 11:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fsecjiFg9llU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #460773 |
On 8/1/18 11:28 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 11:55:34 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 8/1/18 8:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 9:36:12 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>> On 7/31/18 7:59 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 8:06:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>> >>>>> (snip boring rehash) >>>>> >>>>>>> You said chrisv is on the "analogy" list, so let's see a quote by him. >>>>> >>>>> Note: *Still* no quote of chris by you. >>>>> >>>>>>>>> You don't know what you don't know, >>>>>>>>> that's quite unlike estimations of coin flipping. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> In both cases there are uncertainty >>>>>>> >>>>>>> No, fool, the number of flips is *known* in his coin flipping "analogy". >>>>>> >>>>>> Ah, the master of hair splitting >>>>> >>>>> So, in your mind, the difference between known and unknown is "hair splitting"? >>>>> >>>> >>>> This is a direct lie about my views. >>> >>> What do you think I'm discussing here, >> >> You are lying about my views > > LOL! I'm talking about, and have been talking about, the difference between > known and unknown. Your "view" is that I'm hair splitting", which is absurd. It is known you did not understand the stats -hh spoke of, and it is known you cried his simplified example used to educate you was, well, simplified. That is, of course, what you will do anything to obfuscate. :) -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 11:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <55a4ce05-b5c6-4873-8c52-d7ef35023b49@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460776 |
On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 12:31:17 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 8/1/18 11:28 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 11:55:34 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> On 8/1/18 8:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 9:36:12 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>>> On 7/31/18 7:59 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>>>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 8:06:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>> (snip boring rehash) > >>>>> > >>>>>>> You said chrisv is on the "analogy" list, so let's see a quote by him. > >>>>> > >>>>> Note: *Still* no quote of chris by you. > >>>>> > >>>>>>>>> You don't know what you don't know, > >>>>>>>>> that's quite unlike estimations of coin flipping. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> In both cases there are uncertainty > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> No, fool, the number of flips is *known* in his coin flipping "analogy". > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Ah, the master of hair splitting > >>>>> > >>>>> So, in your mind, the difference between known and unknown is "hair splitting"? > >>>>> > >>>> > >>>> This is a direct lie about my views. > >>> > >>> What do you think I'm discussing here, > >> > >> You are lying about my views > > > > LOL! I'm talking about, and have been talking about, the difference between > > known and unknown. Your "view" is that I'm hair splitting", which is absurd. > > It is known you did not understand the stats -hh spoke of He didn't understand the stats he spoke of, as evidenced by his goofy "analogy". Hint: having an unknown number of coin flips doesn't mean you're unaware that the coin will land of one of two sides. This isn't remotely similar to what I was talking about, which is evidence that he failed to understand my obvious point. Again, there is a reason why certain kinds of stats are not used as "evidence" in a courtroom setting. Why are you having so much trouble with this reality?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 11:43 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fseda0Fgg9kU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #460778 |
On 8/1/18 11:36 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 12:31:17 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 8/1/18 11:28 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 11:55:34 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>> On 8/1/18 8:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 9:36:12 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>> On 7/31/18 7:59 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 8:06:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> (snip boring rehash) >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> You said chrisv is on the "analogy" list, so let's see a quote by him. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Note: *Still* no quote of chris by you. >>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You don't know what you don't know, >>>>>>>>>>> that's quite unlike estimations of coin flipping. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> In both cases there are uncertainty >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> No, fool, the number of flips is *known* in his coin flipping "analogy". >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Ah, the master of hair splitting >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So, in your mind, the difference between known and unknown is "hair splitting"? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> This is a direct lie about my views. >>>>> >>>>> What do you think I'm discussing here, >>>> >>>> You are lying about my views >>> >>> LOL! I'm talking about, and have been talking about, the difference between >>> known and unknown. Your "view" is that I'm hair splitting", which is absurd. >> >> It is known you did not understand the stats -hh spoke of > > He didn't understand the stats he spoke of, as evidenced by his goofy "analogy". > Hint: having an unknown number of coin flips doesn't mean you're unaware that > the coin will land of one of two sides. This isn't remotely similar to what I was > talking about, which is evidence that he failed to understand my obvious point. > Again, there is a reason why certain kinds of stats are not used as "evidence" > in a courtroom setting. Why are you having so much trouble with this reality? > Ah, he spoke of stats and helped explain them to you, but your failure to understand is indicative of HIM not understanding what he was teaching you. Sure... not at all tied to your victim mentality. LOL! -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 11:57 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c5649231-84f4-4bec-add8-27b1eed25e66@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460779 |
