Posts by linger
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
Interesting thing: no entry for OnPoint has yet reappeared on the PA homepage blogroll (though this post is on the PAS roll). So how permanent is this return, Keith? Is there something we should know?
-
Not so much fun: It's not a question of "should" or "shouldn't", but rather, what interpretive assumptions Hadyn's making about sequential games. A linear graph makes sense if it can be assumed that player ability does "develop" over time; and at least for some aspects of performance or fitness, it might make sense to consider levels between games. On the data available, this assumption seems to work better for some players than for others -- so, the suitability of the analytical frame is still an open question.
-
I got the other McGlashan references above, but am still confused by "crustacean loving". Is that where someone gets the crabs?
-
so, again, it's all gone toroid-shaped?
(or, with an added twist, a Me-bias strip?)
-
doesn't mean it's unreasonable to ask what the hell kind of judgement was involved in letting him go to air [...] in my view "pretty poor" sums it up.
Sure, it's reasonable to ask the question, and that's even a reasonable conclusion. But it is also reasonable to ask, as many here already have: is that really relevant? Voters didn't just elect the producer to anything, and she's not (even nominally) in government over us.
-
bagel. Which is nothing like it
hm! A bagel could quite clearly be a symbol of nothing. So, possibly more appropriate than you intended for the current financial state of affairs?
(A parallel example: Graeme Norton once asked a New York audience for a radio-safe euphemism for a certain portion of the female anatomy, and was -- initially -- quite happy to use the suggestion "mango".)
-
The point that addresses mark's question is that parties shouldn't have disproportionate freedom to advertise based solely on how much money they have available to throw at it, because that results in a systematic social bias (towards parties representing the interests of wealthier sectors) which runs against the interest of a fair democracy.
It probably bears mentioning, though, that the NZ electoral campaign funding model does include some weighting for popularity of message, albeit in a very indirect and inexact way, in as much as parties get campaign funding proportional to their level of support at the previous election. This is an aspect which favours pre-existing parties (though with the positive effect of disfavouring the nutbars), and which only works well if we can assume a consistent "product" from one election to the next.
-
Whenever I see Key, Toy Love's song "Rebel" runs through my mind.
I like that song a lot -- so hey, it's a good thing :-) -
I should probably apologise for any part I have in Roger
Ah! That goes a long way towards explaining his demeanour at that press conference.
-
heh. clearly takes me too long to type!