Re: Licas and Probability-Statistics

On Mon, 24 Oct 2005 08:20:13 EDT, "\"Luis A. Afonso\""
<licas_@xxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Every time the Readers refer to my English criticizing it I feel very happy indeed:

That's another mistake on your part. The criticism happens
in the mid-range, where someone *might* assume they know
what you mean. At the further extreme, you are ignored.
Who wants to take the time to separate out the difference
between Bad-English and bad-statistics?


> They not found in my posts (they never did, so far, 150 posts, 9 months) something it was wrong in Probability-Statistics grounds, which was their great piece of luck. To be credible in a way, intolerance-prejudice needs a bit of soundness, I guess.

A few weeks ago -
You posted *errors* for several days concerning Post hoc tests,
with arrogance and insults. When you eventually noticed that it
was handy to "sort the means into order", it finally became evident
that you had never read anything previously about post-hoc
tests -- Sorting the means into order is the starting point for
*applying* all the standard things like SNK, HSD, etc.
- Is that what you meant by "something wrong"? That is one.


- You have earned every bit of "intolerance" you have received
in sci.stat.math. Since we are remarkable tolerant of simple
ignorance, we must be objecting to the attitude and the insults.

--
Rich Ulrich, wpilib@xxxxxxxx
http://www.pitt.edu/~wpilib/index.html
.