I may just be tired but what is the comparison in the post you quoted?
The ongoing Elon Twitter saga: "insert demographic" melts down
- Thread starter Energize
- Start date
- Status
I may just be tired but what is the comparison in the post you quoted?
The one I objected to re: the silly denominator vs no interviewed.
Soldato
- Joined
- 4 Feb 2018
- Posts
- 13,316
Dont know if this has been up yet.
lol he really is just trolling. Not really surprising.
lol he really is just trolling. Not really surprising.
In abstract this is the problem with most existing democracies these days - people get fed-up of Tories think the only option is to vote Labour and vice-versa and the same for Republicans and Democrats in the US - democracy isn't worth **** without an actual option for people to vote that the current situation isn't working.
Which is why the non-dullard, wrinkled brain supremes in the UK should hold their nose and vote LibDem as there is a decent chance (versus literally zero) that ultimately their vote will count for something eventually instead of not counting at all.
Not sure he is trolling. Just pulling the mask off...
Ok, doesn't seem comparison is the right word which was confusing me. But even so, the point doesn't seem unfair, 2 opinions out of 7,500 doesn't on the face of it appear statistically significant.
What does statistical significance have to do with anything here? Also I doubt they’ve even attempted to approach 7,500 employees.
Soldato
If the footage has been manipulated to fit a certain narrative then yes, it does matter. And as Project Veritas has done similar tactics in the past, you then have to question the credibility of the video.
Because it doesn't give an accurate representation. It's why Musk is throwing a hissy as Twitter, allegedly, only sampled 100 accounts as he doesn't believe it's given an accurate representation of the number of fake/bot accounts on Twitter.
Because if you look hard enough you can find almost any type of view, e.g. flat earthers exist despite it being obviously and provably wrong. So two people holding a view about Twitter doesn't mean much without more to support it.
Nah, the point still stands even assuming that. They still made those statements.
You’re conflating rather different things there, we were talking about a couple of employees giving their general views, spilling the means etc.. whereas now you’re bringing up sampling and checking something specific - is a bot or not.
They’re hardly flat earthers, what they’re saying is pretty plausible.
Seems rather less likely that of the people project veritas managed to get on film they both happened be representative of some fringe/tiny minority views within Twitter.
I mean I know an ex Twitter employee, these guys really aren’t saying anything particularly out of the ordinary.
It's entirely plausible. It's also plausible they have an agenda biasing their views.
I think ultimately what threw me with your original post was that the comparison was "risible". That's strong language which in reality doesn't seem warranted notwithstanding the fact the employees comments are entirely plausible.
Soldato
True but the people they spoke to are senior people in the company holding positions of responsibility there not directing calls from a call centre. Veritas would have had a list of people to go after and just so happened to have landed on these two clowns.
Did you not read the post it was in reply to?
Yes, and to suggest Sankari's post was a comparison that was "risible/silly" just seemed... odd. Still does unless what you meant was just because it's 2 employees' views it doesn't make it plausible.
Eh? I do think it’s plausible though. I don’t know why you seem to want to make comparisons with cranks/flat earthers or pretend it’s as plausible these guys are like that. It’s far more likely they’re regular employees caught up in a sting and airing views held by plenty of others.
You think it's far more likely because of your confirmation bias. You think it was a "risible" suggestion. Definition of risible:
I think there isn't enough data to make any judgement on what is more likely, because in a large enough population you will find views of any kind. Flat earthers exemplify this as with a large enough population you find beliefs that are easily proved wrong.
Twitter staff is by comparison a much smaller population so utterly ridiculous views seem unlikely. However, I think both sides are plausible and neither are patently ridiculous. Therefore, describing Sankari's statement as "risible" is wrong as it certainly didn't provoke me into laughter through being ludicrous.
FYI, the likely subtext behind Musk's post on voting Republican and expecting "a dirty tricks campagin"
" I'm likely about to face the consequences of my securities fraud, but I want as many people as possible/my followers to see it as political retaliation"
" I'm likely about to face the consequences of my securities fraud, but I want as many people as possible/my followers to see it as political retaliation"
Soldato
Usually you're all up in other users guts for evidence and sources but because this fits your story you're happily letting it slide
And you're suggesting, based on two videos that offer very little credibility, that two employees in one or two offices out of ~7,500 employees spread across 36 offices in 22 countries represents a global business in it's entirety
Fair enough @dowie...
- Status