On 10/2/05, Ryan Delaney <ryan.delaney(a)gmail.com>
wrote:
DF wrote:
For those around here that like statistics, I
have
updated my automated statistical analysis of AFD,
This is fantastic, thank you. I would like to call >
everyone's
attention to something, though. On your
table of the most common AFD closers, there is
User:Jni, who closed 117 AFDs. Of each AFD he
closed, 100% were deletes, with a 30% estimated
threshold for delete votes.
If I'm reading this correctly, that means he only
needed 30% of the votes to be delete to decide that
there was consensus to delete.
<snip other stuff>
Jni is something of a special case. In 117 closes, he
never closed as Keep. Hence at some empirical level,
his threshold might equally well be anything below his
weakest consensus. The algorithm being used picks a
number in the middle of the many equivalent values, so
it may be skewing a lot lower than is sensible. A
more useful column to look at in cases like this is
the "Est. Deviation", this shows how many AFDs he
might have been expected to close differently had he
been using a 63.5% value which is the average. For
Jni, that value is 2, meaning that he closed as delete
roughly two AFDs with less than 63.5% votes for
deletion.
Sorry for the confusion.
-DF