|
E1M1 posted:Again, that's not an argument. You're conflating two acts that I think are obviously distinct in their purpose and ends. Hacking and releasing someone's nude photos requires a kind of cooperation of attention from the public to achieve its goals of humiliating the target. An individual rape doesn't require outside attention in the same way. Sounds like you've never been the target of a hack nor the kind of person worth hacking. The sense of shame and violation comes from having something private, e.g. nude photos, released on a public platform. It doesn't matter if it gets picked up by the media, that sense of violation is there. Were it to go away quietly it could easily spiral into a "well I guess no one actually gives a gently caress about this kind of harassment" scenario, but instead everyone and their mother has picked up this story and by in large have come out in support for Jones. That means way more than you seem to be able to conceive.
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:19
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 03:45 |
|
|
I'm not defending U of K in anyway: I have to edit the Title IX Training Video for my school every year and have watched the same lawyers talk about this more than anyone else at my institution, so this is my assumption about why the U of K is likely freaking out. Those investigations are meant to be extremely confidential for both parties involved in the affair. Any leaked info could create a new case of retaliation and an even bigger headache for the office handling the investigation, especially if it is still on-going and they are still collecting facts. Once the info is out, there isn't much they can do so they shouldn't bother with suing the school newspaper because everyone is right, it's just going to make them look even worse. But I imagine it was a knee-jerk reaction from the office conducting the affair because they just realized they had an even bigger pile of poo poo they have to deal with now. Max fucked around with this message at 18:23 on Aug 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:20
|
|
|
Max posted:I'm not defending U of K in anyway: I have to edit the Title IX Training Video for my school every year, so in my mind, U of K is likely freaking out since those investigations are meant to be extremely confidential for both parties involved in the affair. Any leaked info could create a new case of retaliation and an even bigger headache for the office handling the investigation, especially if it is still on-going and they are still collecting facts. But why die on the hill that is a tenured faculty member who routinely sexually assaults students.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:22
|
|
|
nutranurse posted:Sounds like you've never been the target of a hack nor the kind of person worth hacking. The sense of shame and violation comes from having something private, e.g. nude photos, released on a public platform. It doesn't matter if it gets picked up by the media, that sense of violation is there. Were it to go away quietly it could easily spiral into a "well I guess no one actually gives a gently caress about this kind of harassment" scenario, but instead everyone and their mother has picked up this story and by in large have come out in support for Jones. That means way more than you seem to be able to conceive. Again, it was a simple question of what is ethically the right call when you're a member of the media and you're faced with the question of whether reporting on something like this does a public good or increases harm to the victim. I appreciate your take on this and think there's validity to it, but still, you're being an rear end in a top hat.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:23
|
|
|
From a legal standpoint, if the case hasn't been concluded, they can get hit with a giant lawsuit from said lovely professor. Again, not defending them, but that's the point of view they are likely adopting.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:24
|
|
|
Max posted:From a legal standpoint, if the case hasn't been concluded, they can get hit with a giant lawsuit from said lovely professor. Yeah, ok, that would suck for the university, but at the same time how complicit were they in the continued crimes. If UK is anything like most state schools, probably a fair amount through their own inaction. 
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:25
|
|
|
E1M1 posted:Again, it was a simple question of what is ethically the right call when you're a member of the media and you're faced with the question of whether reporting on something like this does a public good or increases harm to the victim. I appreciate your take on this and think there's validity to it, but still, you're being an rear end in a top hat. No, I'm honestly just incensed that you would think "let's not talk about this issue, shining a spot light on it is bad," Is a good-for-society, constructive pov to hold in tyool 2016.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:26
|
|
|
theflyingorc posted:Worth noting, from the chart at the bottom of this article: Why is this, anyway? My wife works at Quinnipiac (the university, not the polling institute) and so we pay mild attention when it's in the news. I always see around here and other places that Quinnipiac leans R but I don't know enough about polling methodologies to know why that is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
Boon posted:The best part about Kalman's posts on the matter are that the same structure of his argument could be used to justify just about any business practice. In fact, it often is. Surely if we don't allow Apple to patent the slide-to-unlock bar and the abstract concept of software updates delivered over the internet then Silicon Valley will pack up and leave and the US will fall into a thousand years of darkness 
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
nutranurse posted:My question is why on earth would the university's administration think this move wouldn't lead to the story getting even more traction. Are university administrators that loving disconnected from the real world? Because Barbra Streisand successfully censored the existence of the _________ effect.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:29
|
|
|
nutranurse posted:Yeah, ok, that would suck for the university, but at the same time how complicit were they in the continued crimes. If UK is anything like most state schools, probably a fair amount through their own inaction. The latter is irrelevant to the issue at hand.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:31
|
|
|
Trasson posted:Why is this, anyway? My wife works at Quinnipiac (the university, not the polling institute) and so we pay mild attention when it's in the news. I always see around here and other places that Quinnipiac leans R but I don't know enough about polling methodologies to know why that is. A friend of mine who works in Democratic politics (albeit not on the polling side) blames it on a horde of listless college students tilting the results through laziness somehow, but I frankly don't know how accurate that is.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:34
