398 replies to this topic

[CrashieJ]

Heffay, on 01 November 2013 - 05:47 AM, said:

I believe 93% of the population doesn't care. Source: The 93% of the population (actually higher than that, but let's not quibble) that didn't vote in the self-selected poll.

source link please.

[Literally]

Heffay, on 03 November 2013 - 03:11 PM, said:

When your "evidence" is thoroughly discredited and you have nothing left to stand on, all you have left are ad hominem attacks. And that doesn't win any debates.

Imagine if this thread were moderated like a formal debate forum, where repeating logical fallacies and making blatantly dishonest arguments get you probated or banned. What I'm saying is, you wouldn't be here any more.

Your deliberate decision to refuse to understand anything that you don't like is the only problem here. You spout sophomoric keywords that you read from the chapter review of your Stats 101 class, and the only one you're fooling is yourself.

[MadcatX]

Literally, on 03 November 2013 - 03:22 PM, said:

Imagine if this thread were moderated like a formal debate forum, where repeating logical fallacies and making blatantly dishonest arguments get you probated or banned. What I'm saying is, you wouldn't be here any more.

Your deliberate decision to refuse to understand anything that you don't like is the only problem here. You spout sophomoric keywords that you read from the chapter review of your Stats 101 class, and the only one you're fooling is yourself.

Careful what you wish for... if it were moderated, it would have been jettisoned several pages ago for being seriously off-topic, and I guess we would all be probated or banned

[Heffay]

gavilatius, on 03 November 2013 - 03:21 PM, said:

source link please.

http://mwomercs.com/...also-needs-1pv/

Total number of votes: 92
Total number of views: 1931

Percentage of people who bothered to vote: 4.8%

Ok, so I was off by a few percentage. 95.2% of the people who read the post didn't even bother to vote (aka don't care). And no, it doesn't increment every time you click the thread. One register per user.

You want to dig up the original 3PV polls? Let's see what percentage of people who bothered to read that thread even voted. My guess is it will also be around the 95% "don't care" level.

Literally, on 03 November 2013 - 03:22 PM, said:

Imagine if this thread were moderated like a formal debate forum, where repeating logical fallacies and making blatantly dishonest arguments get you probated or banned. What I'm saying is, you wouldn't be here any more.

I'd be all for it. The second someone tried to justify using a self-selected sample as a "proof", the debate would be over.

[Deathlike]

Heffay, on 03 November 2013 - 03:37 PM, said:

Ok, so I was off by a few percentage. 95.2% of the people who read the post didn't even bother to vote (aka don't care). And no, it doesn't increment every time you click the thread. One register per user.

I didn't vote in that poll because it was badly worded and had terrible options. It wasn't biased in the sense that it favored one thing over another, but the questions and options were poorly conceived.

Question #2 has poor answers... how the heck can I answer that question when the answer that best represents me is not there?

So, trying to use a flawed poll in itself to defend your position is the thing you're accusing the rest of us of.

The only reason you're using that poll is because it agrees with your position... selectively choosing what you agree with and ignoring whatever contradicts and/or disagrees with you says all we need to know your bias.

Edited by Deathlike, 03 November 2013 - 03:49 PM.

[Tombstoner]

So PGI's decision regarding changing srm damage is bogus along with 3pv polls...? and its bogus because its a poll of a small biased sample of only the people who care about the subjects. So PGI cares about what we think only when it doesn't matter.
Granted they do have a movie for UI2.0 and comments thread. Do you think they will use a poll to hammer out the final format or listen to player feedback. cause if they do listen, it will be the first time for something that matters.

[Literally]

MadcatX, on 03 November 2013 - 03:33 PM, said:

if it were moderated, it would have been jettisoned several pages ago for being seriously off-topic, and I guess we would all be probated or banned

Pay attention to what I wrote. I didn't say "oh man I wish Destined would come in here and ban everyone saying what she doesn't like". I said "imagine if this thread were moderated like a formal debate forum".

Heffay, on 03 November 2013 - 03:37 PM, said:

I'd be all for it. The second someone tried to justify using a self-selected sample as a "proof", the debate would be over.

No. We use self-selected samples in many fields, and people who I think are more experienced than me have already explained to you multiple times that you have not shown any flaws in the polls to which we are referring. If you still haven't taken the time to read about what a confounder is (you haven't), then your opinion is irrelevant to the discussion. Since you only care about apologism: even PGI has used polls from this forum as evidence in their own posts here.

[Sandpit]

Heffay, on 03 November 2013 - 03:11 PM, said:

Well, it's more like 95% of the population, but let's not quibble over a few percentages. And yes, it's much like when Blizzard decides to do something like nerf Hunters. Yes, a portion of the player base gets REALLY upset, but sometimes it has to be done in the best interests of the game.

Splitting the queue is bad for the game. 3PV is good for the game. Sorry, but that is basically what you're left with.



