5 ms·
Beats me, our relationship ended that week, not something I dug further into. They were informational pamphlets, it looked like something a doctor might hand y
by newnewpdro 8y ago
Beats me, our relationship ended that week, not something I dug further into.
They were informational pamphlets, it looked like something a doctor might hand you when recommending treatment options.
She would just remove cherry-picked samples from the set to produce the desired distribution.
- carbocation 8y agoFrom a scientific practice standpoint, that would be a good description of fraud.
- ItsMe000001 8y agoThere is quite a bit of leeway when you have real world data. You have to clean it. You can always find some justification. This is not neatly black/white at all. Similar in all other fields from accounting to law. I think it's a serious issue that we managed to make so many people believe way too strongly in absolutes ("science" as a magic word to end all discussions, because hey, "science" and "data" - now we have an objective reality!), when in reality the world is way more messy.
- majos 8y agoThe original parent comment is describing someone hand-picking samples to obtain a predetermined conclusion. I know touching data to clean it before analysis can be a grey area, but the original parent comment -- if it is accurate -- is describing clear-cut fraud.
- ItsMe000001 8y agoI refer back to what I wrote. You miss the point. There is no black/white in what is necessary and unnecessary or even nefarious "data cleaning". You just use the same fuzzy undefinable words again, but you did not make it any more a "hard fact" than any of it was before.
- ItsMe000001 8y agoAs I already said: I refer back to what I wrote. You miss the point. Please, DO learn to not just read but also to comprehend what other people write, for everybody's benefit.