...and you have evaded it just as many. **** moron.Blackvegetable » 21 Aug 2025, 6:31 am » wrote: ↑ @Vegas only posted this about 1000x...
You're a **** idiot.
First time I ever thought music like this could be peaceful...
Vegas » 21 Aug 2025, 9:13 am » wrote: ↑ So you can use it to help you? **** off. Figure it out yourself.
Which scenario is an example of survivorship bias in evaluating business success?
A) Believing that reading business books increases revenue after finding many CEOs recommend them.
B) Concluding that most startups fail after analyzing bankrupt companies.
C) Thinking entrepreneurship is easy because most media profiles focus on successful founders.
D) Surveying customers to understand why they chose your product over competitors
I am sure he will, AFTER you post yours to compare
Proof you are begging for my help.
Proof that one of you is a moron and the other a coward AND moron
Blackvegetable » 21 Aug 2025, 9:19 am » wrote: ↑ Proof that one of you is a moron and the other a coward AND moron
lol*Huey » 20 Aug 2025, 1:47 pm » wrote: ↑
WASHINGTON, D.C. — As President Donald Trump continues to hint at taking action to require in-person voting in U.S. elections, Democratic leaders warned that a mail-in ballot ban would place undue hardship on dead voters.
Ever the champions of the rights of deceased voters, Democrats alleged that any move to ban mail-in ballots would disenfranchise millions of dead people who vote Democrat in every American election.
"We can't allow President Trump to alienate our dead voters like this," said Congresswoman Nancy Pelosi. "Our late supporters are vital to the success of any Democratic campaign. Banning mail-in ballots will make it far more difficult — if not impossible — for our vast crowds of departed base to make it to the polls in person and cast their votes for Democratic candidates. The Democratic Party itself would be as dead as our supporters."
Other Democrats warned that dead voters are almost completely reliant upon mail-in voting to make their voices heard. "This is such a large pillar of our support," Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer said. "President Trump continues to search for ways to rig elections in his favor, but we cannot let him cut off such a large portion of our perished constituents. To all of our dead supporters out there — we will continue to stand up for your right to mail in your votes for Democrats."
At publishing time, Democrats urged the Supreme Court to intervene by ruling that all of their supporters who live in other countries and are not legally allowed to vote be allowed to vote legally.
https://babylonbee.com/news/dems-say-ma ... rce=nypost
Just kill yourself...Vegas » 21 Aug 2025, 9:21 am » wrote: ↑ Speaking of you being a coward and a moron. Check out how many times you have ran from this:
Vegas » 21 Aug 2025, 9:12 am » wrote: ↑ He wants my definition so he can use it to answer. He doesn't have confident in his, so he he is begging for help. Not going to happen.
Ask @Vegas whose definition he has been posting...*Beekeeper » 21 Aug 2025, 9:40 am » wrote: ↑ I know that. Now the shoe is on HIS FOOT to either PRODUCE HIS OWN or do as he is now- RUN!!
It's hard on malignant narcissists when you catch them in more and more of their LIES, right @Blackvegetable ??
LEARN TO READ!*Beekeeper » 21 Aug 2025, 9:56 am » wrote: ↑ I don't have to. YOU have never posted one to steal!!
Either POST YOURS TO PROVE OTHERWISE OR KEEP RUNNING.
We are done here until YOU DO WHAT YOU NEED TO DO AND POST YOUR DEFINTION!!
NO ONE is going to allow you to keep doing this crap. Being the good little malignant narcissist you are, this is going to really frost those balls of yours!!
Now, RUN some more!!
How can they "include" my definition if I haven't posted one?Let me break this down for your dumb ***. You see the 4 options to the question? Every option includes your definition, but only one is an example of survivorship bias. Your definition was half assed. Like all of your content.
When a sample fails to reflect "mortality" in the population being examined.
Thanks for admitting my content is strong...
Johnny » wrote:Thanks for admitting my content is strong...
Maybe one person should count all 180 Million votes, and verify each signature.. We can have a POTUS by the year 2050
Bingo. I put him in the same category as 31stArrival.*Huey » 21 Aug 2025, 3:22 pm » wrote: ↑ No, your content is weak and not understandable. You post too many videos.
Blackvegetable » 21 Aug 2025, 10:05 am » wrote: ↑ LEARN TO READ!
viewtopic.php?p=2777473#p2777473
How can they "include" my definition if I haven't posted one?
Like the one in italics.
**** idiot..