Iitoi wrote:
Wrote:
But with all due respect, how do we know your scorecard is accurate?
Does anyone check your work? You do make mistakes, Len. We've seen
some of them here.
Also, it's clear to anyone who reads your posts here that you're
hardly unbiased on the subject of code testing.
Indeed, you used the phrase "unbiased by local groups' opinions on
morsemanship as either vital or neccessary [sic] in amateur radio" as
if *others* scorecards are somehow biased - but not yours. You've
previously accused others of 'massaged numbers' and 'fraud' when their
data did not match yours, too.
So why should anyone *assume* the accuracy of your scorecard, Len? I'm
not saying you're intentionally cooking the books.....
No, you're not actually SAYING he's cooked the books (you're too
slippery to make a blunt statement) but you're certainly spotlighting
the possibility.
Is "spotlighting the possibility" of something not allowed?
Besides, "cooking the books" implies an intent to deceive. There's
also the possibility of honest mistakes.
There doesn't seem to be anybody checking Len's 'work', anyway.
If Anderson was too "cook the books", do you really think the score
would be nearly an even tie between the two camps (about 55:45 at last
tabulation)?
Maybe. That's not the point, anyway.
Grow up.
What does that mean in this context? That I should accept Len's
scorecard without question, just because he says so?