4 ms·

The data is right there at the top of my comment.

• andrewflnr 3y ago
  You made a claim about an "impression" on HN. You cite data about the actual phenomenon. Interesting.
  • wolverine876 3y ago
    I didn't understand your prior comment. I don't feel the need to backup my impression of HN by doing personal research. I wrote, > Reading HN, one might get the impression that it's much higher [than eight out of every 10,000 are retracted] You wrote, > I certainly don't get that impression at all, and it doesn't seem like anyone else in this thread does either People in the thread seem to disagree with the data, not my impression. They think the fraud rate is much higher than the data implies, which supports my impression.
    • andrewflnr 3y ago
      Are you serious? I can see people say explicitly in replies to you what they actually disagree with. Are you not capable of distinguishing between the claims "this stat is false" and "it's bad that this stat is true", or "this stat doesn't imply what you think it does"?