Statistical DATA for postings in rec.scuba.locations vs sci.stat.math

Discussion in 'Scientific Statistics Math' started by Reef Fish, Dec 2, 2006.

  1. Reef Fish

    Reef Fish Guest

    I made the post earlier today in rec.scuba.locations, subject

    (VERY LONG) Re: What happened to rec.scuba.locations?

    after I had notice how DEAD that group was and remarked

    RF > But the rec.scuba folks Lee and his pals used to flock here to
    RF > make noise every time I talk scuba here.

    which immediately brought out Lee and one of his pals. :) which
    prompted my detailed response, covering SEVERAL different
    issues pertaining to my presence/absence in these two groups.

    What was NOT shown are the posting numbers in the two groups

    s2004: 559 405 817 696 522 438 561 872 620 410 385 511

    MEAN S2004 = 566.33
    m2004 :374 573 580 759 495 560 508 505 594 509 734 709

    MEAN M2004 = 575

    That the two groups were about equally active in 2004 before I
    first participated in sci.stat.math about Feb 2005

    By 2006, the amount of posting activities in the two groups were
    dramatically different when I more or less stopped posting in
    rec.scuba.locations in March 2006 (see VERY LONG post).

    Mean # of posts in 11 months of rec.scuba = 442.82
    Mean # of posts in 11 months of sci.stat.math = 1063.9

    :_s2006 =1500 414 632 432 405 366 422 205 156 175 164
    :_m2006=904 711 744 1219 1180 862 1180 1318 1423 1195 967

    The last few monthsin rec.scuba.locations and the decreasing pattern

    422 205 156 175 164

    is particularly telling of the the DEADNESS of that group, compared
    to the corresponding same 5 months in sci.stat.math:

    1180 1318 1423 1195 967

    In fact the decreasing trend in sci.stat.math (which I noticed
    only NOW) seem to reflect that the NOISE had been
    decreasing, until in Nov (967 posts only) that prompted
    my post in sci.stat.math on Nov 22:

    RF> For the FIRST time since I started, sci.stat.math has
    RF> been the CLEAN neighborhood absent of NOISE bullys
    RF> and Quacks, as it should have been long before now.

    Was it because they were leaving in droves because of me?

    The telling numbers were already showing in the FOUR
    groups in the number of subscribers (not all of whom post):

    math edu consult NEW
    1296 745 841 18 Nov 6
    1342 750 848 19 Nov 22
    1351 753 851 21 Nov 28
    1361 758 859 20 Nov 29
    1362 759 859 20 Nov 30
    1366 762 863 20 Dec 1

    on the numbers of subscribers monotonically nondecreasing
    in all three sci.stat groups, and strikingly increasing in
    sci.stat.math, while the NEW group, which can be considered
    the "control" group for the effect of Reef Fish, created by
    beliavsky so that he could "boot me out" more or less died
    before it started: 20 POSTS in the entire history of that group.

    1 new of 1 David (1 author)
    Dec 1
    Type I Error 12 new of 12 Ray Koopman (6 authors) Nov 9
    multivariate uniform 3 new of 3 beliav... (2 authors) Nov 9
    Normal Approximation 4 new of 4 Ethan.J(3 authors) Nov 2

    The posting number data can be used as illustration of the
    use (or not use) of T-tests for comparing means, or the use
    of Mann-Whitney in nonparametric two-sample, or in just
    looking at the RAW DATA and pick out interesting patterns
    that can be attributed to various changes in the short time-
    series of number of posts.

    -- Reef Fish Bob.
    Reef Fish, Dec 2, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  2. Reef Fish

    Dan Bracuk Guest

    "Reef Fish" <> pounded away at his
    keyboard resulting in:

    :I made the post earlier today in rec.scuba.locations, subject
    : (VERY LONG) Re: What happened to rec.scuba.locations?
    :after I had notice how DEAD that group was and remarked

    This is what I have to say about that.


    2. Statistics are like women. Once you get them down, you can do
    anything with them.

    Take your time with your responses. My plane to Cayman leaves in 9
    hours, and I'll be asleep for most of them.

    Dan Bracuk
    If we don't succeed, we run the risk of failure.
    Dan Bracuk, Dec 3, 2006
    1. Advertisements

  3. Reef Fish

    Reef Fish Guest

    My comments are primarily for the benefit of the sci.stat.math readers
    who are not familiar with the author Dan Bracuk.
    I would take it that the DEAD PERSON in Scene 2 was Dan
    identifying himself with the characer in the cartoon.

    If you hadn't gotten the idea from my VERY LONG post above that
    Dan Bracuk is one of the few posters in that group I've known for
    years, which I can truly say is "beyond reproach" and one of the
    few people who actually DIVES (and very much alive) as opposed
    to most of the NOISE makers in that group.

    Dan has a good sense of humor. Even though he is not a statistician
    he would be laughing at his own joke if he were. Clearly made without
    Enjoy! Having taken the Cayman trip 15 years annually, I finally gave
    it up in 2005. :)

    -- Reef Fish Bob.
    Reef Fish, Dec 3, 2006
    1. Advertisements

Ask a Question

Want to reply to this thread or ask your own question?

You'll need to choose a username for the site, which only take a couple of moments (here). After that, you can post your question and our members will help you out.