Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="mamba" data-source="post: 9101984" data-attributes="member: 7034611">as I said, you cannot extrapolate, but since you detected this in that small a sample size, it is worth looking into. You are simply wrong to dismiss it, just because the sample is small.It works the other way, if in a sample of 10 I find no issues, then the sample was too small to safely say that there is no problem. If in this little sample I find a problem already, then you better look into it.What percentage do we expect to stumble? Should we maybe work on making it harder to misunderstand the survey?but how many do can certainly vary, and be influenced by the questions and available answersSure, because a sample size of 10 is too small to reliably detect a problem, it's just that we already managed despite the small size. If we had a thousand and found the problem, it still would be a problem, we just managed to do so in 10 already.Do you think they would say 'oh, it is only 10 out of the 1000 bulbs, we can ignore that'?I gave a rationale, you are basically saying 'you have motive, you have opportunity, you have circumstantial evidence, but you have no DNA at the crime scene, so it could have been anyone'. I have no access to the proverbial crime scene... If you want to dispute the circumstantial evidence, be my guest.sure, but it still pales in comparison to all responses, and the % is the aggregate of all of them, so the few written opinions have only a small influence on the resultyeah, that is your claim, but 'unfortunately' correlation is not the same as causation, so you still will have to show that this is due to how great the playtest is workingNo more or less than mine, or rather, if anything it is less so, because you are not making a case like I did, you just make a claim. And yet you are very comfortable with dismissing mine. Guess I feel the same way about yours.I doubt we will get to an agreement here. How about we turn this around? Why are you so opposed to improving the process? After all that is all I am asking for here... Let's see if we can agree on something here...1) What is WotC really interested in answering? To me it is A) do you like this idea better than what we have today (nevermind the balancing)? B) Do you like the execution enough for us to add it as is, or does it need improvement?Do you agree / disagree? If you disagree, what are they looking for?2) Are the current options we can choose from the best way to answer the questions that WotC wants answers for? To me that is a resounding 'no', let's see what you have to say</blockquote>

Verification