|
|
|
Trasson posted:Why is this, anyway? My wife works at Quinnipiac (the university, not the polling institute) and so we pay mild attention when it's in the news. I always see around here and other places that Quinnipiac leans R but I don't know enough about polling methodologies to know why that is. Their polling models assume a slightly whiter electorate, which favors Trump, compared to other pollsters. It's not "wrong" and the other pollsters aren't "right" until election day. Conventional wisdom says that the white percentage of the vote is going to be lower than 2012, but nobody really knows for sure how much or even if that is true. The Q poll assumes that black turnout will be lower than 2012 and Hispanic turnout will grow, but a smaller amount than other people guess. Leon Trotsky 2012 fucked around with this message at 18:38 on Aug 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
It's called a house effect. Here's a post from Nate Silver in 2012 that explains more: http://fivethirtyeight.blogs.nytimes.com/2012/06/22/calculating-house-effects-of-polling-firms/?_r=0
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:36
|
|
|
Taking all that into consideration, most places are reporting that HRC has ~7 points on him nationally.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:38
|
|
|
Eifert Posting posted:ONLY 90% SAY THEY WON'T CHANGE THEIR MINDS!? Also while looking for that article, I found this one, which ends with the 2016-appropriate line: quote:A follow-up poll revealed that the one thing the entire electorate had decided on was that they were absolutely not voting for third-party candidate Jill Stein.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
Malmesbury Monster posted:A friend of mine who works in Democratic politics (albeit not on the polling side) blames it on a horde of listless college students tilting the results through laziness somehow, but I frankly don't know how accurate that is. Not really, I'd guess. The Polling Institute is affiliated and run by the university, but it's not directly part of the campus and doesn't get work study or anything. It's no more filled with lazy college students than any other part time call center job.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
zoux posted:Taking all that into consideration, most places are reporting that HRC has ~7 points on him nationally. Yep, that's why: http://elections.huffingtonpost.com/pollster/2016-general-election-trump-vs-clinton Is your best barometer for where the race is at given time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:41
|
|
|
Also important to note that national polls mean dick all because of the electoral college. I guess they're useful for establishing trends. Trump's doing worse in state polls and that's because he's not campaigning on a state level at all. You don't bring Nigel Farage to a rally in MS to persuade people in MS.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:42
|
|
|
Donkwich posted:Congrats on David Duke winning the 2020 GOP nomination Eh, I don't know if Trump's base will go for a GOPe RINO moderate.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
zoux posted:Also important to note that national polls mean dick all because of the electoral college. I guess they're useful for establishing trends. Generally speaking national polls tend be relatively reflective of where the national polling is going to end up, but yes if you want a state wide polling look... RCP has one, as well as 538. Right now she's actually doing better in most swing-state polling than national polling. NV was closer, but it also hasn't been extensively polled and has all kinds of issues with hispanic voter representation. (This didn't stop CNN from finding some old white people in a cafe in Reno to tell them how they weren't pumped for Hillary.) Speaking of which 538 does an election update running down the polling news: http://fivethirtyeight.com/features/election-update-the-blue-state-polling-abyss/?ex_cid=538twitter
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:44
|
|
|
zoux posted:Also important to note that national polls mean dick all because of the electoral college. I guess they're useful for establishing trends. They are important because the states and various congressional districts have pretty empirical balances of power within them and will fall in a certain order. Hillary isn't going to win Texas and lose Pennsylvania, or win the House and lose the presidential race.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:Generally speaking national polls tend be relatively reflective of where the national polling is going to end up, but yes if you want a state wide polling look... RCP has one, as well as 538. NV and IN are notoriously hard to poll, if I remember correctly.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:47
|
|
|
Trasson posted:Why is this, anyway? My wife works at Quinnipiac (the university, not the polling institute) and so we pay mild attention when it's in the news. I always see around here and other places that Quinnipiac leans R but I don't know enough about polling methodologies to know why that is. There's a number of reasons, and they can be malicious or not malicious. Simply having certain types of wording in your questions can greatly change what type of response you get - and that can happen in really subtle ways, entirely not on purpose. Remember, for every 100 people they survey, they only have to accidentally change the mind of 2 people due to wording, and they've got a 2% house effect in that direction.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:48
|
|
|
Pander posted:NV and IN are notoriously hard to poll, if I remember correctly. NV is, IN is pretty reliably Republican. NV is hard to poll because it has a high number of hispanics who are already hard to poll, and who fall into the service industry sector of shift work, which makes them even harder to poll. It's not to "unskew" poll numbers, but it is a factor to keep in mind when considering NV polling -- turn out could and will be key.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Nevada is also a weird state that used to be dark red and has a growing Hispanic population but isn't drifting Democratic as fast as Colorado or New Mexico. They also love to elect Republicans at the state and congressional level even when voting D for President.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:49
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Nevada is also a weird state that used to be dark red and has a growing Hispanic population but isn't drifting Democratic as fast as Colorado or New Mexico. Eh, Joe Heck is going to be a good test case and could also be a victim to Trump since the state level Republican party mostly loathes him and the sitting Republican governor, Brian Sandoval, isn't a big fan either. (Sandoval was rumored to be considering running for that seat.)
