2011/9/7 e-mail timothy.mullen <[email protected]>: > contact; I'm afraid those tables are run by people who've no idea what > they're talking about.
I think that is an unfair thing to say about the authors of whatdotheyknow (who are presumably too polite to really object). A great deal of thought went into the presentation of that page - the statistical information particularly. More importantly they appeared to know a great deal about the subject. What you are complaining about is that it is possible to read the - accurate - information supplied in an impressionistic fashion that permits false conclusions to be drawn. The problem - for the site's authors - is that they rightly want to be able to give as much information about an MP as they have available to them and they want to do it in a clear and uncluttered fashion. They do make an effort (eg with the 3 word alliteration statistic) to give a practical example of how the numbers can be misused. But really "Replied within 2 or 3 weeks to a low number of messages sent via WriteToThem.com during 2008, according to constituents." is a precise and accurate statement. What else should they put there? I, as regular readers may know, am a born critic and I've certainly complained about parts of that page, in particular with my "statistician" hat on. As a result of my moans, the presentation was changed to be even tighter than it was. So, I'd ask you not to cast aspersions against a rather hard-working and intelligent bunch of people who really do know what they are talking about, even if the answers they have come to on difficult points of data presentation might be different from yours (and mine). -- Francis Davey _______________________________________________ developers-public mailing list [email protected] https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/listinfo/developers-public Unsubscribe: https://secure.mysociety.org/admin/lists/mailman/options/developers-public/archive%40mail-archive.com
