[email protected] writes: > On Tuesday, December 06, 2016 06:49:04 PM Arne Babenhauserheide wrote: >> It’s been over a week now, could you please post the data with or >> without the evaluation? > > I offered something like that at both the beginning and the end of my reply > to > Ian the last week and got no "Yes, do it" from him. > > Nevertheless if he doesn't reply to the mail within a day, I will assume he > wants that and this week allocate a day for finishing the evaluation as I > consider it reasonable and publish it then.
That’s good. I don’t think we’re doing Ian a service when we make him a bottleneck for things which block other tasks. > Meanwhile, please refrain from your attempts to make me throw away days of > work of manually putting the stuff into spreadsheets, reviewing and coloring > it, etc., just so you can replace it with scripts which will be blind for all > the things a manual evaluation is not blind for. > You can run your scripts on the raw data afterwards, but I really don't feel > like throwing away days of my work in favor of simplistic scripts. I’m sorry that you got the notion that the scripts are simplistic. The implemented approach to derive a Condorcet method and use different evaluations to provide a robust top 5 from the data isn’t simplistic. It’s the best result I can get from the data without adding subjective judgement about the votes people donated to the project. > I *am* thankful for your efforts, but I doubt they'd spot the borderline- > fraudulent data which a human can clearly see. I also looked at all the results manually, but I think that using clearly defined criteria (as in the scripts) is a better method than relying on subjective human marking, because what looks fraudulent to one might just be a strong difference in priorities between different groups in our community. I don’t mind doing an evaluation which includes manual human judgement and one which does not, so we can compare the results. > Please be aware that the spreadsheets *do* contain some of your suggestions > already such as median, standard deviation, etc., so your work is not > neglected either :) That sounds good. Best wishes, Arne -- Unpolitisch sein heißt politisch sein ohne es zu merken
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
_______________________________________________ Devl mailing list [email protected] https://emu.freenetproject.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/devl