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:It's called a house effect. theflyingorc posted:There's a number of reasons, and they can be malicious or not malicious. Simply having certain types of wording in your questions can greatly change what type of response you get - and that can happen in really subtle ways, entirely not on purpose. So it's less of an overarching methodology thing and more an assessment of how the small differences add up? Makes sense. Thanks all, you have made me look that much smarter for my wife.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:51
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:NV is, IN is pretty reliably Republican. NV is hard to poll because it has a high number of hispanics who are already hard to poll, and who fall into the service industry sector of shift work, which makes them even harder to poll. It's not to "unskew" poll numbers, but it is a factor to keep in mind when considering NV polling -- turn out could and will be key. Indiana is notoriously hard to poll because it is the only state where robo-polling is completely illegal for all organizations.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:52
|
|
|
haveblue posted:It sounds like a waste but it also sounds like the chance of the other way around happening is a risk not worth taking. Clean your inhaler. Take the canister out, run water through the plastic holder for a minute, let it air dry, try it again. This fixes ~95% of the defective inhalers that I've encountered in pharmacy. The aerosol needs to pass through a fine point to give the correct amount of drug at the correct rate to absorb in your lungs, little buildups of gunk at that connection spot can mess the whole thing up. Not only does your inhaler not run out of drug before zero, it continues to deliver drug past that point. 200 puffs is only the amount that deliver a full dose, in a pinch you can continue to use the inhaler after zero, just realize it's not giving you the full dose.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Indiana is notoriously hard to poll because it is the only state where robo-polling is completely illegal for all organizations. I did not know that, though Live Calling is more accurate than robocalling. I can see why that would do that.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:53
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:I did not know that, though Live Calling is more accurate than robocalling. I can see why that would do that. It's a cost issue. Banning robo-polling makes polling IN more expensive and most people don't care, so the only publicly released polls end up being a series of competing internal campaign polls or polls from interested parties who are more likely to only release push polls or outliers.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:55
|
|
|
BI NOW GAY LATER posted:NV is, IN is pretty reliably Republican. NV is hard to poll because it has a high number of hispanics who are already hard to poll, and who fall into the service industry sector of shift work, which makes them even harder to poll. It's not to "unskew" poll numbers, but it is a factor to keep in mind when considering NV polling -- turn out could and will be key. Leon Trotsky 2012 posted:Indiana is notoriously hard to poll because it is the only state where robo-polling is completely illegal for all organizations. That's what I mean.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
Trasson posted:So it's less of an overarching methodology thing and more an assessment of how the small differences add up? Makes sense. Thanks all, you have made me look that much smarter for my wife. The important takeaway is that there's a difference between accuracy and precision. It's possible to be very precise in the sense of sense of having a small amount of variance between samples, but also have those samples be clustered at a value that's not the true value. Once you figure out that "house effect" and adjust their result correspondingly those polling results are actually very good.  It's like knowing that your speedometer is super accurate, it just reads 1mph high at a certain speed.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:56
|
|
|
https://twitter.com/peterwsinger/status/768866286600196099 Ann started off last night going HAM on Trump about this, but today she's like "Maybe we WOULD be better off letting some of them stay". This is less a pivot from Ann Coulter and more her realizing that the Trump campaign is only good for selling merch. https://twitter.com/dcexaminer/status/768847685533179904
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
zoux posted:https://twitter.com/peterwsinger/status/768866286600196099 haha like Coulter wrote that
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:58
|
|
|
Paul MaudDib posted:The important takeaway is that there's a difference between accuracy and precision. It's possible to be very precise in the sense of sense of having a small amount of variance between samples, but also have those samples be clustered at a value that's not the true value. Once you figure out that "house effect" and adjust their result correspondingly those polling results are actually very good. I find the dart analogy works well. If you aim for the bulls-eye but hit the edge, you have bad accuracy. If every dart you throw hits the same part of the edge, that means you have bad accuracy but good precision. With enough samples, you can mitigate bad-accuracy good-precision pollsters. Rasmussen, for instance, you can reliable shift about 7 points to the D side and get reasonable results most of the time. What's bad are the pollsters with bad precision. It's better to be 10 off in the same direction every poll than to be 5 off in both directions in sequential polls. You can fix something wrong consistently, but you can't fix crazy.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 18:59
|
|
|
Goatman Sacks posted:haha like Coulter wrote that It's only 165 pages.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 19:01
|
|
|
zoux posted:It's only 165 pages. Well then she didn't have to pay the ghostwriter that much, I guess.
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 5, 2024 03:45 |
|
|
Today it is all of our responsibility to shitpost the #AltRightMeans hashtag on twitter, and to amplify those voices on twitter that use that hashtag to take a big steaming poo poo on the evil that is the alt-right. If you've got a twitter feed, do your part!
|
|
#
?
Aug 25, 2016 19:11
|
|