When your "evidence" is thoroughly discredited and you have nothing left to stand on, all you have left are ad hominem attacks. And that doesn't win any debates.

No sir, you're completely ignoring anything I pointed out.
if 10% of your base hates an idea
1% likes it
89% doesn't care one way or the other

You're not "******* off a small portion" you're ******* off 10% of your population. Let's use real numbers
3000 hate it
100 like it
26,900 don't care

You now have 26,900 who still play, enjoy, and spend money
you now have 100 who enjoy it and spend money
you have 3000 pissed off customers who hate it and adjust their spending accordingly.

You can argue and quibble numbers and schematics all you want. The bottom line is your entire line of thought on this one is wrong. I don't know if you're jsut arguing to be arguing or really don't see what I'm pointing out.

An unbiased business decision is to go with the idea that's going to **** off teh smaller number. You don't actively **** off and alienate 3000 instead of 100.

As far as "good for the game"? That's completely subjective. You can also argue "Well the game is still here so it must be good" but that wears thin as well. When you're the only game in town it's easy to get by with that. It's here because anyone who wants an fps Btech game has to be here. Just because they play doesn't mean they're satisfied.

Another way to look at it:

3pv is for our new demographic
3pv acquired us xx amount of new players
3pv drove xx amount of old players off (let's not argue this as an unbiased view shows that yes there were several and quite a few that left. Want proof? Peruse the archives some time and see how many of those players DON'T post on here any more. It's not the ones posting you have to consider. It's the ones that truly left and entire units that have abandoned this game)

Now with that said, let's use real numbers in lieu of xx just for example purposes

3pv increased player size by let's say 30% and assume (since none of us have actual numbers) the player base was 100,000 so 3pv increased base to 130,000
3pv drove off let's say 2000 of the 3000 which drops us to 128,000
Now we know for a fact (even withou exact numbers) that the casual new player isn't dropping $500+ on this game. Those players that left? The hardcore Btech fans? They did

so let's say those 30,000 new players spend $30 each on a hero mech and another $10 on premium for $40, that's $120,000 new income
the players that left let's say spent $200 each, that's $400,000

DO you see how that 3000 player number becomes more important any way you want to look at it? Now that's just using the exact number of 3000. We both know there are players that DO care (on both sides of the argument) that aren't active on the forums but are active in the game. If there's 2 players fo every 1 poster we now have an even larger representation.

You keep wanting to dismiss 3000 as insignificant. It's not. If you work in ANY kind of statistician position or with stats then you know (if you're being unbiased) that a sample size of that magnitude for this community represents many more players than the 3000 that bothered to vote. Especially when you count in apathy of voters, cynicism of "it doesn't matter if I vote no or not anyway" (which in this case was actually true).

Some times you respond to me and you make very good points and I understand some of your thoughts, but others you just seem to want to argue in circles and hope to wear down anyone who disagrees with you completely disregarding and ignoring very good points that disprove and dispute your ideas.

[Ghogiel]

Heffay, on 03 November 2013 - 02:19 PM, said:

No. Look at the number of people who viewed the polls. Then count up the number of people who voted.

Not that it would mean anything.

Quote

How do you explain that 95% of the people who saw the poll didn't even bother to vote?

I don't. At all.

Quote

Do you think the distribution of those people even remotely matches what people are claiming the poll shows?

Could very well be. Polls are kinda used to statistically gauge the responce of a population by using the data collected from a smaller sample after all.

Quote

If you don't care enough to vote, you're in the "I don't care" bucket. And that is 95% of the population.

Bald assertion.

And in fact I have voted in exactly 1 3pv poll. GG I guess I am in the don't care bucket for all the other ones lol

[Sandpit]

One more thing, these are random samples of this population. Every member of this population is involved in the game in some form or fashion. For a truly random sample you would have to pull ideas and thoughts from people outside of this game. Which is completely invalid.

[Deathlike]

Sandpit, on 03 November 2013 - 04:07 PM, said:

Some times you respond to me and you make very good points and I understand some of your thoughts, but others you just seem to want to argue in circles and hope to wear down anyone who disagrees with you completely disregarding and ignoring very good points that disprove and dispute your ideas.

I think the most apt statement is the following:

George Carlin said:

Never argue with an *****. They will only bring you down to their level and beat you with experience.

That is what we have here.

Edited by Deathlike, 03 November 2013 - 04:12 PM.

[CrashieJ]

Heffay, on 03 November 2013 - 03:37 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...also-needs-1pv/

Total number of votes: 92
Total number of views: 1931

Percentage of people who bothered to vote: 4.8%

Ok, so I was off by a few percentage. 95.2% of the people who read the post didn't even bother to vote (aka don't care). And no, it doesn't increment every time you click the thread. One register per user.

