Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 9109441" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Ah, I see. They aren't baseless accusations, they are SECRET accusations. How sneaky and clever of you, you can't seem like your accusations are baseless if you never tell people your reasons for making them.Because you don't seem to have any understanding of what the various levels mean, despite having it explained to you. Because it has been explained to you MULTIPLE TIMES in this very threat, Crawford practically has a meme with them laid out in front of you mulitple times in this thread, but you are still acting like it is so confusing. Just because I don't want to explain it a twelth time doesn't mean that I have never considered it. It doesn't mean I haven't listened to it be explained in over a dozen videos, where Crawford talks the numbers, the design, and how they will move forward. But fine, since we insist, lets explain it one more time. 80% -> this is good, it doesn't need improvement, we probably should keep it exactly as is or very very similar. 70% -> This is good, but we may be able to make it better, we might still keep it as is though60% -> This isn't so good. We need to improve this. It is probably getting altered50% -> This was a bad idea, we should drop this and move on to other ideas. Ta-Da! No please tell me how this is totally wrong, utterly confusing, and makes no sense because you voted a specific way and the thing you liked didn't make it in the playtest, because it rated something that you don't know but was too low to keep, and your single vote is totally exactly indicative of the percentage after the data processing of tens of thousands of votes.Because design isn't a binary.Because I don't have his words carved upon my heart, and I'm not researching the exact wording when you could do that exact same thing yourself. And since you have likely already told me that I'm wrong, because despite them saying X Y happened... then you are saying they lied.Unreliable data based on exactly what flaw in their process? On "one person misunderstood"? Surveys have a margin of error for a reason. Their data processing ACCOUNTS for a small handful of people not understanding or giving troll answers. This is why this is such a frustrating conversation, you can't seem to imagine that they know about this potential flaw in the data, and correct for it. Because it is not only a minor flaw, but an expected flaw in every survey ever run by anyone, ever.Yeah, I don't drink Coke. I heard something about new coke tasting bad a few years ago. I do not care if it tasted bad, because I don't drink coke. And I don't know if it was a massive blunder on their part... because I never drank it and I don't know how it affected their sales. And since, yet again, I never claimed big companies can never possibly make mistakes ever... congrats, you proved that people can make mistakes. A position I never disagreed with and that was a strawman you concocted out of the fact that I have yet to supplicate myself before your brilliance. What I have said, is that if you want to declare something like "Coca-Cola Move released in 2023 is a horrible move by the company that is a massive mistake!" You need... evidence. And that evidence has to be more than "I know this is true, because I met a guy at the gas station who said he didn't like the taste!" because a single person not liking a specific taste of a specific drink is... absolutely normal and expected. It doesn't mean Coke needs to launch an investigation into their release to see what flaws might exist in the flavor profile, because if you were to tell them this information... they'd be completely unsurprised it happened.I admitted what? The thing I've constantly told you I don't believe? This is almost hilarious, because your point is based on a single person not understanding written text, and you keep strawmanning me and making up things I've never said, despite my written text. You are literally creating a case study to disprove your own evidence as being troubling.A narrative I never held, and told you constantly I have never held. Congratulations. You proved a non-point that I conceded three days ago the first time you accused me of saying WoTC is perfect and without fault. And in the meantime, also proved that people misunderstand written communication all the time, so it is something that they would be incredibly likely to account for, especially since they likely would have noticed it over the DECADE of using these surveys to guide their productions.</blockquote>

Verification