zlacker

[parent] [thread] 8 comments
1. chromo+(OP)[view] [source] 2023-08-15 17:11:44
And 0.02% is really a lot.
replies(1): >>latchk+E2
2. latchk+E2[view] [source] 2023-08-15 17:22:59
>>chromo+(OP)
Is it?
replies(1): >>warren+nH
◧◩
3. warren+nH[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-08-15 20:59:19
>>latchk+E2
0.02% of a big number ... is still a big number

0.02% of 10,000 is 2 - pretty small

0.02% of 1,000,000,000 is 200,000 ... kinda big :)

replies(1): >>chromo+3o1
◧◩◪
4. chromo+3o1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-08-16 01:53:22
>>warren+nH
In my opinion, absolute value is not important here, what matters is the fraction. I consider 0.02% to be large by itself for the given context.
replies(1): >>latchk+Po1
◧◩◪◨
5. latchk+Po1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-08-16 02:00:44
>>chromo+3o1
What would be small?
replies(1): >>chromo+vt1
◧◩◪◨⬒
6. chromo+vt1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-08-16 02:32:26
>>latchk+Po1
This is subjective, but for me here a small fraction would be a few orders of magnitude less than that - few ten-millionths or less.
replies(1): >>latchk+vA1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓
7. latchk+vA1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-08-16 03:45:47
>>chromo+vt1
Exactly, it is subjective, 0.02% is small in my opinion. Yet I'm getting downvoted and told that isn't small. ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
replies(1): >>chromo+VC1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔
8. chromo+VC1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-08-16 04:11:55
>>latchk+vA1
What's important here is the negative impact of the blacklist on communication. Probably some downvoters mean that the blacklist is big enough that the impact is important, and disagree with your supposed implication that it isn't.
replies(1): >>latchk+cD1
◧◩◪◨⬒⬓⬔⧯
9. latchk+cD1[view] [source] [discussion] 2023-08-16 04:14:35
>>chromo+VC1
Agreed, you're probably right about that.
[go to top]