Nancy Melucci, accurately declaring herself not being nice, had this to say about Michael Sylvester's query about significance levels:
> It's just a way for him to insult and disrespect/patronize us. I am so > sick > of his reverse-racist nonsense. Wasn't there a farewell that was > issued? > When is he going to follow through on that and go away? He > adds nothing to this list and brings us all down. Aw, come on, Nancy, that's rather harsh, and Michael doesn't deserve it. He's unfailingly good-natured in his posts, even when the replies aren't. So what if he likes to tweak us on certain issues? I think you take his posts too seriously. And they do add something, often generating considerable discussion on novel topics. Case in point: today's significance level query from him which you complained about. In response we get an intriguing historical review cite from Stuart McKelvie, and from Chris Green, a direct quote from Ronald Fisher in 1925 where he first proposes the use of p = .05, surely a significant (p <.05) event in the history of experimental psychology. I didn't know that. That's pretty good stuff resulting from Michael's post. Stephen ----------------------------------------------------------------- Stephen L. Black, Ph.D. Professor of Psychology, Emeritus Bishop's University e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] 2600 College St. Sherbrooke QC J1M 1Z7 Canada Subscribe to discussion list (TIPS) for the teaching of psychology at http://flightline.highline.edu/sfrantz/tips/ ----------------------------------------------------------------------- --- To make changes to your subscription contact: Bill Southerly ([EMAIL PROTECTED])
