Subject | Re: Colonial Photo & Hobby |
From | Eric Stevens |
Date | 04/18/2014 06:38 (04/18/2014 16:38) |
Message-ID | <una1l95fqodlib0kd8sbp5vn0pcd9jqtpm@4ax.com> |
Client | |
Newsgroups | rec.photo.digital |
Follows | Sandman |
Followups | Sandman (6h & 46m) > Eric Stevens |
SandmanWhy would it be statistically worthless even for the one store at which the data was gathered?
In article <1h4uk9hbi4ec03cq6c6n0gt043s146e427@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:SandmanEric StevensTony CooperSandman
I've made no claim for Best Buy stores other than the one store that I actually checked out.
Which renders the claim as statistical information worthless.
... except for the one store, as Tony stated.
Which would be statistically worthless even if we were only talking about one store, which we weren't.
An estimate with some hard numbers behind it, including error data and an acceptable estimate of probability might be regarded as statistical data. Without that kind of support, it's just a guess. --SandmanYou mean, other than his explicit claim about: "I'd estimate that in somewhere around half the visits", which means that he has at least visited enough stores for a number of them being "about half", which puts it roughly in at least around ten stores (4/10 is "about half"), so he already has ten times as much statistical data than you (i.e. infintaely more, since you have none).Eric Stevens
Do you really call an estimate "statistical data"?
Do you really think it can't be?