On Friday, December 18, 2015 at 1:37:22 PM UTC+6, Francesco Lodolo [:flod] wrote: > I don't think looking at 90 days is fair. Let's look at 7 days, at least > there's something manageable > https://input.mozilla.org/en-US/?q=pocket&date_start=2015-12-10&selected=7d This is not how statistics works. To get a representative statistical sampling, you should be widening time range, not narrowing it. Pocket was shipped with Firefox 38.0.5 at 2nd of June, more than 6 month ago. So basically we should look at all feedbacks within this time (minus month or two in order to filter 0-day rage feedbacks).
> 4 out of almost 4k people who took the time to use input to give > feedback (and we all know that people rarely take the time to give > positive comments). Would you define this as 'overwhelmingly negative'? > I don't. I'm sorry, but you're really not good in statistics. Regarding this matter we don't and shouldn't care about feedbacks that are not about Pocket. E.g. if there would be a hundred negative feedbacks about Pocket and a billion positive feedbacks about anything but Pocket - that's 'overwhelmingly negative' Pocket feedback. _______________________________________________ governance mailing list [email protected] https://lists.mozilla.org/listinfo/governance
