At 12:20 AM 11/7/2000 -0500, Stephen Black wrote:
>Concerning my objection to Marc Turner's post on being a "good
>guesser" on the grounds that there's no such thing, I see now
I admit it... bad choice of phrasing on my part with that one.
>than what would be expected on average. I suggest "lucky guesser"
>is a less confusing term for what he had in mind. And, contrary
True... I thought about this later on as well... lucky and unlucky instead
of good and lousy...
>So the advice to a student would be: If you have no basis
>whatsoever for deciding among the five alternatives, guess if
>you're a gamblin' man (or woman), or don't guess if you're a
>cautious sort. But only the very poorest of students answering
Agreed... and my sole point of joining this discussion was to argue that
true random guessing could hurt someone's score. I think this was Nancy's
main point as well. Actually, I don't think any of us were ever that far
apart, but there might have been some miscommunications along the way...
(for example, my "good" guessers)
Hope all is well...
- Marc
(And unless something else that I strongly disagree with shows up, I'm back
to work on the dissertation... the fun never ends... how could it end? It
never started!)
G. Marc Turner, MEd
Lecturer & Head of Computer Operations
Department of Psychology
Southwest Texas State University
San Marcos, TX 78666
phone: (512)245-2526
email: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
