tomcatfish
Joined 8 years ago
Joined 8 years ago
The giveaway is the handling of information and curiosity. You argue for throwing both away, and it's not clear why. When the author takes away more decimals than they should, the article becomes useless. When the author leaves in more decimals than they should, I round "with my eyes" to my desired precision. As a bonus, I can take their numbers and spot-check them easily.
The author put up a fun piece on a board game review website and summarized that the dice are fine. You ask what the threshold is, I say use your brain and eyes to pick one. We only need to read this once, not grade 200, so we don't need to invent an arbitrary cutoff.
If you treat students or coworkers in this way, I hope it is clear to them that you respect rubrics more than the actual "Ask a question, gather data, answer it in public" scientific process and that they do not mistake stodgy rules for must-follow procedures. It would be a shame to scare people off from rolling dice on the internet because someone may say there are too few p-values or too many decimal places.
The correct answer is XER?APUOBIA LEADS TO INDIVIDUALLY WRAPPED CARROTS
I do not know why you did not spot check the number of letters!
---
Both phrases are used like this— let me explain:
Logic classes teach that "but" is just "and" in fancy clothing, and actual usage is quite different. A lot of language is signpost phrasing that "helps the medicine go down" by giving hints at how the following idea will connect to this one.
> Enter Navjot Sawhney, who founded the UK-based social enterprise The Washing Machine Project (TWMP) to tackle this, and has now shipped almost 500 of his hand-crank Divya machines to 13 countries, including Mexico, Ghana, Iraq *and the US.*
LessWrong is pretty neat
You can use Crocker's Rules (http://sl4.org/crocker.html) on me and we'll still be cool :)
[ my public key: https://keybase.io/alexvermillion; my proof: https://keybase.io/alexvermillion/sigs/MHd0sTBs5C5sf8Nv5N8Sx7sid0N1RkOFM3RlHvBFkDE ]