Date: Wednesday, April 8th, 2015 06:45 pm (UTC)
kaberett: Photo of a pile of old leather-bound books. (books)
From: [personal profile] kaberett
Hi. I'm a PhD student in the physical sciences. I made my comment with that as my background.

One doesn't get to use "disproportionate" without defining and justifying a baseline; I consider the baseline the report chooses and uses disingenuous and unhelpful given its other flaws. It's pretty classic How To Lie With Statistics stuff. It is not possible to robustly argue from the data available that WF/RH/BS deliberately read more books by WoC for the purpose of targeting WoC (as opposed to any other reason), which is what the phrasing in question implies; and, to reiterate, in combination with the report's other flaws I consider this choice of phrasing and statistical approach at best sufficiently infelicitous that it is not deserving of a Hugo on its own merits.
From:
Anonymous (will be screened)
OpenID (will be screened if not validated)
Identity URL: 
User
Account name:
Password:
If you don't have an account you can create one now.
Subject:
HTML doesn't work in the subject.

Message:

 
Notice: This account is set to log the IP addresses of people who comment anonymously.
Links will be displayed as unclickable URLs to help prevent spam.

July 2017

S M T W T F S
      1
23456 78
91011 1213 14 15
16 1718192021 22
23 24 2526272829
3031     

Expand Cut Tags

No cut tags

Tags