Re: Re: Fisher-Yates theory

[halley]

Again with the "you are wrong." Why the acerbic and argumentative tone? Up to this point, this appears to be a friendly conversation about their views on the theory, which was informative and interesting.

If someone says they're not convinced, you can't disprove that. One may heap on additional evidence to attempt to convince them, but they may continue to be unconvinced for rational or irrational reasons.

This site often discusses matters of faith. There's no right or wrong about being convinced. "You are wrong" demarks an absolutism, both in passive grammar and in connotation. I prefer a community which demonstrates respect for others' faith and others' opinion.

Fisher-Yates may have been proven effective by way of analyzing the results for uniform potential entropy. It may have been proven by logical analysis of the probabilities on each successive swap. Sharing that evidence is helpful, but I ask politely for everyone to build a constructive community, not one which promotes controversy and arrogance.

--
[ e d @ h a l l e y . c c ]

[demerphq]

Again with the "you are wrong." Why the acerbic and argumentative tone?

For an opposite view: IMO we dont have enough people like Abigail-II kicking around the monastery. Yeah sure he's inclined to be a curmudgondy git with minimalist sense of humour, but hes also a prolific poster who knows the subject matter extremely well. (We have both kinds, but rarely both at the same time ifyswim) If putting up with a bit of crunchyness is what is needed to have Abigail-IIs wisdom and knowledge added to the Monestary trove then so be it.

This site often discusses matters of faith. There's no right or wrong about being convinced.

Sure we do discuss matters of faith here quite often. But I personally see a big difference between arguing about which editor is best and whether there is a solid theoretical foundation to what is a mathematical process. Abigail-II knows this stuff as well or better than anybody else here who can be bothered to post. He cites his sources, and he speaks his mind. I fail to see how you can fault him on it. (And ive been in his gunsights getting my shit sorted so dont think that I havent found his manner on occasion to be harsh. But bottom line Id believe what he says over just about anybody else here. I might not agree with him on all things but hes one of the people I come to read.)

Sharing that evidence is helpful, but I ask politely for everyone to build a constructive community, not one which promotes controversy and arrogance.

I think you should develop slightly thicker skin and not fight other peoples battles for them. If MarkM felt his reply was OTT then im sure he would say. (And that argument doesnt apply to this reply at all as you brought up the community and hence gave me the right to respond.)

Cheers, (And I mean that honestly and friendly)


---
demerphq

_{<Elian> And I do take a kind of perverse pleasure in having an OO assembly language...}