On 12/05/2011 03:09 PM, Chí-Thanh Christopher Nguyễn wrote:
> Zac Medico schrieb:
>> One person's common-sense behavioral model is another person's baseless
>> claim.
> 
> Claims don't have to be based on data. You can come to a conclusion from
> experience/knowledge of working/researching/studying in a particular
> subject, or from opinions of those who did. Or you can say that this is
> your idea of "common sense". Or your can say that it is derived from
> your imagination.
> 
> All these claims are valid and deserve attention, but in a discussion
> should be clearly labelled as what they are.

My intention wasn't to present anything as fact. It was to provide a
hypothetical mechanism for sampling bias, in order to demonstrate the
kinds of challenges involved in statistical analysis.

>>> One way to investigate would be to sample statements in the forum
>>> thread, and determining how many responded with personal preference and
>>> how many with practical arguments. It would still have to be accounted
>>> for those who try to rationalize their pre-conceived opinion with ad-hoc
>>> arguments, but better than nothing at all which is the current case.
>>
>> Sure, but that seems like more of an academic exercise than a practical
>> one. I think we'll better of with a judicial approach, where a group of
>> judges weighs a set of pros and cons. Gentoo's council is the closest
>> thing to that we have to a judiciary.
> 
> I have just given an example of what I would have considered data/fact
> regarding the bias claim.

And I think that statistics are basically useless in the current
context, due to the challenges involved in obtaining a reasonably
unbiased sample. That's why I suggest that a judicial approach would be
most appropriate.
-- 
Thanks,
Zac