4 ms·
Ummm, I don't want to say that reading is fundamental (even though it is), but, of the 36% of his acquaintances that go to the gym for that reason, about just o
by ci5er 8y ago
Ummm, I don't want to say that reading is fundamental (even though it is), but, of the 36% of his acquaintances that go to the gym for that reason, about just over 25% (of his 'crowd' in aggregate, not of the 36%) take steroids. That's certainly a lot more than my friends ('crowd') do (as far as a know), but it's not as out of whack as you suggest.
- willio58 8y agoIf 1 out of 4 of your fiends are on steroids just for the gym, that’s pretty crazy to me
- ci5er 8y agoMe too. Most of my friends don't go to the gym - they drink. Maybe I hang out with the wrong crowd.
- aikinai 8y agoThe parent comment was edited and a bunch of numbers changed, but actually not enough to invalidate my comment; the numbers would still only apply to very particular subgroups. Edit: Also no need to be a jerk about “reading comprehension” even if the comment hadn’t been edited to mismatch my reply. That’s the first rule in the HN guidelines.
- ci5er 8y agoI don't see the '*' that would indicate editing, but whatever. I'm a jerk; you're right: HN rules clearly state I should not mock illiterates.
- detaro 8y agoThere is no '*' that would indicate editing. Are you maybe thinking of reddit?
- ci5er 8y agoI must be thinking of something (I wouldn't have guessed it to be reddit; maybe it was), but I just added a space as an edit to the end of an above comment and didn't get a '*', so I guess it wasn't here. Mea maxima culpa.
- choot 8y agoComment was edited but the numbers weren't changed. I simply edited my comment to clarify how many of my friend actually go to gym. And I added, "out of them" to clarify that further distribution is sub distribution of the distribution above it.