You want to dig up the original 3PV polls? Let's see what percentage of people who bothered to read that thread even voted. My guess is it will also be around the 95% "don't care" level.

then this should also be viable as a marker.
http://mwomercs.com/...age__mode__show
along with this one
http://mwomercs.com/...orship-edition/

ooops, that poll seemed to be lost into the ether, along with many others that clocked in over 2000-3000 users saying "no"

remind me to screen cap future popular polls as a method of eDiscovery and Litigation.

[CrashieJ]

Heffay, on 03 November 2013 - 03:37 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...also-needs-1pv/

thought that the site registers users every time, Site defines user a 1

edit: now, thanks to MWO not being able to close a poll, the poll numbers (both poll-wise and threadwise) can now change.

I hate to say this Heffay, but you're going to have to pull evidence from a site that allows polls to be closed and the data can be preserved

eDiscovery, Litigation, and all that other fun stuff.

Edited by gavilatius, 03 November 2013 - 04:22 PM.

[Dr Herbert West]

I'll get to the rest of this later, but it seems like everyone else is doing a pretty good job of shutting Heffay down. Just a few "lol" points though:

Heffay, on 03 November 2013 - 03:11 PM, said:

When your "evidence" is thoroughly discredited and you have nothing left to stand on, all you have left are ad hominem attacks. And that doesn't win any debates.

You have discredited nothing.

You also have no data or evidence to back up your claims.

Heffay, on 03 November 2013 - 03:37 PM, said:

http://mwomercs.com/...also-needs-1pv/

Total number of votes: 92
Total number of views: 1931

Percentage of people who bothered to vote: 4.8%

Ok, so I was off by a few percentage. 95.2% of the people who read the post didn't even bother to vote (aka don't care). And no, it doesn't increment every time you click the thread. One register per user.

Number of views does not equal number of people who viewed the thread.

You are not this stupid so you are clearly lying at this point.

[Heffay]

Deathlike, on 03 November 2013 - 03:49 PM, said:

I didn't vote in that poll because it was badly worded and had terrible options. It wasn't biased in the sense that it favored one thing over another, but the questions and options were poorly conceived.

Question #2 has poor answers... how the heck can I answer that question when the answer that best represents me is not there?

So, trying to use a flawed poll in itself to defend your position is the thing you're accusing the rest of us of.

The only reason you're using that poll is because it agrees with your position... selectively choosing what you agree with and ignoring whatever contradicts and/or disagrees with you says all we need to know your bias.

Pick any of the other 3PV polls. How many people looked at those and didn't vote?

You can make a self selected poll say anything you want IF you are willing to toss out 95% of the data that you don't like to see.

Self selected. Cherry picking data. That is why the polls are useless.

Sandpit, on 03 November 2013 - 04:08 PM, said:

One more thing, these are random samples of this population.

Holy {Scrap}! That is EXACTLY what these polls don't represent! This is the exact opposite of a random sample!!

[Dr Herbert West]

gavilatius, on 03 November 2013 - 04:13 PM, said:

then this should also be viable as a marker.
http://mwomercs.com/...age__mode__show
along with this one
http://mwomercs.com/...orship-edition/

ooops, that poll seemed to be lost into the ether, along with many others that clocked in over 2000-3000 users saying "no"

remind me to screen cap future popular polls as a method of eDiscovery and Litigation.

There is a screenshot out there of the 3000+ vote, but I don't have it on hand.

[Heffay]

Dr Herbert West, on 03 November 2013 - 04:17 PM, said:

I'll get to the rest of this later, but it seems like everyone else is doing a pretty good job of shutting Heffay down. Just a few "lol" points though:



You have discredited nothing.

You also have no data or evidence to back up your claims.



Number of views does not equal number of people who viewed the thread.

You are not this stupid so you are clearly lying at this point.

It doesn't record a new view each time you click on the thread. Even if it's off by a factor of 50%, the number of people who didn't vote is still over 90%. Of course, most people who will click on it will never come back, because ....


No one cares about 3PV.

[Deathlike]

Heffay, on 03 November 2013 - 04:18 PM, said:

Pick any of the other 3PV polls. How many people looked at those and didn't vote?

You can make a self selected poll say anything you want IF you are willing to toss out 95% of the data that you don't like to see.

Self selected. Cherry picking data. That is why the polls are useless.

You cherry picked that poll yourself to defend your own argument. Please.

[Heffay]

Deathlike, on 03 November 2013 - 04:24 PM, said:

You cherry picked that poll yourself to defend your own argument. Please.

Dr Herbert West, on 03 November 2013 - 05:33 AM, said:

You have no data that says that 3PV had no effect on the game. In fact, we have data that claims the opposite: http://mwomercs.com/...also-needs-1pv/

I didn't pick that poll. HE did. And he conveniently discards any data that doesn't support his hypothesis.

[CrashieJ]

Heffay, on 03 November 2013 - 04:29 PM, said:

I didn't pick that poll. HE did. And he conveniently discards any data that doesn't support his hypothesis.

then would you kindly pick your own poll that does not discard data and would be accepted by (at least some) of the community.

if it would be possible.