Irving Scheffe wrote:
>
> Jerry:
>
> A quick response.
>
<snip>
Thanks.
As we all agree, an intelligent discussion of the situation that
prompted the thread demands the participants become familiar with
the details. I am not and never have claimed to be.
My contribution was meant as an aside in response to a particular
statement contained in the Glork example--"Why would one want to
mumble aimlessly about what would happen if you shuffled the two
stacks of numbers?"--to point out that there are some situations
where one might in fact be interested in what would happen when one
randomly shuffled two stacks of numbers, even though the
individuals are not a sample from some larger population.
I'll let those familiar with it debate the merits of applying such
tests to the specific case under discussion. From what I'm reading,
it seems like a fascinating case study, but my email just delivered
an assignment of 6 grants to review for an upcoming grant review
panel, so I'll have to stay on the sidelines for this one!
=================================================================
Instructions for joining and leaving this list and remarks about
the problem of INAPPROPRIATE MESSAGES are available at
http://jse.stat.ncsu.edu/
=================================================================
