55 minutes ago, GreenDragoon said:

They actually did give @catachanninja's defintition of an ace a couple months back, when he left the recording room so that he couldn't hear them giving it to The Masses (tm) .
That being said, I don't recall which episode.

I also just wrote a Big Rant© if you care enough to read. It's kinda like an article/blogpost, but I don't give enough of a **** to make a blog.

1 hour ago, GreenDragoon said:

3 hours ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

hey actually did give @catachanninja's defintition of an ace a couple months back, when he left the recording room so that he couldn't hear them giving it to The Masses (tm) .
That being said, I don't recall which episode.

I know. But despite listening to all the mario tennis, I missed it, so I keep denying that it ever happened. We need a written form, or it didn't happen.

3 hours ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

I also just wrote a Big Rant© if you care enough to read. It's kinda like an article/blogpost, but I don't give enough of a **** to make a blog.

I did and I agree with it. But what did you expect would happen? It's not something the Jedi forum would listen to

9 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

I know. But despite listening to all the mario tennis, I missed it, so I keep denying that it ever happened. We need a written form, or it didn't happen.

I did and I agree with it. But what did you expect would happen? It's not something the Jedi forum would listen to

I see through the lies of the podcast! I do not fear the forum as you do! I have brought Peace, justice, and security to my new droidpire!

14 hours ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

They actually did give @catachanninja's defintition of an ace a couple months back, when he left the recording room so that he couldn't hear them giving it to The Masses (tm) .
That being said, I don't recall which episode.

I also just wrote a Big Rant© if you care enough to read. It's kinda like an article/blogpost, but I don't give enough of a **** to make a blog.

what actually happened was, Chris said it in reference to something else, and then i noted that it was also the definition of an ace

11 hours ago, GreenDragoon said:

I know. But despite listening to all the mario tennis, I missed it, so I keep denying that it ever happened. We need a written form, or it didn't happen.

I did and I agree with it. But what did you expect would happen? It's not something the Jedi forum would listen to

It made me realize that the Wedge Defense Force is very real.

Why do they love wedge so much?

"Here is a list of things that are 2stronk (and why) and why they need to be nerfed"

"NuH hUh, WeDgE iS ToTaLlY bEtTeR tHaN 7b jeDi"

13 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

It made me realize that the Wedge Defense Force is very real.

Why do they love wedge so much?

"Here is a list of things that are 2stronk (and why) and why they need to be nerfed"

"NuH hUh, WeDgE iS ToTaLlY bEtTeR tHaN 7b jeDi"

It's not just a love for Wedge, but the "Wedge is OP, plz Nerf" as well...

Clearly perceived value is something of a factor...

38 minutes ago, Kaptin Krunch said:

It made me realize that the Wedge Defense Force is very real.

Why do they love wedge so much?

"Here is a list of things that are 2stronk (and why) and why they need to be nerfed"

"NuH hUh, WeDgE iS ToTaLlY bEtTeR tHaN 7b jeDi"

There's a massive gap between "Wedge's ability is statistically significant passive modification" and "Wedge is better than 7B."

Anyhow, here's what strikes me. Wedge is probably priced about right. High initiative with a pilot ability that ranges from around the power level of Predator to a bit better than Target Lock, depending on some fairly common scenarios. To be sure, he's not a double repo ace and has his limits, but he's still a member of the high-init passive mods club.

Ironically, it all probably becomes another case of "The T-65 X-Wing is the only correctly priced ship in the game, and everything else is wrong."

We probably have similar ideas about the direction of changes that ought to happen, but not necessarily on the magnitude and pace of change. Incrementalism vs Nuke From Orbit.

2 hours ago, catachanninja said:

what actually happened was, Chris said it in reference to something else, and then i noted that it was also the definition of an ace

fun fact, the definition came up again in the last cast as well.

1 minute ago, jagsba said:

fun fact, the definition came up again in the last cast as well.

13 minutes ago, jagsba said:

fun fact, the definition came up again in the last cast as well.

Correct!

This thread is impenetrable

Ever argument/conversation I've seen in the wild using ATC has involved a huge misunderstanding of statistics to make an argument that may or may not be true.

...Should we just bring it back down/make it private? I'm not sure it's making things actively worse, but as far as I can tell it's still just people starting with a conclusion then working backwards from ATC data.

1 minute ago, Brunas said:

Ever argument/conversation I've seen in the wild using ATC has involved a huge misunderstanding of statistics to make an argument that may or may not be true.

...Should we just bring it back down/make it private? I'm not sure it's making things actively worse, but as far as I can tell it's still just people starting with a conclusion then working backwards from ATC data.

That’s what everyone everywhere does with data. Stats in psychology is just p-hacking until the data supports the conclusion your gut came to when making a hypothesis.

The worst outcome is someone can cherry pick data to convince themselves that they are right about the opinions they were going to hold anyway. That doesn’t seem bad enough to take it down? (And I selfishly like looking at it).

Just now, AEIllingworth said:

p-hacking until the data supports the conclusion your gut came to when making a hypothesis

but it's OK when I do it!

...I try not to do it, but I think we're all just doing it

4 minutes ago, Brunas said:

Ever argument/conversation I've seen in the wild using ATC has involved a huge misunderstanding of statistics to make an argument that may or may not be true.

