Mon: Are you pro or anti-biotics?
Tues: “Null hypothesis” = “A specific random number generator”
Wed: No guarantee
Thurs: The Puzzle of Paul Meehl: An intellectual history of research criticism in psychology
Fri: Redemption
Sat: Doing data science
Sun: Will transparency damage science?
Pre-Specified Commenting Plan:
Mon: Los dos
Tues: Daniel Lakeland is a super-commenter
Weds: Can I buy an extended warranty?
Thurs: tl;dr
Fri: The Rye is pretty good, the Bourbon is OK
Sat: Does it pay well?
Sun: No
Jrc:
Excellent. Maybe you can write your comments a few months ahead of time, to match my posts!
Nah, as soon as I saw the discussion of null hypothesis vs RNG I knew it’d get bumped.
Actually, my theory was clearly conditional, and is fully consistent with you only being a super-commenter if it were either very warm and sunny in New York (in which case Andrew would have gone to play frisbee and the regularly scheduled post would have appeared) or you walked past me eating a Jamaican meat pie (which situational inequality can result in antisocial behavior, which would cause you to bring up NHST and RNGs).
So this is precisely within my pre-specified commenting plan. I mean, the theory makes very specific predictions, you just hadn’t thought through the interactions clearly enough.
Turns out that according to my Random Number Generator, in 95 percent of all possible worlds in which posts were scheduled for today, I did actually walk past you eating a Jamaican meat pie and hence our coverage guarantees are met, and it turns out we just got unlucky in this universe!