3 ms·

“Seeking out perspectives that could combat your inherent selection bias” != selection bias. Are you arguing that poor people would be OVERrepresented in the m

• BeetleB 7y ago
  No - I am arguing that the only way not to have selection bias is by doing a randomized survey - it is the very definition of selection bias. If andbberger wishes to make a nice, nuanced argument, I encourage him/her to do so. However, if instead (s)he wishes to provide two word answers, (s)he should expect push back. Furthermore, I highly doubt andbberger has done a randomized study, and thus the accusation of selection bias applies equally to him/her. Saying things like "perhaps you should talk to more poor people" is simply dismissive, and unjustifiably assumes that someone who is disagreeing with him/her hasn't talked to enough poor people or that the other person suffers from selection bias, and not him/herself. Look at the whole thread: andbberger's comments are short, lacking any citations, sarcastic, accusatory ("middlebrow dismissal", not talking to poor people, talking to the wrong poor people). Contrast with HN guidelines: >Be kind. Don't be snarky. Comments should get more thoughtful and substantive, not less, as a topic gets more divisive. (Two word responses don't help). >Assume good faith. (Implying people of being ignorant of the conditions of the poor doesn't help). >Please don't post shallow dismissals ("Selection bias") So no, I'm not commenting here to argue whether the conditions of the poor constitutes a sky falling. I'm commenting to counter low quality statements.