westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
 Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 16:36 |
 
|
There's been numerous blog posts recently complaining about unfair matches in the box.
But when the data is examined, it shows a much smaller problem than claimed, typically an average disadvantage of under 5TS (including handicaps).
If the point being made is that strong coaches face an unreasonable disadvantage in the box, I think it's a fairly weak case. Is ~5TS such a huge deal? |
_________________
\x/es |
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 16:47 |
|
No it's not.
5 TS is not a huge deal.
Still, building something new on the wrong premises is.
(Again for the n-th time: the premise of the Petition is based on a principle. Continuously stating that facts don't back up the "unfair matches terror syndrome" doesn't really address the point, which is more idealistic than factual) |
_________________
Last edited by JanMattys on %b %30, %2008 - %16:%Dec; edited 3 times in total |
|
BiggieB
Joined: Feb 19, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 16:52 |
|
actually for all purposes your perception is your reality  |
|
|
PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
having just railed against analogies im going to use one.
I work often as a Diversity trainer with the Uk police force.
There there is a perception that being a 'visible minority' will gain you promotion quicker and you will be more favoured. The reality is actually provably the exact opposite still (sadly). Being black, gay, female, dissabled etc etc will slow and limit your progression in the organisation. Statistics prove it unarguably, really proper statistics like taking X entrants Y years ago and seeing their progress, like dividing the number of senior posts by the percentage of a visible minority after taking length of service into account. But it is pointless me endlessly explaining that to the good people (let alone the few bad) people of the UK police force, as the PERCEPTION is so widespread that it becomes STRONGER than the reality. Therefore the difference between the concept of reality and perception ceases to matter.
They also imagine, again wrongly, that there is a policy to embed and encourage this prejudice in favour of visible minorities.
in B we DO have the policy, and the perception has similarly become FAR more important than any reality. both due to individual experience, vagueries of memory, other factors affecting perception and importantly the impact of the explicit policy.
So, sadly, i think this thread is useless.
Sorry. |
_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 17:05 |
|
| BiggieB wrote: | | actually for all purposes your perception is your reality |
But when perception and reality are in conflict, which should change?
At the very least perception should be informed by reality. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
Britnoth
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 17:47 |
|
| PurpleChest wrote: | I work often as a Diversity trainer with the Uk police force.
There there is a perception that being a 'visible minority' will gain you promotion quicker and you will be more favoured. The reality is actually provably the exact opposite still (sadly). |
Appologies for the hijack, but coudlnt quite resist this
You work as a 'diversity trainer', presumably paid by the tax payer to go around telling people they dont employ enough blacks, asians, women, gays or whatever, and then are surprised when people get the false impression that such people are somehow favoured?
Maybe if minorities didnt have loud vocal activists expecting preferential treatment and accusing people of racism or whatever that view might not exist? Just a thought.  |
|
|
JanMattys
Joined: Feb 29, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 17:52 |
|
| Britnoth wrote: | | PurpleChest wrote: | I work often as a Diversity trainer with the Uk police force.
There there is a perception that being a 'visible minority' will gain you promotion quicker and you will be more favoured. The reality is actually provably the exact opposite still (sadly). |
Appologies for the hijack, but coudlnt quite resist this
You work as a 'diversity trainer', presumably paid by the tax payer to go around telling people they dont employ enough blacks, asians, women, gays or whatever, and then are surprised when people get the false impression that such people are somehow favoured?
Maybe if minorities didnt have loud vocal activists expecting preferential treatment and accusing people of racism or whatever that view might not exist? Just a thought. |
...
Tell me you're joking Brith, please. |
_________________
|
|
koadah
Joined: Mar 30, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 17:54 |
|
| Britnoth wrote: | | PurpleChest wrote: | I work often as a Diversity trainer with the Uk police force.
There there is a perception that being a 'visible minority' will gain you promotion quicker and you will be more favoured. The reality is actually provably the exact opposite still (sadly). |
Appologies for the hijack, but coudlnt quite resist this
You work as a 'diversity trainer', presumably paid by the tax payer to go around telling people they dont employ enough blacks, asians, women, gays or whatever, and then are surprised when people get the false impression that such people are somehow favoured?
