Thread: Spading Snatch

Originally Posted by MasterE

Testimonials aren't objective tests, and 'observational study' is rife with cherry picking; both are prone to confirmation bias. I'm going to have to start a new thread to clearly define the objectives and methodology and hopefully cut the spam. You are all sure of your opinions, but they aren't informative even to you.

Your arrogance, towards me and the community in general, is irritating. While you occasionally make valid points, your attitude makes it difficult to engage with you in anything but a confrontational manner.

Allow me to clarify your point here. The problem isn't with 'observational studies', which you seem to have so little regard for. You HAVE identified an important bias, which is termed reporting bias--in this case, the tendency to report only extreme results (e.g., a streak of no drops or a streak of valuable drops). Correcting for this requires selecting the subjects to be studied in advance, before the outcome (the drops they get) is known. You are correct that failing to correct for this will tend to result in biased anecdotal data that isn't useful. BUT if this is corrected for in advance, crowdsourced data can be a useful asset, and you would do well not to dismiss it.