Re: [ga] WHOIS: Statistical note.

[Marc Schneiders <marc@fuchsia.bijt.net>]

Oh, I thought this thing you're talking about was called At Large, or
ALOC, or ALSO. Has the name changed again, and is it now WHOIS? And what
does it stand for?

On Fri, 9 Aug 2002, at 11:56 [=GMT+0200], Thomas Roessler wrote:

>    One reader of the [1]WHOIS Task Force's report sent me a private
>    comment about the statitsical considerations section of that report,
>    pointing out that there is no reason to suppose that the statistics of
>    a self-selected sample can be modeled by a Gaussion or any other
>    random model. This is, of course, true: The fact that the respondents
>    were [2]self-selected can add any systematic bias, and we don't know
>    what that bias looks like. However, we know that this bias makes the
>    results worse. Thus, error margins derived from a random model
>    underestimate the errors. Put differently: If you couldn't derive a
>    conclusion assuming the sample is random, you certainly can't derive
>    it when the results come from a self-selected sample.
>
> References
>
>    1. http://www.dnso.org/dnso/notes/whoisTF/
>    2. http://www.capitalcentury.com/1935.html
>
> --
> Thomas Roessler                        http://log.does-not-exist.org/
> --
> This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
> Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
> ("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
> Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html
>

--
This message was passed to you via the ga@dnso.org list.
Send mail to majordomo@dnso.org to unsubscribe
("unsubscribe ga" in the body of the message).
Archives at http://www.dnso.org/archives.html