Maybe if minorities didnt have loud vocal activists expecting preferential treatment and accusing people of racism or whatever that view might not exist? Just a thought. |
Hey Britnoth,
Want a good deal on some diversity training?  |
_________________
O[L]C 2016 Swiss! - April ---- All Star Bowl - Teams of Stars - 2 more teams needed |
|
westerner
Joined: Jul 02, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 17:57 |
|
| PurpleChest wrote: | | having just railed against analogies im going to use one... 'visible minority' |
| Britnoth wrote: | | Maybe if minorities ... that view might not exist? |
| other coaches wrote: | | political flamewar |
This is why applying political analogies to BB is a bad idea. |
_________________
\x/es |
|
boch
Joined: Feb 15, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 18:16 |
|
I guess that statistically it is good enough overall. But there´s alot of coaches in here and therefor a lot of different/atypical experiences.
After just 9 Blackbox matches I must say this was the most unbalanced:
DE vs DE with effective TS-difference of 15 (if I calculate it correctly)
http://fumbbl.com/FUMBBL.php?page=match&op=view&id=2483584
Basicly I think the ceiling works better at higher TS-ratings.
In this match my opponents TS is more than 10% higher than mine - that´s a lot more skills.
Perhaps the cap should be a percentage of TS as well as a hard cap?
There have been games where my TS was higher as well, but of course you won´t hear me complain about them |
|
|
paulhicks
Joined: Jul 19, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 18:25 |
|
| Britnoth wrote: | | Appologies for the hijack, but coudlnt quite resist this |
I too apologise for carrying on the derailment of your thread but....
| Britnoth wrote: | | You work as a 'diversity trainer', presumably paid by the tax payer: |
the perpose of paying taxes is that those taxes will be used in a way that is of benefit to the country (as opposed to their original perpose of giving the king money so he could go to war more often.... well its a bit different these days) and purplechests job does just that.
Wether you like it or not it is undeniable that in western culture race/ sexual orientation/ gender has been a major factor in holding people back over the past several decades and this has a harmfull effect on society. Not only does it poentialy lead to the best people being in jobs where they can make a difference but also is a major contributing factor to the fact that minorities are more likely to live in poorer conditions/ die earlier etc and (in england certainly... i cant speak for other countries) for certain minorities are more likely to become dragged into a life of crime.
So surely therefor as a "tax payer" you would be happy that money is being spent in ways that will bennefit the whole of the country... and therefor you... in the long run.
| Britnoth wrote: | to go around telling people they dont employ enough blacks, asians, women, gays or whatever, and then are surprised when people get the false impression that such people are somehow favoured
Maybe if minorities didnt have loud vocal activists expecting preferential treatment and accusing people of racism or whatever that view might not exist? Just a thought. |
your arguement is one that is usualy used by the anti "positive disprimination" lobby which (i dont think) was what purplechest was talking about anyway. he said his role was about dispelling false ideas with facts. that generaly sounds like a good thing to me |
_________________
Spelling, grammer and sense are for noobs! |
|
PurpleChest
Joined: Oct 25, 2003
|
| Britnoth wrote: | Appologies for the hijack, but coudlnt quite resist this
You work as a 'diversity trainer', presumably paid by the tax payer to go around telling people they dont employ enough blacks, asians, women, gays or whatever, and then are surprised when people get the false impression that such people are somehow favoured?
Maybe if minorities didnt have loud vocal activists expecting preferential treatment and accusing people of racism or whatever that view might not exist? Just a thought. |
Happy to set you straight. As you are almost entirely wrong.
The right bit is that when i work with the police i am paid by the tax payer. The rest is ill informed drivel.
The concept of Diversity is that of difference being inherant to everyone, no heirarchical system is created whereby any diferenece is veiwed as special or better than any other, though admittedly some are always more prevalent in certain situations. Diversity is centered on the right of every individual to be an individual and that if any characteristic or part of themselves isnt contradictory to their role within an organisation then it follows that it shouldnt be used to limit their progression within that organisation nor as a tool of aggresiioon by others in that organisation. I am as like to be championing the rights of male pattern baldness, or youth, or people with tattoos or class background as that of ethnic minorities. Your view of my work is based largely on the stereotypes of 'equality' work from the 1980's.
Also we do not 'teach' nor 'preach' nor 'convert'. Peoples behavior largely only changes as a result of their own choice, be that as a result of thought, or experience or compulsion. Their ideas and beliefs change even more rarely, but usually only after the behavior has changed and they find they need a new mind set to conform to their new practice and enviroment.
My specific niche is to provide experiencial training to organisations to allow their people a chance to practice and explore situations and issue that are already arising in a way that is both safe (in that it isnt real) and fun/involving (by being interactive), it would be absurdly patronising for me to go into any organisation and tell them how to behave, so we dont. We set up events that allow them to examine their own personal and organisational responses to situations and issues and then asses wether their practices and behaviors are having the impact the individuals and organisation wishes it to.