On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 12:43:16 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 8/1/18 11:36 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 12:31:17 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> On 8/1/18 11:28 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 11:55:34 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>>> On 8/1/18 8:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>>>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 9:36:12 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>>>>> On 7/31/18 7:59 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 8:06:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> (snip boring rehash) > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> You said chrisv is on the "analogy" list, so let's see a quote by him. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> Note: *Still* no quote of chris by you. > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>>> You don't know what you don't know, > >>>>>>>>>>> that's quite unlike estimations of coin flipping. > >>>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>>> In both cases there are uncertainty > >>>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>>> No, fool, the number of flips is *known* in his coin flipping "analogy". > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Ah, the master of hair splitting > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>> So, in your mind, the difference between known and unknown is "hair splitting"? > >>>>>>> > >>>>>> > >>>>>> This is a direct lie about my views. > >>>>> > >>>>> What do you think I'm discussing here, > >>>> > >>>> You are lying about my views > >>> > >>> LOL! I'm talking about, and have been talking about, the difference between > >>> known and unknown. Your "view" is that I'm hair splitting", which is absurd. > >> > >> It is known you did not understand the stats -hh spoke of > > > > He didn't understand the stats he spoke of, as evidenced by his goofy "analogy". > > Hint: having an unknown number of coin flips doesn't mean you're unaware that > > the coin will land of one of two sides. This isn't remotely similar to what I was > > talking about, which is evidence that he failed to understand my obvious point. > > Again, there is a reason why certain kinds of stats are not used as "evidence" > > in a courtroom setting. Why are you having so much trouble with this reality? > > > > Ah, he spoke of stats And I cited a 'cherry picked' example to give him the necessary clue, he later came back with a goofy "analogy" that told anyone all they needed to know. Why do you care that I don't buy the 'stats as reality' arguments in all cases?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 12:05 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fseeknFgq0sU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #460781 |
On 8/1/18 11:57 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 12:43:16 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 8/1/18 11:36 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 12:31:17 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>> On 8/1/18 11:28 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 11:55:34 AM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>> On 8/1/18 8:50 AM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 9:36:12 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>> On 7/31/18 7:59 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Tuesday, July 31, 2018 at 8:06:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> (snip boring rehash) >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> You said chrisv is on the "analogy" list, so let's see a quote by him. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> Note: *Still* no quote of chris by you. >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>>> You don't know what you don't know, >>>>>>>>>>>>> that's quite unlike estimations of coin flipping. >>>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>>> In both cases there are uncertainty >>>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>>> No, fool, the number of flips is *known* in his coin flipping "analogy". >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Ah, the master of hair splitting >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>> So, in your mind, the difference between known and unknown is "hair splitting"? >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> This is a direct lie about my views. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> What do you think I'm discussing here, >>>>>> >>>>>> You are lying about my views >>>>> >>>>> LOL! I'm talking about, and have been talking about, the difference between >>>>> known and unknown. Your "view" is that I'm hair splitting", which is absurd. >>>> >>>> It is known you did not understand the stats -hh spoke of >>> >>> He didn't understand the stats he spoke of, as evidenced by his goofy "analogy". >>> Hint: having an unknown number of coin flips doesn't mean you're unaware that >>> the coin will land of one of two sides. This isn't remotely similar to what I was >>> talking about, which is evidence that he failed to understand my obvious point. >>> Again, there is a reason why certain kinds of stats are not used as "evidence" >>> in a courtroom setting. Why are you having so much trouble with this reality? >>> >> >> Ah, he spoke of stats and helped explain them to you, but your failure to understand is indicative of HIM not understanding what he was teaching you. Sure... not at all tied to your victim mentality. LOL! > > And I cited a 'cherry picked' example to give him the necessary clue, he later > came back with a goofy "analogy" that told anyone all they needed to know. > > Why do you care that I don't buy the 'stats as reality' arguments in all cases? Ah, your failure to understand his stats or his point, and your inability to understand the simplified version he used to educate you, and how it related to the main point, is what turned you into a victim. Or maybe it was that the evidence did not back your biases. But either way you are ALWAYS the victim, right? -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 12:15 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <8a2a8b3b-f9f3-485d-8082-e4c3e9802a49@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460782 |
On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:06:03 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: (snip repetitive regurgitation) > But either way you are ALWAYS the victim, right? LOL! We're all victims of your BS, as has been proven repeatedly but, no, I didn't fall 'victim' to the 'stats are reality' argument in this case. I still fail to see why it's so important for you to push your faulty view down my throat. What is this big interest you have in convincing "others" that stats can replace reality in all cases?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 12:31 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fseg4eFgno7U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #460783 |
On 8/1/18 12:15 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:06:03 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> Ah, your failure to understand his stats or his point, and your inability to understand the simplified version he used to educate you, and how it related to the main point, is what turned you into a victim. Or maybe it was that the evidence did not back your biases. >> >> But either way you are ALWAYS the victim, right? > Gee, and below you work to change the topic from your failure to understand what -hh was saying, and what he very patently tried to teach you, to your favorite topic: your delusions of me. Gee, who could have predicted you would play that game? LOL! > LOL! > > We're all victims of your BS, as has been proven repeatedly but, no, > I didn't fall 'victim' to the 'stats are reality' argument in this case. I still > fail to see why it's so important for you to push your faulty view down > my throat. What is this big interest you have in convincing "others" that > stats can replace reality in all cases? > -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 12:36 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <31e854ab-6dc3-47f6-be52-d5094360f77d@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460786 |
On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:31:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 8/1/18 12:15 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:06:03 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > > > >> Ah, your failure to understand his stats or his point, and your inability to understand the simplified version he used to educate you, and how it related to the main point, is what turned you into a victim. Or maybe it was that the evidence did not back your biases. > >> > >> But either way you are ALWAYS the victim, right? > > > Gee, and below you work to change the topic from your failure to > understand what -hh was saying That's *alleged* failure... but you're still not answering why you care about people always believing 'stats as reality'. What's your stake in it?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 12:40 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fsegltFgno7U3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #460787 |
On 8/1/18 12:36 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:31:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 8/1/18 12:15 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:06:03 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>> >>>> Ah, your failure to understand his stats or his point, and your inability to understand the simplified version he used to educate you, and how it related to the main point, is what turned you into a victim. Or maybe it was that the evidence did not back your biases. >>>> >>>> But either way you are ALWAYS the victim, right? > >> >> Gee, and below you work to change the topic from your failure to understand what -hh was saying, and what he very patently tried to teach you, to your favorite topic: your delusions of me. >> >> Gee, who could have predicted you would play that game? LOL! > > That's *alleged* failure... but you're still not answering why you care > about people always believing 'stats as reality'. What's your stake in it? Ah, just because others understood -hh and you did not does not mean you failed... after all, you are a victim. And your "stats as reality" nonsense, which is your own creation and not representative of my views in any way, is another sign of you being a victim no doubt. After all, you are not responsible for your false claims, others always are. So very predictable. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 12:49 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <9a128836-019c-43f1-a8b2-9e9c44efaf30@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460789 |
On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:40:48 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 8/1/18 12:36 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:31:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> On 8/1/18 12:15 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:06:03 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>> > >>>> Ah, your failure to understand his stats or his point, and your inability to understand the simplified version he used to educate you, and how it related to the main point, is what turned you into a victim. Or maybe it was that the evidence did not back your biases. > >>>> > >>>> But either way you are ALWAYS the victim, right? > > >> > >> Gee, and below you work to change the topic from your failure to understand what -hh was saying, and what he very patently tried to teach you, to your favorite topic: your delusions of me. > >> > >> Gee, who could have predicted you would play that game? LOL! > > > > That's *alleged* failure... but you're still not answering why you care > > about people always believing 'stats as reality'. What's your stake in it? > > Ah, just because others understood -hh ... that's somehow "proof" to you that the 'stats as reality' argument is unimpeachable in all cases? So why are certain kinds of stats not allowed in as evidence in court cases? If it's as cut and dried as you obviously believe, seems that stats would be the answer to everything. And why are you hammering on me being a 'victim' when I made it clear I don't buy the argument in all cases? And why are you ignoring my questions about your apparent stake in people believing in 'all things stats'?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 12:54 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fsehfkFhe9eU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #460791 |
