4 ms·

I've updated that sentence to read, "A persons position on crime really depends on how they interpret the data on this dashboard." Thanks for pointing out the

by kodah 4y ago

I've updated that sentence to read, "A persons position on crime really depends on how they interpret the data on this dashboard." Thanks for pointing out the poor phrasing.

dragonwriter 4y ago
You still have the subject and object of “depends on” reversed, at best.
- kodah 4y ago
  I think reversing it treads heavy into opinion territory, which has no data - just people's feelings. If the roles were reversed, eg: were this not SF, people would be die hard about the data and what it shows - which is part of my point. We can't have our cake and eat it too. At some point you just have to set clear boundaries, like what I mentioned at the end.
rahimnathwani 4y ago
My point still applies: people don't usually base their opinions on data. They base them on what they perceive directly (e.g. seeing a crime) or indirectly (e.g. hearing about a scary crime). Even if confronted with data, people will interpret it based on their opinion. Crime report data is up? That could mean: A) law enforcement has been doing a better job, so people feel it's more worthwhile to report crimes, or B) law enforcement has been doing a worse job, so people don't bother reporting crimes Whether someone interprets the data as meaning A or B depends on their opinion more than it informs their opinion.
- kodah 4y ago
  The data, to me, is mostly reality. I rephrased it so that it reflects peoples perceptions on reality. I did that specifically because there's debate on how much crime there actually is. I do agree that data is fallable and manipulatable, but I do still think the data is good enough for a baseline.
  - rahimnathwani 4y ago
    I'm not suggesting the data aren't useful, that they don't reflect reality, or that they don't inform your opinion of what policies we should pursue. I'm just disagreeing that the data (trend in # of incidents of crime) are what drives most people's opinions about what policies we should pursue.

by kodah 4y ago

I've updated that sentence to read, "A persons position on crime really depends on how they interpret the data on this dashboard." Thanks for pointing out the poor phrasing.

dragonwriter 4y ago

You still have the subject and object of “depends on” reversed, at best.

kodah 4y ago
I think reversing it treads heavy into opinion territory, which has no data - just people's feelings. If the roles were reversed, eg: were this not SF, people would be die hard about the data and what it shows - which is part of my point. We can't have our cake and eat it too. At some point you just have to set clear boundaries, like what I mentioned at the end.

rahimnathwani 4y ago

My point still applies: people don't usually base their opinions on data. They base them on what they perceive directly (e.g. seeing a crime) or indirectly (e.g. hearing about a scary crime). Even if confronted with data, people will interpret it based on their opinion. Crime report data is up? That could mean: A) law enforcement has been doing a better job, so people feel it's more worthwhile to report crimes, or B) law enforcement has been doing a worse job, so people don't bother reporting crimes Whether someone interprets the data as meaning A or B depends on their opinion more than it informs their opinion.

kodah 4y ago
The data, to me, is mostly reality. I rephrased it so that it reflects peoples perceptions on reality. I did that specifically because there's debate on how much crime there actually is. I do agree that data is fallable and manipulatable, but I do still think the data is good enough for a baseline.
- rahimnathwani 4y ago
  I'm not suggesting the data aren't useful, that they don't reflect reality, or that they don't inform your opinion of what policies we should pursue. I'm just disagreeing that the data (trend in # of incidents of crime) are what drives most people's opinions about what policies we should pursue.