Are there times this leads me into direct confrontation (verbally) with people of fixed and often prejudiced mindsets? yes. But that is not the aim, nor the focus of the work, merely a byproduct. Also in those situations I am not trying to 'win' the arguement, simply to ensure that the totality of the delegates on the course are presented with both sides of any issue and that the impact of both sides is looked at in an organisational and personal context.
Also of note is that in the private sector we are often brought in not by the HR department but by the finance department. Organisations that successfully embrace diversity are able to recruit from wider pools, ensuring that while the best person for the job still gets it, that person will on average be better as more are applying. Also they tedn to be more creative and responsive to the community/client base they serve and have happier employees and pay out less in compensation.
So on balance i reckon i save you, the taxpayer, loads by avoiding pointless cash loss to the discriminated against and also helping to further a better, stronger and more responsive organisation for your cash.
Sorry, but you did ask. |
_________________
Barbarus hic ego sum, quia non intelligor illis -Ovid
I am a barbarian here because i am not understood by anyone
Last edited by PurpleChest on %b %30, %2008 - %18:%Dec; edited 1 time in total |
|
funnyfingers
Joined: Nov 13, 2005
|
| Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 18:44 |
|
|
TheCetusProject
Joined: May 25, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 18:56 |
|
1) As Alessandro has repeated so many times, many arguments against the BR component of the scheduler are fundamental philosophic objections. Data are not required to support our position.
2) Since TS-difference can be positive and negative, one must be careful before making inferences based on averages. Were I to play 10 games at +100 TS and 10 games at -100 TS I would care little that my average TS difference is 0. Anyone taking averages of TS differences should use the absolute values of the differences to make better inferences.
3) Regarding the off topic divergence: Assuming that PurpleChest's quoted studies are properly done, it is quite dispiriting that he reports that explaining such things to people doesn't actually influence them. I guess such studies will always have to make some assumptions that people who started off with the perception of positive discrimination or whatever will always be able to say "hah, this assumption is obviously wrong, the data are worthless". For instance, the examples he gives of how minorities are at a disadvantage are, based on the short explanation, clearly completely worthless. One would need a much deeper examination of what the studies did before one could conclude anything. Indeed, it's difficult to immediately see where one would begin to try to show that the two sub-populations (minority and majority) of applicants have roughly even distributions of aptitude (whatever that means). But this is an unnecessary aside, since anyway the data in our case do show occasional behaviour that we don't like, and by 1) that is enough to irritate those of us who think it is fundamentally wrong.
Edit: 4) If you wanted a data-based approach to analysing the situation, you would have to take the system that most of us "anti" people are happy with: where BR is an influence only to decide which TS-fair matchups are made. You would try that system out and compare the results with the current system. Then you could try to analyse the relative values of the two systems in a structured way. But since we don't have such a system to compare with, I don't really see what a data-based analysis of just the one system can really do. |
|
|
Britnoth
Joined: Aug 02, 2003
|
| Posted:
Dec 30, 2008 - 19:02 |
|
| paulhicks wrote: | | the perpose of paying taxes is that those taxes will be used in a way that is of benefit to the country |
Well by having someone encouraging 'diversity' in for example the police force, you are basiclly saying the official policy of the police is this:
x% of the population is some kind of minority.
currenty y% of the police force is some kind of minority.
y is less than x.
we want it to equal x.
Therefore, by saying you have to have a 'diverse' police force and commiting resources in it instead of actually policing the streets, you are telling the country that a police force with y black people or whatever is inherently a worse police for than one with x.
so black police officers are better than white ones. QED.
Please tell me how that isnt racist and counter productive
| Quote: | | I am as like to be championing the rights of male pattern baldness, or youth, or people with tattoos or class background as that of ethnic minorities. Your view of my work is based largely on the stereotypes of 'equality' work from the 1980's. |
This is the only part of your reply that made any sense to me sorry PC, the rest came across as pyscho-analytical management speak.
You get paid to inform people that baldness is okay? What rights does being bald provide me? Can I be protected from constant abuse like 'cueball' and 'lex luthor' ?
Thank god such champions as yourself are out there fighting for truth, justice and the american way.
Please tell me this has only been the policy of the current government? Youre well on your way to making me think of something I thought id never do, vote tory. 
Anyway, apologies and hijack over. |
|
|
|
|
| |
Conceding v Goblins/...
Search