On 8/1/18 12:49 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:40:48 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 8/1/18 12:36 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:31:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>> On 8/1/18 12:15 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:06:03 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Ah, your failure to understand his stats or his point, and your inability to understand the simplified version he used to educate you, and how it related to the main point, is what turned you into a victim. Or maybe it was that the evidence did not back your biases. >>>>>> >>>>>> But either way you are ALWAYS the victim, right? > >>>> >>>> Gee, and below you work to change the topic from your failure to understand what -hh was saying, and what he very patently tried to teach you, to your favorite topic: your delusions of me. >>>> >>>> Gee, who could have predicted you would play that game? LOL! >>> >>> That's *alleged* failure... but you're still not answering why you care >>> about people always believing 'stats as reality'. What's your stake in it? >> >> Ah, just because others understood -hh and you did not does not mean you failed... after all, you are a victim. And your "stats as reality" nonsense, which is your own creation and not representative of my views in any way, is another sign of you being a victim no doubt. After all, you are not responsible for your false claims, others always are. >> >> So very predictable. > > .... that's somehow "proof" to you that the 'stats as reality' argument Nobody is saying your "stats as reality" crap is in any way related to what -hh said. Well, other than you as you play victim. > is > unimpeachable in all cases? So why are certain kinds of stats not allowed > in as evidence in court cases? If it's as cut and dried as you obviously > believe, seems that stats would be the answer to everything. And why > are you hammering on me being a 'victim' when I made it clear I don't > buy the argument in all cases? And why are you ignoring my questions > about your apparent stake in people believing in 'all things stats'? > When was -hh's argument not allowed in a court room, or are you just spewing your normal topic-changing crap as you play victim again? -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 13:18 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <02c7f4fe-5b18-4212-b6ca-c762d272aa8c@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460792 |
On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:54:32 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 8/1/18 12:49 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:40:48 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> On 8/1/18 12:36 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:31:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>>> On 8/1/18 12:15 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>>>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:06:03 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>>>> > >>>>>> Ah, your failure to understand his stats or his point, and your inability to understand the simplified version he used to educate you, and how it related to the main point, is what turned you into a victim. Or maybe it was that the evidence did not back your biases. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> But either way you are ALWAYS the victim, right? > > >>>> > >>>> Gee, and below you work to change the topic from your failure to understand what -hh was saying, and what he very patently tried to teach you, to your favorite topic: your delusions of me. > >>>> > >>>> Gee, who could have predicted you would play that game? LOL! > >>> > >>> That's *alleged* failure... but you're still not answering why you care > >>> about people always believing 'stats as reality'. What's your stake in it? > >> > >> Ah, just because others understood -hh and you did not does not mean you failed... after all, you are a victim. And your "stats as reality" nonsense, which is your own creation and not representative of my views in any way, is another sign of you being a victim no doubt. After all, you are not responsible for your false claims, others always are. > >> > >> So very predictable. > > > .... that's somehow "proof" to you that the 'stats as reality' argument > > Nobody is saying your "stats as reality" crap It's not my crap, it's owned by those pushing that idea that stats can account for every kind of unknown there is. > is in any way related to > what -hh said. Well, other than you as you play victim. > > > is > > unimpeachable in all cases? So why are certain kinds of stats not allowed > > in as evidence in court cases? If it's as cut and dried as you obviously > > believe, seems that stats would be the answer to everything. And why > > are you hammering on me being a 'victim' when I made it clear I don't > > buy the argument in all cases? And why are you ignoring my questions > > about your apparent stake in people believing in 'all things stats'? > > > When was -hh's argument not allowed in a court room Sober up ;)
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 13:25 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fsejamFgno7U5@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #460793 |
On 8/1/18 1:18 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:54:32 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 8/1/18 12:49 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:40:48 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>> On 8/1/18 12:36 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:31:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>> On 8/1/18 12:15 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:06:03 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Ah, your failure to understand his stats or his point, and your inability to understand the simplified version he used to educate you, and how it related to the main point, is what turned you into a victim. Or maybe it was that the evidence did not back your biases. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> But either way you are ALWAYS the victim, right? > >>>>>> >>>>>> Gee, and below you work to change the topic from your failure to understand what -hh was saying, and what he very patently tried to teach you, to your favorite topic: your delusions of me. >>>>>> >>>>>> Gee, who could have predicted you would play that game? LOL! >>>>> >>>>> That's *alleged* failure... but you're still not answering why you care >>>>> about people always believing 'stats as reality'. What's your stake in it? >>>> >>>> Ah, just because others understood -hh and you did not does not mean you failed... after all, you are a victim. And your "stats as reality" nonsense, which is your own creation and not representative of my views in any way, is another sign of you being a victim no doubt. After all, you are not responsible for your false claims, others always are. >>>> >>>> So very predictable. > >>> .... that's somehow "proof" to you that the 'stats as reality' argument >> >> Nobody is saying your "stats as reality" crap > > It's not my crap, it's owned by those pushing that idea that stats > can account for every kind of unknown there is. Which is, of course, nobody. But you lying about this proves, in your mind, you are a victim. Got it! Amazing how far afield from the topic you have gone. I bet you do not even remember what -hh was explaining to you. >> is in any way related to >> what -hh said. Well, other than you as you play victim. >> >>> is >>> unimpeachable in all cases? So why are certain kinds of stats not allowed >>> in as evidence in court cases? If it's as cut and dried as you obviously >>> believe, seems that stats would be the answer to everything. And why >>> are you hammering on me being a 'victim' when I made it clear I don't >>> buy the argument in all cases? And why are you ignoring my questions >>> about your apparent stake in people believing in 'all things stats'? >>> >> When was -hh's argument not allowed in a court room > > Sober up ;) Let me guess: the fact you are suggesting his argument was not or would not be allowed in a court room, which is not in any way relevant or supported, is somehow another sign of you being a victim. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Steve Carroll <fretwizzer@gmail.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 13:35 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <c7766a98-abb0-4006-9ebd-54c7377dca19@googlegroups.com> |
