Page 15 of 33 FirstFirst ... 5 13 14 15 16 17 25 ... LastLast
Results 71 to 75 of 162
  1. #71
    renrose Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by redwoodfey View Post
    Is anyone familiar with the Msscribe fiasco? If true, it's the most elaborate case of sockpuppeting I've ever heard of. Worth a read if you have several hours to do so and you're as bored/ interested as I was.
    Wow. This is so interesting! I was meant to go to bed two hours ago and instead I'm still reading, lol. And it was all going on when my HP website was just a baby.
    Last edited by renrose; April 4th, 2013 at 08:56 PM.

  2. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by blade View Post
    I'd never heard of any of this so of course just spent time googling and wiki'ing. Can I say that I am highly amused that 'Cassandra Claire' looks *exactly* like how a woman who ran a Harry Potter fanfic website and has three cats should look?
    Yeah, I had to laugh a little when the search results came up. Then I found out why she was so famous, and I laughed even more.

  3. #75
    Join Date
    Apr 2011
    Although I don't feel smart enough or knowledgeable enough (even remotely!) to post in this thread, I'm going to risk it because you all have always been nothing but nice to me.

    I am shocked that there are so many fake postings on here that it brought you to this!! (Though, I have to say, it is very impressive investigative work (and math!), blade!) I am so naive!!! Honestly, it never even occurred to me that people would post fake baby names in the announcements section. That's just stupid and mean. Do you know if those are somehow removed when they make the lists of names from the announcements?

    Trolls, or fakers, I have always assumed are doing it because they enjoy watching us scurry to reply and discuss a scenario they have created and that only they know is fake. That drives me crazy, but I am terrible at spotting them because my instinct is to just believe people. It definitely makes me mad. And I'm wondering how it happens that these people get outed -- is it in the thread; does someone confront them there? Or is their thread just shut down? I just hate to think I'm putting so much thought into helping other people when they're not real, but at the same time, I don't want to start doubting everyone. UGH! Just the fact that they are making me doubt people makes me so angry.

  4. #77
    Quote Originally Posted by flick View Post
    So I have come to the conclusion that perhaps Sims could be a legit form of therapy for these people?
    Ha! I love playing the Sims. It's so mindless and they always leave their babies crying on the floor while their passed out on the sidewalk.
    Theodore Arthur

  5. #79
    Join Date
    Nov 2012
    Wow, very interesting. Thanks for sharing, Blade!

    For any other math people out there (and to answer your question, Blade), I decided to run a few independent samples t-tests, grouping data from before the fourth quarter of 2012 (so, 1/12, 2/12, and 3/12) and after (4/12 &1/13). Using Blade's calculations, I analyzed whether there was a statistically significant difference in the proportion of girls to boys, proportion of multiples to singletons, excess girls (observed/predicted), and excess twins (observed/predicted). I didn't really expect to find much since our sample size is so small, but there was a statistically significant difference in the amount of excess girls (t(3)=-5.45, p<.05)!!! Specifically there was a smaller proportion of observed/expected girls in and after the fourth quarter of 2012 (M=1.30, SD=.02) than before (M=1.44, SD=.03). So...good work team sleuths!! Maybe as our sample size grows we'll find more statistical differences!!

    I was also wondering whether there is a difference in the prevalence of multiples based on socioeconomic status (SES)? I'm thinking that those with higher SES might be more likely to use fertility medication which, as stated in the original post, lead to higher rates of multiple births...right? I can also imagine that the mean SES of nameberry members is a bit higher than US national average as well. If these two assumptions are correct, it may not be fair to compare nameberry to the general US population (which is where we're getting our stat of 3.31% twins). Of course, my assumptions could be incorrect and this would have no baring on the excess report of female births.
    Last edited by raptreverie; April 4th, 2013 at 09:15 PM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts