At least you recognize the limitations of your sample set.
The next step is reject conclusions based off of biased small sample sizes.
You'd like me to reject a conclusion based off a biased small sample size? Sure: I reject yours. It fits that criterion, after all. ^.^
Small sample sizes being irrelevant to draw conclusions from is not my conclusion.
It is the conclusion of every statistics course, ever.
You talk with a wording and tone that acts as though your isolated data point of experience is somehow more valuable and more potent a case to make that it should somehow negate or counter the reported data points of several others, and should quiet them.
I literally state my opinion is simply one data point and that I don't speak for others.
You are the only one trying to bolster your opinion by claiming you speak for "many"
This forum is designed for feedback, so please keep giving your personal feedback.
Larian will balance that feedback with actual data and make their decisions accordingly.
You are are the one who came into this thread just now and attempted to shut them down.
I attempted to shut no one down.
I encourage everyone to express their opinion and said so.
I tend to comment when folks attempt to draw conclusions from exceedingly small and non-representative data sets.
The only thing it demonstrated was the woeful lack of understanding most of the folks involved had about statistics.
Fortunately for us, the ones aggregating the results and illustrating them visually were not amongst those people ^.^
Yes, it was the ones attempting to interpret the data who had no idea what they were talking about.
If I flipped a fair coin 1,000,000 times, how many runs of 10 heads in a row would you expect statistically?
You should expect 976 runs of 10 Heads in a row
You are sitting within one of those runs of 10 and arguing the coin isn't fair.
Your analysis is demonstrably false.
