Velocity Reviews > Re: OT: London Cops seem to have a \$54K time problem

# Re: OT: London Cops seem to have a \$54K time problem

tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a

 01-28-2012
On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 12:38:42 +1300, Eric Stevens
<(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:

>On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 13:43:32 +0000, Bruce <(E-Mail Removed)>
>wrote:
>
>>Doug McDonald <(E-Mail Removed)> wrote:
>>
>>>On 1/26/2012 4:42 PM, Alan Browne wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>> My assertion that 50% of the schools will always score below average is
>>>>> correct, regardless of the actual values.
>>>>
>>>> Don't let actual values get in the way, mighty inconvenient, wot.
>>>>
>>>>> If this is found not to be the
>>>>> case in practice, then the scoring method is flawed...
>>>>
>>>
>>>Actually it is wrong. Half the schools will score below the MEDIAN,
>>>not the average.
>>>
>>>Doug Nitpicker

>>
>>
>>Your nitpicking is misplaced because the term "average" can have more
>>than one meaning, including the median, arithmetic mean and mode.
>>
>>http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Average

>
>I wouldn't rely in Wikipedia for that. I have always been taught that
>'average' was the 'arithmetic mean' and that the other measurements of
>central tendency were not the average.
>

one section I graded, the questions required the student to determine
the average, and which "average" to use. It was one of the middle

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

PeterN
Guest
Posts: n/a

 01-28-2012
On 1/27/2012 7:59 PM, tony cooper wrote:

<snip>>
> Last fall I graded standard achievement test for grade schoolers. In
> one section I graded, the questions required the student to determine
> the average, and which "average" to use. It was one of the middle
>

I'm not in the mode to do that anymore. It would make me feel mean and
wanting to median other beer.

--
Peter

tony cooper
Guest
Posts: n/a

 01-28-2012
On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 20:36:04 -0800, Savageduck
<savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:

>On 2012-01-27 19:45:44 -0800, Pete A <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>
>> On 2012-01-28 03:32:34 +0000, Savageduck said:
>>
>>> On 2012-01-27 18:12:24 -0800, Pete A <(E-Mail Removed)> said:

>
><<< Le Snip >>>
>>>>
>>>> Yes indeed. If one collects data and processes it according to the
>>>> theoretical model, the difference between the processed data and the
>>>> model data can be used to give the confidence level of the results; in
>>>> either direction. I.e. how well the data fits an established theory or
>>>> how will a yet-to-be-proved theory (a hypothesis) fits real-world data.
>>>
>>> The truly interesting thing here is, we have moved into a dissection of
>>> statistical analysis because London cops have a problem determining the
>>> local time.

>>
>> The probability of me going off topic is as near to 1.0 as most things
>> can get. I have too much time on my hands, unlike the cops who've had
>> too many hands on the time.

>
>Yup! If the LMP had just kept things simple with just a "little hand" &
>a "big hand" they might never have had the problem.

All they need do is listen to the bells and set their watches.

"Oranges and lemons" say the Bells of St. Clement's
Y"ou owe me five farthings" say the Bells of St. Martin's
"When will you pay me?" say the Bells of Old Bailey
"When I grow rich" say the Bells of Shoreditch
"When will that be?" say the Bells of Stepney
"I do not know" say the Great Bells of Bow
Here comes a Candle to light you to Bed
Chip chop chip chop - the Last Man's Dead."

--
Tony Cooper - Orlando, Florida

Bruce
Guest
Posts: n/a

 01-28-2012
Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>The truly interesting thing here is, we have moved into a dissection of
>statistical analysis because London cops have a problem determining the
>local time.

London cops don't have any problem determining the local time. You
and others appear to have been comprehensively fooled by an alleged
statement from a PR person (reported by a notoriously unreliable news
site) who appears to be trying to defend a bill for using the Speaking
Clock on the basis that serving officers might have a need for it,
when they don't.

The PR person put up a smokescreen; it appears to have worked.

Most organisations in the UK will find that some of their staff have
been making use of the Speaking Clock more than they should, quite
possibly thinking that it is still a free service. Anyone who has
ever employed others knows that checking the workplace phone bill can
be a worthwhile activity.

Pete A
Guest
Posts: n/a

 01-28-2012
On 2012-01-28 04:48:06 +0000, tony cooper said:

> On Fri, 27 Jan 2012 20:36:04 -0800, Savageduck
> <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>
>> On 2012-01-27 19:45:44 -0800, Pete A <(E-Mail Removed)> said:
>>
>>> On 2012-01-28 03:32:34 +0000, Savageduck said:
>>>
>>>> On 2012-01-27 18:12:24 -0800, Pete A <(E-Mail Removed)> said:

>>
>> <<< Le Snip >>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes indeed. If one collects data and processes it according to the
>>>>> theoretical model, the difference between the processed data and the
>>>>> model data can be used to give the confidence level of the results; in
>>>>> either direction. I.e. how well the data fits an established theory or
>>>>> how will a yet-to-be-proved theory (a hypothesis) fits real-world data.
>>>>
>>>> The truly interesting thing here is, we have moved into a dissection of
>>>> statistical analysis because London cops have a problem determining the
>>>> local time.
>>>
>>> The probability of me going off topic is as near to 1.0 as most things
>>> can get. I have too much time on my hands, unlike the cops who've had
>>> too many hands on the time.

>>
>> Yup! If the LMP had just kept things simple with just a "little hand" &
>> a "big hand" they might never have had the problem.

>
> All they need do is listen to the bells and set their watches.
>
> "Oranges and lemons" say the Bells of St. Clement's
> Y"ou owe me five farthings" say the Bells of St. Martin's
> "When will you pay me?" say the Bells of Old Bailey
> "When I grow rich" say the Bells of Shoreditch
> "When will that be?" say the Bells of Stepney
> "I do not know" say the Great Bells of Bow
> Here comes a Candle to light you to Bed
> Chip chop chip chop - the Last Man's Dead."

I've been waiting for someone to mention Big Ben - it's quite difficult
to avoid, both by sight and by sound. I say old sport, it keeps jolly
good time!

Pete A
Guest
Posts: n/a

 01-28-2012
On 2012-01-28 04:56:12 +0000, Bruce said:

> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>
>> The truly interesting thing here is, we have moved into a dissection of
>> statistical analysis because London cops have a problem determining the
>> local time.

>
> London cops don't have any problem determining the local time. You
> and others appear to have been comprehensively fooled by an alleged
> statement from a PR person (reported by a notoriously unreliable news
> site) who appears to be trying to defend a bill for using the Speaking
> Clock on the basis that serving officers might have a need for it,
> when they don't.
>
> The PR person put up a smokescreen; it appears to have worked.
>
> Most organisations in the UK will find that some of their staff have
> been making use of the Speaking Clock more than they should, quite
> possibly thinking that it is still a free service. Anyone who has
> ever employed others knows that checking the workplace phone bill can
> be a worthwhile activity.

Another worthwhile activity is monitoring Web site accesses at various
times of day. I somehow doubt this information is available under the
Freedom of Information Act.

Richard
Guest
Posts: n/a

 01-28-2012
Pete A wrote:
> On 2012-01-28 04:56:12 +0000, Bruce said:
>
>> Savageduck <savageduck1@{REMOVESPAM}me.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> The truly interesting thing here is, we have moved into a
>>> dissection of statistical analysis because London cops have a
>>> problem determining the local time.

>>
>> London cops don't have any problem determining the local time. You
>> and others appear to have been comprehensively fooled by an alleged
>> statement from a PR person (reported by a notoriously unreliable news
>> site) who appears to be trying to defend a bill for using the
>> Speaking Clock on the basis that serving officers might have a need
>> for it, when they don't.
>>
>> The PR person put up a smokescreen; it appears to have worked.
>>
>> Most organisations in the UK will find that some of their staff have
>> been making use of the Speaking Clock more than they should, quite
>> possibly thinking that it is still a free service. Anyone who has
>> ever employed others knows that checking the workplace phone bill can
>> be a worthwhile activity.

>
> Another worthwhile activity is monitoring Web site accesses at various
> times of day. I somehow doubt this information is available under the
> Freedom of Information Act.

If you want to know:
http://www.whatdotheyknow.com/