Still nothing. There’s one person not trying to argue in good faith here, I don’t think it’s me.
Burden of proof is on you, you made the claim of a majority. It isn’t my problem if that inconveniences you.
I note you are NOT promising you will do so. It is easy, you promise you will see this line of argument to the end, and I’ll do it.
Because I do NOT believe you will do so, and next time I want to be able to just point at this.
I am going to have to do a lot of work for this, the LEAST you can do is promise to see it to the end.
You’d rather get me to do some kind of “pinky promise” than provide all your data.
Don’t you want to prove your side of the argument, if not to convince me then at least everyone else?
For someone who was supposedly so interested in this subject, it’s strange that you didn’t keep note of all your data/evidence on a file somewhere.
This is a small set, I’ll go look for the bigger one.
I have many interests, not everything gets a file.
Now, lets start your analysis.
If the polls are not there anymore (since, I can see failed links), you can see people in the thread saying that it DOES show the results which is claimed, which would NOT have happened if they did not.
As recipts said…
And I was showing that it was 2/3 Majority AFTER people experienced it.
So, go for it.
Again, showing the data was 2/3 for, and 1/3 again, but this time talking about the post polls.
Time for you to maths it up.
You must now show that the bias you are talking about swamps that data.
Can you just link the polls directly please? (Exactly the same way I did regarding role distribution.)
I’m not going to sift through pages of discussions with expired(?) links.
It’s your job to provide the data, not discussions, the data.
Well, we could find someone complaining that I did link all of this stuff both in the community, and into reddit threads etc.
Oh wait, it was you complaining that I did exactly that…
I’ve shown what the results, were, AND that you were aware of them, AND that I had linked to both inside and outside the forums.
Now, do your analysis. I’ve shown people know I linked to it, AND that you were aware of it.
No more dodging, start your work.
Yeah okay, I get it.
No data.
Thanks for clarifying.
Except I have linked to the post, which linked to the polls.
AND I have shown that you KNEW that, and you were willing to be upset at the results then.
I’ve shown that we had a 2/3 majority in the polls, AND that they were from more than the forums, AND that you accepted that in the past, and was upset that I did so.
I’ve shown the proof, and do your maths, because if you don’t, then I have shown you are arguing in bad faith.
After all, WHY would YOU be complaining about the polls results, if I hadn’t shown them 
Now, do the maths.
The post you linked to, did not contain any polls.
Thanks, no point continuing the discussion then.
Let me hold your hand though the process then, because they did link to the polls.
Go click on the links, and you will see the results.
Hint, they show a 2/3 in favor result overall.
1 Like
Thanks, not sure why that took you so long.
Will have a look over them. But thanks for finally providing them.
Funnily enough, I copied the links DIRECTLY from the post I linked you to…
Which you were saying “they were all expired”…
1 Like
No. The links you gave me didn’t direct to any polls. Might be due to the link on my end leading to a different post, not sure. But now I checked again, the one you linked me to, I had to scroll up like 10 posts to get to the polls.
Now the next thing you need to do, is show me where those polls were done - as I did for my role distribution polls.
1 Like
Well, LETS assume worse case, and they are all from here.
Which was where your “this is the bias” data is from.
If you can’t show it when it is worse case, then you fail at the first step.
No, let’s not assume anything. Assumptions always lead to errors.
Just provide the links, thanks.
1 Like
No, worse case is good enough for me, I’m giving you the BEST result for you.
Lets see if you can make that work.
I want to know if I’m wrong just as much as I want to know if I’m right, and how wrong/right I am, and what I’m wrong or right about, rather than vague assumptions.
I’m sure as a Maths guy you understand.
I think you can napkin it to work out if more work needs doing.
After all, if you fail at this step, we ALREADY have our answer.
No further analysis is needed.
If you show there is enough to need more, then we do more.
I’m looking forward to playing open q in comp. I left right before role qing existed and playing in a forced 2-2-2 meta just isn’t how I used to play. Open q seems more original- I don’t want the game to force my team into anything.
Okay, let’s take the worst case scenario.
They were taken from a Role-Queue supporters Discord group.
1 Like