(Anderson Geten) #81

What is wrong is not the data. What is wrong is your interpretation of the data.

Again, this is only YOUR interpretation. not ccp’s. CCP did not claim there is a causation. YOU did. out of nowhere. So YOUR opinion is ■■■■. And that’s all there is to say about it.

(Dom Arkaral) #82

Calm down miner.

So offended and offensive with people :joy:
I’m almost wondering how people can even converse with you if that’s all you do

(Anderson Geten) #83

The matter is that this stupidity (mixing correlation and causation) is propagated to people and then they don’t realize they are doing it, because people make them believe this is womewhat acceptable (it is not).

You are harming people IRL by doing that. You are just too ignorant to realize it - or you are really trying to harm people IRL.

(Dom Arkaral) #84

I sure am
Breaking dreams and stuff, also killing people /s

Get off your high horse :joy:

(Anderson Geten) #85

nothing about me.

Really get off your high horse, like I could care about your little person. You are just nothing at all. How could you even consider I care about you ?

(Dom Arkaral) #86

Can you at least try to post on topic?
Or do you really just love to dig your hole deeper? :sweat_smile:

(Anderson Geten) #87

well let’s be on topic then :slight_smile:
CODE. is full of crybabies who can’t accept to be shown wrong.

They don’t know the basics of logic, they affirm that 2+2=5 is a fact, and when people tell them they are wrong, they say it is “salt” and feel “embarrassed” by people not agreeing with them.

In two words, CODE. is a corporation of delusional children - for what we received on this thread.

(Kuba Ganowski) #88

I respect CODE…
Your CODE Agents are assholes

(Elsebeth Rhiannon) #89

Can we refrain from using RL actual conditions as insults?

(Anderson Geten) #90

I tried to be factual and not insulting. What could be the correct symptoms for people who can’t accept the reality ?

My bad indeed autism is linked to the issue with communication.
is “delusional” better ?

(John E Normus) #91

I like that there are still people like you playing eve.

(Galaxy Pig) #92

Hey, just checking in here!

Let’s tally up the score:

Gankers have a study that demonstrates a correlation, as Anderson has said. CCP undertook this study as an attempt to confirm the old bias that ganking has a negative affect on noob retention but in fact could only demonstrate the opposite (as limited as the scope may be).

And then the carebears have… wait, what is it that the creabears have? It can’t be nothing, right? It can’t be just their feelings, right? It can’t ALL be anecdotal, surely? No data at all? WHAT???

@Anderson_Geten you can point out the limited nature of CCPs study until the cows come home, but it’s still wayyyyyyyyyyyyy more than what your camp has to offer (which is nothing but their carebear feelings).

Just to recap:
We have a correlation that was enough to satisfy CCP’s fancy data analyst folks.

You have zip, diddly, nada, jack, squat, zilch. :avocado:

(Anderson Geten) #93

That’s where you are wrong. CCP tried to find a CORRELATION between two things, and instead found another CORRELATION.
In no way does it mean there is a causation. In no way did they say there is a causation. The causation part is only YOUR interpretation, and that’s because you don’t know how to make correct logic. You are affirming that 2 plus 2 equals 5.

another reason why you are wrong is the first sentence :

That is false. You can not demonstrate a correlation. You exhibit it, because the correlation is only true for a given way to extract data. If you make another study, then this correlation will not be present.

Something that you don’t understand, is that you can have a causation from A to B and not be able to exhibit a correlation between A and B. Just because you find a correlation between A and B does not mean anything outside of the data analysis of the study. And of course you can create correlations by the way you build your study.

Just to recap :
You don’t have the basic knowledge about logic.

(Mevatla Vekraspek) #94

Whatever, on the entertainment front CODE. always win.

(NotTheSmartestCookie) #95

And here comes the amazing part: the CCP study did look at the reasons players gave for quiting the game. So they studied the “non-survivors”. Lo and behold, in the CCP data less than 1% cites “ship loss and harassment” as the reason to leave the game. Myth busted!

CCP spells it out for everyone to read: “People who die play longer”. Of course CCP would not have written that if people with losses played on average 1% longer; this means people with a PvP experience play significantly longer.

Now in making EVE more attractive to play, should CCP adjust EVE for the 1% or for the 99%? I am willing to put a significant amount of ISK on the line that a lot more people left EVE because they were bored. This is were CODE. comes in; they have been the premier highsec content provider for the past 6 years. An amazing effort!

(Syeed Ameer Ali) #96

So just to recap - you’ve got nothing. Right?


(Anderson Geten) #97

This does not prove a thing. You are affirming that 2+2= 5 out of thin air, again.

(NotTheSmartestCookie) #98

To be honest, it is a case of a mental midget vs the wisdom of James 315, so the outcome was never in doubt. However, it can still make for good education of the masses.

(Galaxy Pig) #99

Okay, I’ll play your word game.

Gankers have a study that exhibits a correlation.


We’re all waiting, Anderson.

What do you have other than tears? Ball’s in your court.

(NotTheSmartestCookie) #100

If I had to choose between A> a study by the game development studio with access to player data and the actual responses by players give for quiting EVE, or B> the unsubstantiated feelings of a carebear, I know where my ISK will be.