On the subject in the title: Contributing data without breaching anyone's privacy — what changed since Working notes rather than a conclusion.
What changes if the standard account of Contributing data without breaching is wrong? I ask because I have been treating it as settled and I noticed this week that I could not say why.
Working through the consequences rather than the evidence, since others here are better placed on the evidence.
Using data in discussions: datasets are useful as reference points when someone claims something unusual. "I have not seen that reported in the data" is different from "that is impossible", but data gives you something to say.
That is where I would start, not where I would stop.
Taking post #2 at face value and following it one step further.
Include the denominator. A collection of reports without knowing how many people did not report is uninterpretable in the direction everybody wants to interpret it.
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
Aggregated purity results across four services, with caveats — a second dataset
Aggregated purity results across four services, with caveats — a second dataset — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Posting a small dataset on Aggregated purity results…
|
+127 | 151 | 42k | 10mo |
|
Coming back to: A community side-effect dataset, with its response rate and biases
On the subject in the title: A community side-effect dataset, with its response rate and biases Working notes rather than a conclusion. Reading back through what has been written here about community…
|
+27 | 31 | 46k | 9mo |
|
Cleaning a self-reported dataset and what you throw away — what changed since
Posting this under the heading it deserves: Cleaning a self-reported dataset and what you throw away — what changed since Everything below is what sits behind that. What changes if the standard account of…
|
2 | 2k | 1h | |
|
Whether an aggregate is worth publishing at all: a disputed topic
On the subject in the title: Whether an aggregate is worth publishing at all: a disputed topic Working notes rather than a conclusion. An honest uncertainty about whether an aggregate rather than a disguised…
|
+20 | 24 | 18k | 13mo |
|
Cleaning a self-reported dataset and what you throw away
Cleaning a self-reported dataset and what you throw away — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Collecting what is known about cleaning a self-reported dataset in one place,…
|
2 | 28k | 1d |
| Topic | Participants | Replies | Views | Activity |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
List price versus negotiated price versus what you pay
On the subject in the title: List price versus negotiated price versus what you pay Working notes rather than a conclusion. List price versus negotiated price — I have the observation and I do not trust my…
|
+99 | 115 | 11k | 3mo |
|
Coming back to: How much context is too much context in a first post?
Asking directly, because I could not find a straight answer: How much context is too much context in a first post? Counting it rather than describing it, because the count is the part that can be argued with.…
|
+2 | 6 | 7.5k | 1d |
|
Residual solvents and scavengers: what is looked for
On the subject in the title: Residual solvents and scavengers: what is looked for Working notes rather than a conclusion. I would like to know what people here actually do about residual solvents and…
|
+19 | 23 | 39k | 14mo |
|
Reading a chromatogram someone posted without axes
Reading a chromatogram someone posted without axes — setting out what I have, and where I think it stops being reliable. Posting a small dataset on reading a chromatogram. It is mine, it is uncontrolled, and…
|
+47 | 55 | 9.4k | 13mo |
|
Carryover and the ghost peak from last week's standard
On the subject in the title: Carryover and the ghost peak from last week's standard Working notes rather than a conclusion. What changes if the standard account of carryover is wrong? I ask because I have…
|
+80 | 92 | 16k | 16mo |