Liberal Forum

Blackvegetable » 04 Apr 2026, 11:28 am » wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2026, 11:28 am

Define the Population and the Biased sample in this case.

I actually already did here. BlackVegtable justifies my repeated survivorship bias question. Does his stupidity know any bounds? - Liberal Forum Political Chat Room

And why don't you do your own work? You just can't **** answer your own damn questions. You can't stop hiding. It's not in your nature.


1. You will demand that I post it for you, because you refuse to read. **** no. Figure it out.

Vegas » 04 Apr 2026, 11:31 am » wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2026, 11:31 am

I actually already did 

You're lying 

Blackvegetable » 04 Apr 2026, 11:33 am » wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2026, 11:33 am

You're lying

Just like I predicted. You refused to look for yourself. 

Not my problem.

Vegas » 04 Apr 2026, 11:33 am » wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2026, 11:33 am

Just like I predicted. You refused to look for yourself. 

Not my problem.

The words "Population" and "Sample" do not appear in the OP.


In fact, the OP lies about what appears in the graph....because the OP is an idiot.

This graph proudly shows people without criminal convictions but conveniently forgets one tiny detail: a huge number of cases are still awaiting trial.

What does the key tell you is included in the graph?

Blackvegetable » 04 Apr 2026, 11:43 am » wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2026, 11:43 am

The words "Population" and "Sample" do not appear in the OP.

In fact, the OP lies about what appears in the graph....because the OP is an idiot.

What does the key tell you is included in the graph?

I won't answer your questions since you have not finished answering mine. STOP!.

Answer them yourself, and then we will talk. Do it now.

 

Blackvegetable » 04 Apr 2026, 11:43 am » wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2026, 11:43 am

The words "Population" and "Sample" do not appear in the OP.

In fact, the OP lies about what appears in the graph....because the OP is an idiot.

What does the key tell you is included in the graph?

You stand in the forum demanding that everyone explain the chart’s legend, the sample, the population, the heavens, and perhaps the migration patterns of geese, while refusing to answer the actual objection: a graph can be technically labeled and still incomplete in what it implies. The key tells us what is plotted, not whether the broader picture that conveniently " didn't survive."


1. You still wont answer. More questions after questions after questions...while dodging... and dodging ...and dodging.

Well...we both know that you won't answer your own question , because it takes you 6 months just to give a half-answer.
 

Vegas » 04 Apr 2026, 12:04 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2026, 12:04 pm

You stand in the forum demanding that everyone explain the chart’s legend, the sample, the population, 

Either you have misrepresented what the graph shows, or you can't read it


Survivorship bias is a form of sampling bias.

To determine if this is the case in this instance it is necessary to define the Population, in order to establish if it satisfies the condition necessary for this specific sampling error.


This is true whether you can be made to understand it or not.

Blackvegetable » 04 Apr 2026, 12:17 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2026, 12:17 pm

Either you have misrepresented what the graph shows, or you can't read it

As always, you only read the first line then disregard the rest of my post. Therefore, I will do the same to you. 

I only expect you to read the first line, but if you want to be schooled, then read all of it. Remember, if you read only 5 words, then I will do the same back to you. 




No, this is not a reading problem. It is an inference problem.
The population shown is plainly ICE arrests during the stated period, broken into weekly rolling averages by case-status category. The chart tells us that many arrestees had no conviction at the time of arrest. It does not tell us that they were therefore innocent, harmless, or free of pending charges. In other words, you keep hiding inside the legend because the legend is safer than the conclusion you want to draw from it. “No conviction” is not the same thing as “no criminal exposure,” and that is the entire point. Medieval schoolmen used to call this equivocation, smuggling one meaning into another and then pretending the listener cannot read. Modern people call it dodging.
 

Vegas » 04 Apr 2026, 12:31 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2026, 12:31 pm

As always, you only read the first line then disregard the rest of my post. 

once you have established that you are full of ****, there is no reason for me to persist in the hopeless pursuit of something even vaguely intelligent.


 

Blackvegetable » 04 Apr 2026, 12:41 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2026, 12:41 pm

once you have established that you are full of ****, there is no reason for me to persist in the hopeless pursuit of something even vaguely intelligent.

I already proved you were full of **** on my last post ...that once again, you didn't read. Not my problem.

If you do get around to it, just a fair warning: I vaporized you. Absolutely nuked you.


1. Continue to refuse to read it. 

Vegas » 04 Apr 2026, 12:44 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2026, 12:44 pm

I already proved you were full of **** on my last post ...

you have no idea what it means to do so.
 

Blackvegetable » 04 Apr 2026, 1:44 pm » wrote: ↑

04 Apr 2026, 1:44 pm

you have no idea what it means to do so.

Speaking of you having no idea that you have been vaporized, check this out:


Defend it, coward.
Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.


Veghead pretending to be superior followed by him getting his *** handed to him:
Master Vegetable's MAGAt Moron Challenge! or Why Blackvegetable Is Much Better Than You, Bish! - Liberal Forum Political Chat Room



BlackVegtable justifies my repeated survivorship bias question. Does his stupidity know any bounds? - Liberal Forum Political Chat Room

Vegas » 05 Apr 2026, 10:48 am » wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2026, 10:48 am

Speaking of you having no idea that you have been vaporized, check this out:

Defend it, coward.


 

To whom?

Blackvegetable » 05 Apr 2026, 10:54 am » wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2026, 10:54 am

To whom?

     

Defend it, coward.
Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?

C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.


Veghead pretending to be superior followed by him getting his *** handed to him:
Master Vegetable's MAGAt Moron Challenge! or Why Blackvegetable Is Much Better Than You, Bish! - Liberal Forum Political Chat Room



BlackVegtable justifies my repeated survivorship bias question. Does his stupidity know any bounds? - Liberal Forum Political Chat Room

Vegas » 05 Apr 2026, 10:57 am » wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2026, 10:57 am

     

Defend it, coward.

Because the Population features the specific characteristic required to give rise to the sampling error in question. 

 https://media2.giphy.com/media/v1.Y2lkP ... /giphy.gif
 
 

Blackvegetable » 05 Apr 2026, 11:05 am » wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2026, 11:05 am

Because the Population features the specific characteristic required to give rise to the sampling error in question. 

 

Holy ****...did you finally answer? Wait...wait a minute. I can't believe my **** eyes. Ill need to get back to you. 

Let me find my glasses to make sure.
 

Vegas » 05 Apr 2026, 11:07 am » wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2026, 11:07 am

Holy ****...did you finally answer? Wait...wait a minute. I can't believe my **** eyes. Ill need to get back to you. 

Let me find my glasses to make sure.

Just post the example you owe.

Blackvegetable » 05 Apr 2026, 11:12 am » wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2026, 11:12 am

Just post the example you owe.

This **** again. I already posted 2. You know that. Now shut up with your narcissist amnesia. 

**** pathetic. AI wasn't impressed with your defense.             

Hang on, I'll show you.

Blackvegetable » 05 Apr 2026, 11:12 am » wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2026, 11:12 am

Just post the example you owe.

Actually, I would prefer to publicly humiliate you. Hang on.

Vegas » 05 Apr 2026, 11:17 am » wrote: ↑

05 Apr 2026, 11:17 am

Actually, I would prefer to publicly humiliate you. Hang on.

You aren't qualified.