...Should we just bring it back down/make it private? I'm not sure it's making things actively worse, but as far as I can tell it's still just people starting with a conclusion then working backwards from ATC data.

Wouldn't the same folks just make bad arguments from MetaWing instead?

But then, there is the issue of being complicit in bad arguments...

4 minutes ago, Brunas said:

Ever argument/conversation I've seen in the wild using ATC has involved a huge misunderstanding of statistics to make an argument that may or may not be true.

...Should we just bring it back down/make it private? I'm not sure it's making things actively worse, but as far as I can tell it's still just people starting with a conclusion then working backwards from ATC data.

I am a bit of an outside party, but private data would likely simply make the divide worse. If all your points are based on data you don’t share, then it becomes a matter of trust rather than the soundness of ideas. I think it is better to let everyone see where you are coming. Yeah, some people will misuse it (intentionally or not), but will simply use something else for their points.

Now, in the end, I’m a drifter and you made ATC. What you do with it and my suggestion are completely up to you.

Just now, SabineKey said:

I am a bit of an outside party, but private data would likely simply make the divide worse. If all your points are based on data you don’t share, then it becomes a matter of trust rather than the soundness of ideas. I think it is better to let everyone see where you are coming. Yeah, some people will misuse it (intentionally or not), but will simply use something else for their points.

Now, in the end, I’m a drifter and you made ATC. What you do with it and my suggestion are completely up to you.

Oh, no worries, I really appreciate the feedback. It's public because it both seemed silly and unfair to sit on in private - no one is a drifer.

7 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

Wouldn't the same folks just make bad arguments from MetaWing instead?

But then, there is the issue of being complicit in bad arguments...

Right, it's the "being complicit in bag arguments" bit. Or more accurately, it's like making a car for someone then watching them immediately drive it into the nearest building. Is it my fault? Not... really? They'd have probably walked into it on their own, just maybe with a bit less velocity...

19 minutes ago, Brunas said:

as far as I can tell it's still just people starting with a conclusion then working backwards from ATC data.

I feel attacked

21 minutes ago, Brunas said:

Ever argument/conversation I've seen in the wild using ATC has involved a huge misunderstanding of statistics to make an argument that may or may not be true.

...Should we just bring it back down/make it private? I'm not sure it's making things actively worse, but as far as I can tell it's still just people starting with a conclusion then working backwards from ATC data.

FWIW, my fear was exactly this - the illusion of increased precision will make people feel ever more secure in making assertions and yelling at people.

14 minutes ago, theBitterFig said:

Wouldn't the same folks just make bad arguments from MetaWing instead?

But then, there is the issue of being complicit in bad arguments...

Yes, but now they think they have higher "accuracy".

5 minutes ago, Brunas said:

Oh, no worries, I really appreciate the feedback. It's public because it both seemed silly and unfair to sit on in private - no one is a drifer.

Right, it's the "being complicit in bag arguments" bit. Or more accurately, it's like making a car for someone then watching them immediately drive it into the nearest building. Is it my fault? Not... really? They'd have probably walked into it on their own, just maybe with a bit less velocity...

This is... sadly a pretty apt metaphor.

27 minutes ago, Brunas said:

Ever argument/conversation I've seen in the wild using ATC has involved a huge misunderstanding of statistics to make an argument that may or may not be true.

...Should we just bring it back down/make it private? I'm not sure it's making things actively worse, but as far as I can tell it's still just people starting with a conclusion then working backwards from ATC data.

No please don’t. I find a beauty in the ability to look at raw data and form my own conclusions myself, without X blog/podcast, forum dwelling statistician, or website doing it for me. If I error in conclusion it is my own hubris.

People will always misinterpret data, especially when starting with “X should be good” mindset, instead of asking “how is X doing?”. Also people were yelling at each other with metawing and list fortress data, so that doesn’t really change anything.

27 minutes ago, Brunas said:

Ever argument/conversation I've seen in the wild using ATC has involved a huge misunderstanding of statistics to make an argument that may or may not be true.

...Should we just bring it back down/make it private? I'm not sure it's making things actively worse, but as far as I can tell it's still just people starting with a conclusion then working backwards from ATC data.

I’d say leave it. You’d know the stats, but I’d guess for every vocal argument, good or bad, based on your data, there are X amount of folks who say nothing and quietly make good use of it.

36 minutes ago, Brunas said:

Ever argument/conversation I've seen in the wild using ATC has involved a huge misunderstanding of statistics to make an argument that may or may not be true.

...Should we just bring it back down/make it private? I'm not sure it's making things actively worse, but as far as I can tell it's still just people starting with a conclusion then working backwards from ATC data.

It's why I only threw my stuff around with a huge wall of text. Getting the data was not the hard work. Writing was.

43 minutes ago, Brunas said:

Oh, no worries, I really appreciate the feedback. It's public because it both seemed silly and unfair to sit on in private - no one is a drifer.

Right, it's the "being complicit in bag arguments" bit. Or more accurately, it's like making a car for someone then watching them immediately drive it into the nearest building. Is it my fault? Not... really? They'd have probably walked into it on their own, just maybe with a bit less velocity...

you should see Ford vs Ferrari, it tackles that issue to some extent. Also, it's a great movie.

20 minutes ago, catachanninja said:

you should see Ford vs Ferrari, it tackles that issue to some extent. Also, it's a great movie.

I saw Ford vs Ferrari this weekend and concur that people should see it.