2,014
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
Line 139:
Line 139: + + + + + + + + + + + +
Innumeracy
I know some people's palms sweat when they imagine the concept. [[User:Human|Human]] 23:05, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
I know some people's palms sweat when they imagine the concept. [[User:Human|Human]] 23:05, 27 April 2007 (EDT)
== Innumeracy ==
As I have said, it doesn't matter to me one way or another what this article (or ''anything'' on this blog) says, '''but''', I would I would expect those publicly associated with it to strive for relatively sensible versions of their, um, version of reality. (There are precisely <s>57</> ''six'' times as many liberals on Wp as in America!)
1. The metric of "six times" depends on an incredibly small number of self-identified Wpdians.
2. In the absence of its inverse, the conservative quotient, defining the Lq is silly knee-jerk reactionism.
3. Judging by what Ashfly calls "liberl" on this site, the US is about 60% or so liberal and 30% or so conservative. Leaving 10% "sheep".
4. An appropriate acale for a measure like this would create a middle point of "1" or "0", with a clear reflection about that point in each direction. So it should run form infinity to minus infinity, or 10 to -10, or 1 to -1. or, gee, 0 to 1.
5. This is a really dumb article
Discuss amongst yourselves. [[User:Human|Human]] 23:43, 27 April 2007 (EDT)