[Prev][Next][Index][Thread]
Re: SRH: Improvement of Hindu Newsgroups is the Goal
In article <4d73ko$8lo@babbage.ece.uc.edu>,
Ajay Shah <editor@rbhatnagar.csm.uc.edu> wrote:
[...]
>> Ajay, I ask you point blank: how are the statistics skewed? Please
>> give me a direct answer.
>
>Posted the point by point response to this yesterday (article may still be
>available on your newsserver), perhaps Vivekji will save my articles and make
>them available to the other proponents of re-org RFD like you from his web
>site, so I do not get the same question from a different proponent each day?
The simplest way for you to prove your claims, Ajay, would be with a
counter-example. If the timestamps in the archive reflect the archive
date and not the posting date, then it should be simple for you to
provide a counter-example - find a single post on DejaNews or Alta
Vista which has a timestamp different from that in the archive, or
find a post which appears during one of the "gaps" shown in the SRH
Stats page, http://www-ece.rice.edu/~vijaypai/srh-stats.html
An even easier test would be to run MHonArc on a single post and see
what timestamp is generated. If the timestamp in the resulting HTML is
the same as the timestamp in the filesystem, then you point would be
made, but since that's not how MHonArc works, I would guess that you'd
have a hard time doing so.
The best possible course would be for you to provide alternate
statistics and show how they were gathered. I would be more than happy
to compare data with you, but as it currently stands, it seems that
all you are doing is claiming, without proof, that the data I've
gathered is incorrect. If you look at the SRH Stats page, you'll see
an elaborate description of how the data was gathered, and how to
verify the data. I've also got the 2 megabyte archive (concatenated
into one file) on my local disk, in case anyone would like me to mail
them the raw data.
-Vivek
Sat Jan 13 14:12:26 CST 1996
References:
