Puppy Bites Woman AGAIN, Pictures at 11 !!!!

[chris_gerrib]

So, the Irene Gallo affair continues. Vox Day, citing an anonymous Tor employee on Reddit, claims that Tor considers all the emails they got calling for Gallo's firing to be botnets. Now, ignoring for the moment that the sourcing for this allegation is too weak for even the old Weekly World News to run with, and further ignoring how there is no connection between Sad and Rabid Puppies (except that when Vox barks, so do the other Puppies) I find a notable fact buried in the piles of puppy-doo.

I'm going to dig said fact out and clean it up for you. I'm doing this because facts have been one thing in short supply in this debate. For the most part, what we get are vague statements that some unnamed person committed some undefined offense sometime during a large event. But now we have a fact.

Per Vox, 765 individual people emailed Tor complaining about Gallo. That sounds like a lot, except, 79,279 people bought a copy of Redshirts in 2013. So, if you take 765 and divide it by 79,279, you get .00964. In other words, less than 1% of the people who bought one book from Tor are complaining. You'd have to magnify that complaint number by an order of magnitude to get anybody's attention.

Comments

[daveon.livejournal.com]

For the rich, business genius he claims to be, he really does have a shaky grasp of numbers.

I'm surprised it was that many frankly.

His sticking power on this is remarkable though. I really thought he'd be bored by now. I know I am.

[chris-gerrib.livejournal.com]

facts, numbers - what does it matter when you're a genius? ;-)

Strike while the Irony is hot

[(Anonymous)]

Ironic, then, that you don't seem to grasp the concept of facts and numbers, either.

Consider that the 765 number is only based on those respondents who remembered to CC one of the trackers. This means there were additional respondents who were not included in that number, some of whom left comments indicating such to be the case (and who may or may not have been subsequently included). Undoubtedly, though, there were others who did neither and were left out completely.

Granted, you may consider this a similarly insignificant number. But the fact that it is a non-zero number indicates you also have a problem with the facts. Whether this is due to ignorance or dishonesty, I leave to your readers to decide.

-- I Am Irony, Man

Strike while the Irony is hot

[(Anonymous)]

Ironic, then, that you don't quite seem to grasp the concept of facts and numbers, either.

Consider that the 765 number apparently represents those respondents who remembered to CC one of the trackers. This means there were additional respondents not included in that number, some of whom left comments indicating such to be the case (and who may or may not have been subsequently added). Undoubtedly, though, there were others who did neither and were left out of the count completely.

Of course, you will no doubt consider this a similarly insignificant number. But the fact that it is non-zero indicates you also have a problem with the facts. Whether this is due to ignorance or dishonesty, I leave to you to hand-wave away.

-- I Am Irony, Man

Not for nothing, but. . .

[(Anonymous)]

I just retired from a job in Corporate America, and I can tell you with absolute certainty that any time even a tenth that many customers contact the president to complain, the company is in deep, DEEP peril. Our worst screw up ever had 28 people complain, out of a count of about 225,000 customers caught up in the problem. Heads rolled. Careers were terminated. We lost 1 Vice President and 2 Managers over the incident. If 2200 people complained to our parent company, they'd have cleaned out the entire "C-suite" and every member of management in the culpable departments before it was over.

I think you may be underestimating the impact here by a couple orders of magnitude.

YMMV

FormerFlyer

Re: Not for nothing, but. . .

[chris-gerrib.livejournal.com]

Well, I currently work in corporate America, so I don't think my opinion is uninformed.

In fairness, the acceptable level of complaint varies by type and company. If you run a company making industrial fasteners, 1% calling to complain about unexpected breakage of the fastener is a big deal.

If you run a chain of coffee shops, you probably have a process in place to track cold coffee complaints, send out apology / have a coffee on us letters, and a system to track which stores are unusually complaint-prone.

If you get a rash of complaints about which politician your CEO shook hands with, or the same-sex couple in your TV ad, a 1% complaint rate equals an "attaboy" to the PR team.

Publishers are quasi-consumer businesses used to pissing off people since Gutenberg cranked out his second edition.

[catsittingstill.livejournal.com]

Vox Day dangles the bait and the Blogging portion of the Puppy leadership all jump and snap in unison. How is Vox not in charge of the Puppies, again? If they wanted people to believe Vox wasn't in charge of them, wouldn't that work better if Vox wasn't in charge of them?

Just saying.

[chris-gerrib.livejournal.com]

You're confusing people with facts. That's not fair! ;-)