| In reply to | #460794 |
On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 2:26:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > On 8/1/18 1:18 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:54:32 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >> On 8/1/18 12:49 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:40:48 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>>> On 8/1/18 12:36 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>>>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:31:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>>>>> On 8/1/18 12:15 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > >>>>>>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:06:03 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: > >>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> Ah, your failure to understand his stats or his point, and your inability to understand the simplified version he used to educate you, and how it related to the main point, is what turned you into a victim. Or maybe it was that the evidence did not back your biases. > >>>>>>>> > >>>>>>>> But either way you are ALWAYS the victim, right? > > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Gee, and below you work to change the topic from your failure to understand what -hh was saying, and what he very patently tried to teach you, to your favorite topic: your delusions of me. > >>>>>> > >>>>>> Gee, who could have predicted you would play that game? LOL! > >>>>> > >>>>> That's *alleged* failure... but you're still not answering why you care > >>>>> about people always believing 'stats as reality'. What's your stake in it? > >>>> > >>>> Ah, just because others understood -hh and you did not does not mean you failed... after all, you are a victim. And your "stats as reality" nonsense, which is your own creation and not representative of my views in any way, is another sign of you being a victim no doubt. After all, you are not responsible for your false claims, others always are. > >>>> > >>>> So very predictable. > > >>> .... that's somehow "proof" to you that the 'stats as reality' argument > >> > >> Nobody is saying your "stats as reality" crap > > > > It's not my crap, it's owned by those pushing that idea that stats > > can account for every kind of unknown there is. > > Which is, of course, nobody So what's the real push here? You somehow were able to spend some of our tax dollars on stock in a company that does statistical analysis?
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Snit <usenet@gallopinginsanity.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2018-08-01 15:34 -0700 |
| Message-ID | <fseqr6Fgno7U10@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #460795 |
On 8/1/18 1:35 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: > On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 2:26:02 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >> On 8/1/18 1:18 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:54:32 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>> On 8/1/18 12:49 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:40:48 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>> On 8/1/18 12:36 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:31:29 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>> On 8/1/18 12:15 PM, Steve Carroll wrote: >>>>>>>>> On Wednesday, August 1, 2018 at 1:06:03 PM UTC-6, Snit wrote: >>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> Ah, your failure to understand his stats or his point, and your inability to understand the simplified version he used to educate you, and how it related to the main point, is what turned you into a victim. Or maybe it was that the evidence did not back your biases. >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>>>>> But either way you are ALWAYS the victim, right? > >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Gee, and below you work to change the topic from your failure to understand what -hh was saying, and what he very patently tried to teach you, to your favorite topic: your delusions of me. >>>>>>>> >>>>>>>> Gee, who could have predicted you would play that game? LOL! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> That's *alleged* failure... but you're still not answering why you care >>>>>>> about people always believing 'stats as reality'. What's your stake in it? >>>>>> >>>>>> Ah, just because others understood -hh and you did not does not mean you failed... after all, you are a victim. And your "stats as reality" nonsense, which is your own creation and not representative of my views in any way, is another sign of you being a victim no doubt. After all, you are not responsible for your false claims, others always are. >>>>>> >>>>>> So very predictable. > >>>>> .... that's somehow "proof" to you that the 'stats as reality' argument >>>> >>>> Nobody is saying your "stats as reality" crap >>> >>> It's not my crap, it's owned by those pushing that idea that stats >>> can account for every kind of unknown there is. >> >> Which is, of course, nobody. But you lying about this proves, in your mind, you are a victim. Got it! >> >> Amazing how far afield from the topic you have gone. I bet you do not even remember what -hh was explaining to you > > So what's the real push here? You somehow were able to spend > some of our tax dollars on stock in a company that does statistical > analysis? Let me guess: you lack of understanding of stats used to back -hh's views, or even simplified stats used to help you understand -hh's comments, somehow lead you to thinking you were being victimized by your tax dollars being abused. You are ALWAYS the victim somehow. Your family talks to you about your obsession and YOU are the victim. The police talk you about your harassment and YOU are the victim. YOU are always the victim in your mind. -- Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow superior by attacking the messenger. They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again. <https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 5 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.advocacy
csiph-web