On Mon, Sep 23, 2002 at 11:33:54PM +0100, Rik Burke wrote: > Erik said: > > > > The stat I have on that doesn't give details, so I assume no, it doesn't > > > mean 60% of households of one adult and two children. > > > > > > Does that make the above stat "irrelevant"? I don't think so. It was > > > supposed to be indicative of a situation, nothing more. > > > > Whatever. Quote whatever random statistics you like. > > Well, it's not quite random. It's relevant, in the way I argued. Do you > disagree with the conclusions I drew from it?
Yes. As I said, it is irrelevant. Maybe I should have been less glib. I'll try again. You had my interest until you started quoting irrelevant statistics. Then you lost it. It is better to give no statistics that irrelvant statistics. If you want to make a point to me, you'll need to quote relevant statistics. Otherwise, I will probably bow out of the discussion. -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
