#as sampling biases go?

[hauntoblogical]

I have seen three different "how much of this site is queer" polls this evening poking fun at staff's 1/4 assertion and not a single indication any of them understand statistics. One someone even replied "This might have some sampling bias" what do you mean might what do you mean SOME

[felidaereverse]

you people in my phone love playing surveys, right?

[creatingblackcharacters]

Black Character Design Poll: Event Rules

I am an avid lover of graphs. I like numbers, I like trends and the absence thereof. I like the mindsets that make people make decisions, I like recognizing the biases, both conscious and unconscious, in sampled populations. I like how you'll always gain some sort of answer, even if it's not the one you expected (it's the scientist in me)! Best of all, I like making people question themselves! So... Why not a poll?

This is going to be a TWO-PART event. The first portion is going to ask the First Question, starting Sunday April 13th and I will stop taking submissions Saturday April 19th. The second portion is going to ask the Second Question, starting Sunday April 20th, and I will stop taking submissions Saturday April 26th.

See below the cut to find out all the details!

The goal is:

To see how different groups feel about the same character design, specifically Black audiences

To make participants question how and why their own beliefs may be affected

When I tell you "consider your Black audience when you create Black characters", that's not me pointing you to an amorphous concept- I'm talking about real people who are looking at a work! And very often, we find out that a creator's intent, versus a particular audience's perception, are not on the same page. That's not always a bad thing, nor something we can always control. But sometimes, it can reveal some lack of understanding, or biases we aren't aware of. So let's test that out! Let's have that conversation!

Submissions:

You will be submitting characters! There are three things requested in an ASK format:

A good, clear picture of Black Character from the Source Material

Black Character's Name

Title of Black Character's Source Material

DASSIT! No, I don't want leading arguments or why you love them in the ask. I will delete it. Let people make their own conclusions!

Responses:

Your options will be "Peak", "Mid", and "Nah".

Answer honestly and instinctively! If you thought it was great, choose that! If you thought it was ass, choose that! Don't let a need to "look nonproblematic" or "to be nice" affect your answer. Just take the time to consider why your opinion may be different from others. This is an opportunity to consider something new!

That being said! I'm not arguing or doing discourse with y'all in the comments or tags- I'd have to keep up with far too many conversations. Think before you speak! That thought that you think might be racist- you do not have to say it!

I will be organizing responses into three groups of viewers: "White", "Nonblack POC", and "Black". One, so that the Black voters have a little more chance to be seen (and we're not like, 97-3 every time 😅) and two, because sometimes I think people of color assume they are immune to antiblackness. I want everybody to think!

Do not send me an ask or message telling me why you're uncomfortable and why you think I shouldn't ask these questions. It's meant to bring people out of their comfort zone. Considering that you may have a different perspective on the presentation of Blackness than an actual Black person is not a bad thing, and no, it's not causing racism to have a conversation about why that may be an issue. Just don't participate.

I will add the questions and rubric in a reblog- stay tuned!

[detectivejay]

This is a very silly poll that's been bopping around in my head since I started making these, but I could never settle on the options. But I don't feel like working right now, so here goes (yes this is biased heavily towards detectives from media I follow, apologies but hey it's my blog xD) -

Now, you can just go ahead and choose your favorite of these sleuths, OR you may have some other criteria for who you'd want hired for the case. The fun part will be hearing the whys!

Please reblog/share to see as big a sample size and as many fun answers as possible. :)

[pineapple-frostyfruits]

May I be annoying and add on, transjinx?

... Better to beg for forgiveness than to ask permission-

So:

I was tagged by @theangelyouknew

Put your 4 favorite characters from 4 pieces of media as options and let your Tumblr pals decide which one most suits your vibe then tag 4 people

npt: @lombolica @idkaguyorsomething @wibbly-wobbly-blog @sugarplumanderson

[froggiequarium]

dyeing your hair ft. rafayel bc i just dyed mine earlier & imagine he'd be good at/willing to do it for u

-

"huh? is it supposed to look like this...?"

"it looks a little chunky.. did i do something wrong?"

you skim over the box dye and the small now-empty bottle before looking back at the bowl.

"lets just keep mixing it."

rafayel does as you say, taking the brush and mixing the dye together with the developer in the bowl. after about a minute, a light color begins seeping through the pearly mixture.

"oh, look!"

"guess that's a good sign," rafayel comments, still mixing.

"do your paints take this same amount of effort too?"

"hmm.. sometimes; depends on the color im trying to achieve."

you both watch as the mixture turns a deeper and deeper shade of red as the minutes pass while simultaneously becoming smoother and smoother.

"it looks so yummy..."

he glances over at you, eyebrow raised.

"did you not eat or something, cutie? i would've made something for you, y'know!"

"no its just— look at that and tell me you don't wanna sample it."

he looks back at the bowl of soft red and back at you.

"i don't think i wanna sample this." you huff a breath through your nose before he voices his reasoning. "doesn't it smell weird? is this how it's supposed to smell?"

"what do you mean? it smells amazing!"

"...you have some strange tastes," he comments before going back to slowly stir the rest of the chunks smoothly.

"anyway, as long as i'm here, you're not getting a lick of this."

"i bet it tastes like strawberries...."

"...you're so weird," he laughs, hand slowly coming to a stop.

"okay, its done, now what?"

"now to paint my hair!"

"oh, do you need your renowned artist fishie to do the honors?"

you're in the middle of clipping up a section of your hair when your eyes trail over to the gleam in his.

"do you really want to?"

"isn't that why you asked for my help in the first place?"

"well, yeah, but—"

"relax, cutie, and just trust me!"

"well, if you're sure," you point to your hair that's left loose. "then, start here at the bottom. my hair is kind of thick, so the trick is coloring in sections to equally distribute it."

he hums along, dipping the brush into the bowl of red and pulling it up to swipe over your hair in careful strokes to paint each section.

knowing how rafayel gets when he's in the zone, you don't make much conversation, simply humming along to the music playing in the background as you watch him delicately paint your hair through the mirror.

once he's finished with the bottom, you unclip some more hair, still keeping one section confined to your head, and he quickly gets to work on the next one.

a comfortable silence has enveloped you both, and as he paints, you can't help but feel slight doubt creeping into your mind, prompting you to break the quiet.

"rafayel?"

"hmm? yes, cutie?"

you hesitate for a moment, his eyes catching yours momentarily in the mirror.

"its just— do you think.. this color will suit me?"

a grin spreads across his lips as he dips the brush back into the bowl gathering more red.

"is that what you're worried about?" he moves it and begins painting a strand.

"i'm already almost done, don't tell me you're going to make me paint your head all over again." he's teasing you, and you can't help a small grin crack.

"well, its been awhile since i've dyed it last so i'm just worried..."

"well, if you ask me, i think anything looks good on you," he winks at you through the mirror. "or off, for that matter."

"rafayel!" he laughs and you let out a sigh before getting back to the matter at hand.

"aren't you biased? what if this ruins my look or doesn't compliment my skin tone, and you lie and tell me that i look great?" you cross your arms, pointed stare gazing at him through the mirror.

"ouch, do you doubt an artist's eye that much?"

you don't answer as he finishes the section. he unclips the next one himself, setting the hairpiece aside as he begins again, his soft voice breaking through the silence once more.

"to answer your question, i think it suits you perfectly, cutie."

his hand is gentle as it paints the stray strands of your hair, and you feel like you're one of his canvases being painted in his vision.

"you really think so?" you pause before your next question bubbles up. "you won't like it any less now that the color is changing?"

"since when do you care what i think?" he jokes.

"rafayel..." you whine.

he laughs before giving his actual answer.

"of course not. you could dye it every color under the sun and i'd help you every time, admiring the you in each different hue of the world."

you smile at his answer, heart fluttering in your chest.

sometimes, it slipped your mind just how romantic he could be at the most unexpected times.

"okay, it looks like i'm all done here, buuut it still looks like there's a good amount left in the bowl," he turns to you, an eyebrow raised.

"what should we do with the rest of it?"

"add extra to any empty-looking spots!" you smile, eyes trailing towards his pretty locks.

"...unless you want some highlights?"

he looks down at the bowl before smiling.

"hmm, i'll consider it for another time. right now, it's all about you, cutie."

you fall back into a comfortable conversation as he touches up some spots here and there, relaying your worry and excitement for the result.

rest assured, he couldn't wait to see the finished product of his work, either.

-

[saxamophone]

reading, lately

Go give all these a look, they're phenomenal.

Eat Your Death, Draco by @sillywives T | 3k

What if Draco was really excited to join the Death Eaters but then found out they eat death? Literally. On a plate. Draco being Draco is hilarious in this one. (Written for @hp-abandonshipfest)

Seven Year Itch by @mintawasalreadytaken E | 5.6k

Please read @vukovich's prompt for this at the start of the fic, and then oh my god. What minta does with it is so, so good. Ugh! I don't want to say much because I don't want to spoil it. But it will hurt so good. (Written for @hd-hurtcomfort-fest)

Crush by @citrusses E | 8k

Harry's a mess but someone has a crush on him. What's the best way to ensure he can keep their attention? Asking Draco Malfoy for help, of course! Gosh, I love this. Funny and sweet and sexy. I love everything citrusses writes.

When the Flood Comes by @academicdisasterfic E | 10.3k

Draco is a lawyer, back in England to stop oil drilling legislation in the North Sea. Harry is a stoic Auror, set on seeing something through. There's political manouvering, powerful women, and men who are terrible, as always. But Harry's one of the good ones, as always. I love this fic sm, and maybe I'm biased (I am, but I'm also right) but you should read everything by academicdisaster. (Written for @hd-wireless)

Rookie Moves by peu_a_peu E | 75k

Harry and Draco are Auror partners. Harry attempts earnestness, while Draco remains Draco ('Get fucked, loser,' is an amazing response to when someone tries to shake your hand.) Hilarity ensues. Ron and Hermione blame themselves. Need a sample? @littlewinnow drew an amazing rendition of the above-mentioned 'Get fucked, loser.'

Also not a rec, per se (because it's widely known) but my comfort fic lately is Draco Malfoy and the Mortifying Ordeal of Being in Love. Hilarious, smart, and full of the best romcom tropes.

[miserye]

under the cut

Okay perfume talk, I wouldn’t consider myself to be a serious fraghead but I’ve been in this for a couple of years maybe 3 or 4 so I’m not a novice either atp,, Every holiday season Sephora and ulta release a perfume/cologne set of tester samples that you can also use to redeem a full or travel size of perfume which is a pretty good deal because getting perf samples is a pain in the ass esp if you’re looking for more elusive perfume, usually goes around $4-6 on average so getting this collection of say (for this year, it varies per year I believe the average is around 7-8 samples for the travel pack and usually something similar for the full/mid size set) 8 samples for a value of 34 is really good plus you get a travel size on top of that for free because again, if each of those samples you’re eyeing are even just 4 bucks a piece, that’s still 32 and you’re out a travel size so these are really good value deals.

Now here’s the issue. Every single year without fail, there are the sample fucking scents EVERY SINGLE TIME yeah yeah cult classics or whatever but it’s fucking boring and it lowers the value of the set because we already tried them the previous year and if you just want to try like say three scents, it’s better to just go in store try them and buy a normal travel size, which are typically from $28-34 depending on the brand but this is a typical average for travel sizes. It’s always the most BORING scents they choose to re-use because we’re stuck in like 2015 or something idk but usually you can see D&G’s light blue, herrera’s good girl, Valentino bright crystal, ysl black opium AND libre, Viktor & Rolf either flower bomb or good fortune. Here’s the other issue with these sets, 90% of these scents are strong vanilla or heavy sweet floral which is fine EXCEPT that’s most the set. It’s just not very versatile usually, and caters to a specific group of people who enjoy more overpowering scents because, again, that’s what perfume is known as typically. Kinda strong vanilla (specifically vanilla base) and usually a floral like rose or peony.

ALSO my other issue with these sets is that I KNOW the other perfume in them are ass because I’ve smelt them before. The other ones they add in are not ‘indie’ perfumes per say but they’re not super popular such as Juliette has a gun which HAS GOOD SCENTS BUT they ALWAYS ALWAYS ALWAYS put in not a gun which is a layering scent and is lame and is not for the average normal people consumer because most people don’t think to layer their perfume when they’re testing out new scents so I think it’s not great in these kinds of sample sets because people want to take each scent in as an individual.

Regardless, they always choose some of the most popular scents and some mid scents from other brands which are ‘trendy or people have their eyes on’ but typically smell mediocre if I haven’t mentioned that. That brings me to this year where they’ve really stepped it up. This year, they changed the typical line up to the ‘one off’ scents where a lot of big frag brands will create a ‘twist’ on their scents and sometimes it does make a difference, but sometimes not.

For example, black opium from ysl has like three iterations where there’s the classic, there’s one called over red, and there’s one called like illicit green or something WHCIH is not to be confused with edp, edc, and edt that’s different <- this is the strength of the fragrance concentration (side tangent, perfume is comprised of two main elements, the alc which diffuses the perfume and is the reason why when you first spray something it smells like alc and the actual fragrance oils, each of those have varying quantities of each, the strongest smell and amount of fragrance oil to alc concentration goes eau de parfum, followed by eau de cologne, then eau de toilette <- the toilette is a reference to the bathroom aka toilet, meaning you’re supposed to refresh this perfume when you go to the bathroom so it’s intentionally a perfume that doesn’t last).

Anyways. This year, the sample set from Sephora has more ‘new’ scents that step away from the cookie cutter cult classics and also have favored the new ‘twist’ perfumes on the actual classics, typically as a means of promotion for the new version of the scent which usually isn’t as well loved/recieved aka Herrera’s new version of good girl which is good girl blush. They also have included perfume oils which is really new and fresh because those have been increasing in trend recently and I really appreciate it. Anyways, there’s a new massive set for 95? That has 15 samples and includes a free MID sized perfume, it says full size but it’s actually the size in between full and travel, it’s usually around a two oz or so less which comes out to around 30-50 mL usually (depends on the brand, some do both 30 and 50 if they’re more expensive) compared to a full which is usually around 98sih mL. The line up was pretty good!! I was happy about the mix of older and newer scents that they chose, though I’m not happy about the appearance of Charlotte tilbury into the perfume world, I haven’t tried any but just looking at them they look cheap and gross in terms of scent. While the trend to cater towards sweet and floral hasn’t changed, I’m glad they started branching out of the usual mainstream scents and I really do think that even the smaller full and travel sets they came out this year are a lot more unique than usual.

In terms of ulta, they’re lacking a bit as per usual when it comes to these things, but they also included a new like diversity set so there’s one with all the cult classics and there’s a different one where most are relatively newer scents which I like, also the price point is crazy it’s like 17 and 14 scents (the sets have different # of scents, the classics is 17 the new one is 14) for 20 plus a 15 gift card so the ‘essentials’ they have is good for people getting into perfume and those that want the normal popular scents and the newer one are more relevant scents to 2022ish and while it’s still a sweet vanilla and floral set, I’m happier about the ones they chose to include. Though the thing with these sets is that there’s always a chance they’ll give you perfumes that are empty/half full just because this is something third parties put together. There’s less of a risk with regular sample sets that the brands put out because it’s from the brand, but Sephora and ulta have a history of having crappy sets with less than full bottles, however if you’re just wanting to sincerely try out a scent like once or twice, it’s whatever. Honestly I don’t need most of my samples past one use because I can tell when I like or hate something pretty easy. Anyways, that’s my thing about perfume LMFAO sorry this was long

do you guys want to see my literal essay i just sent to my coworker about perfume

[lousycapy]

How statistics can easily be manipulated to fit a certain agenda in Formula 1

Hello! I’ve seen a lot of f1 fans or media sources bring up statistics incorrectly to prove their points recently, which is really getting on my nerves. So here is a comprehensive guide, with examples, of how statistics work and why they are not the be-all and end-all some people might think them to be. This is a pretty long post, so the explanations are all below the cut. With that, I hope you find this useful!

Multiple factors come into play when analyzing a statistic, so I’ve separated them in different categories: what data set is used to make the stat, how the stat can be interpreted and how being factually correct doesn’t equate a valid argument :

THE DATA SET

To make a statistic, you first need values which correspond to a data set. What said data set is made of is very relevant to the exactitude of the stat and how much regard should be given to it.

For example, to determine the average lap times of a driver over a stint you would need to divide the sum of all lap times by the number of laps executed. Which means that theoretically you could use a single lap as an average, e.g. 1:57:325/1 which gives an average lap time of 1:57:325s.

However, as you might imagine this stat is not representative of a driver’s stint, since the lap chosen to be analyzed could very well be an outlier. That’s why sample sizes matter, the more values make up your data set, the more representative of reality the result obtained is.

It is also important to know what the data set consists of. Let’s reuse our average lap times of a driver over a stint example, are outlaps/inlaps included? Is it based on clean air, dirty air? Are there laps excluded due to driver mistakes (e.g. going off track)? A stat being presented without any explanation of how it was calculated is absolutely worthless.

Finally, comprehension of the data set is very valuable as well.

Let’s imagine this fictional scenario where Ferrari makes Charles and Carlos compare average lap times. They both use the same car, on the same track, on the same tires, at the same time, for a stint of a total of 10 laps. Both drivers average a lap time of 80.125s over their whole stint, so is the conclusion that they have both done the exact same thing accurate? No!

Despite having the same average lap times in this scenario, the data set suggests a different conclusion, and different trends. Considering stints in a race are going to be longer than 10 laps, it can be assumed that Charles would average better lap times thanks to his consistency compared to Carlos, who would get worse lap times as time passes as can be observed thanks to the trend line in his graph.

2. INTERPRETATION OF THE DATA

Now that we can recognize the importance of the data set and its constituents, it is time to understand how the data provided can be used to make a statistic.

More than one answer can be correct based on the same sample of data. Despite using the same set, depending on how the data is used it can lead to different statistics that drive different arguments both being factually correct.

For example, I’d like to refer to the wonderful basspro24chevy World’s Destructor Chamionship from Brazil 24 on Reddit in an effort of determining who is the most destructive driver. Here is a chart I’ve made which also includes number of races each driver took part in (Ollie not included I was too lazy to recalculate how it affects the drivers he’s replaced’s damage bill) and the average cost of damage per race of each driver.

Based on these statistics, both arguments could be made to justify either Checo being the most destructive driver, since he’s the one who’s cost his team the most damage over the whole season, or Franco, since he’s the one who on average costs the most for his team per weekend.

Depending on someone’s biases, they could make some drivers look better than others despite using the same data set as another person, and depending on how their argument is justified even if they end up with a different conclusion it doesn’t mean they aren’t right as well.

3. FACTUALLY CORRECT ≠ VALID ARGUMENT

Even if you are factually correct with your statistic’s interpretation, and it is based on an acceptable data set, it doesn’t mean it has a direct link of causality with your argument and provides validation to the point you are trying to make.

For example, someone could argue that Checo is a safer pair of hands in races than Pierre, because over the course of the 2024 season he has DNFed 2 out of 21 races, meanwhile Pierre has DNFed 3 out of 21 races. However, the point being argued here is which driver is a safer pair of hands, and other variables than the drivers come into play when discussing those two’s DNFs.

Indeed, Checo drives a RedBull with a Honda engine, whilst Pierre drives an Alpine with a Renault engine. Out of Checo’s 2 DNFs, 2 were caused by driver mistakes. Out of Pierre’s 3 DNFs, 3 were caused by engine issues. The World’s Destructor Championship can also be used as a counterpoint to Checo being a safer pair of hands than Pierre by comparing damage bills.

Thus, instead of the conclusion being that Checo is a safer pair of hands than Pierre, the DNFs statistic is more appropriate to conclude that the Honda engine is more reliable than the Renault engine.

Which means that to make a valid argument, you need to be able to explain why the statistic presented is relevant and what it suggests. Alleviating circonstances also need to be taken into account to solidify the point being made.

For example, let’s imagine a scenario where Fernando is 1.235s off Lance during a qualifying run. To use this stat in an argument, you need to be able to justify why he was so far off. Was it genuine pace? Did he make a mistake which ruined the lap? Were they on the same tires? Was it track evolution? Are they on the same setup? Did Fernando come across traffic? Did Lance get a significant tow?

Contextualization matters twice as much as the actual statistic being presented, because the statistic without context can easily be manipulated in a way to drive a certain agenda.

4. CONCLUSION

All in all, what I’m trying to say is that even maths can be used to drive agendas. Statistics can not be taken at face value, because there are multiple factors that can influence their relevance. I hope you found this little guide helpful, and that it will help you analyze better the information you see online on how drivers are performing (or argue better with crazed fans, you do you 🫡)

Thanks for reading and have a good day!

[a-bad-case-of-the-stephs]

Wait I’m extremely curious about something. My sample size is going to be insanely biased given my account but whatever I still have to know. Reblog for bigger sample size or whatever.

(No shame btw I personally didn’t really internalize it on my first read through. Only once I had become sufficiently insane about stephanie brown did I put it together and Freak out.)

[nkjemisin]

Hey there. I'm writing a story set in New York City and am not American. I have few characters, but most of them are arab or white. I can't help but feel a bit wrong about it, given that America is much more diverse than that, and NYC being an emblem of that. Do you think I should force myself to include more representation or should I just tell my story, and leave that more diverse cast to some other story I could write? I know this is a neverending debate and there are many opinions about it, but I've always agreed with everything you've said in matters of representation in fiction, and so I'd be curious to know your personal answer on it.

I'm a little confused by how you're using "representation," here. It sounds like you think representation = "randomly sticking BIPOC everywhere." I think when most people use that word, it means something more like "create an accurate or at least plausible depiction of a group or place." In actual New York, there are plenty of Middle Easterners and white people who live in relatively homogeneous small communities where they might only see someone of a different ethnicity on the subway. If your story is set in one of those communities -- and you do stick some random BIPOC in that subway scene, because that's plausible -- then it sounds like your characters might be an example of good representation.

(Note: if you're not writing something set in the real world, but it features human beings, it needs to represent humanity as a whole, unless there's a good in-world reason not to. But if it's our world? You can get specific.)

Here's the catch, tho: plausibility is relative. If you've absorbed some biases and haven't done enough research, then you might end up writing something that feels plausible to you, but which isn't actually representative or plausible to anyone else. The way to avoid this is to do the research and check (to the best of your ability) your biases. For example, you aren't American, I assume you've at least visited NYC? If not, you should. You can visit some of the communities I mentioned! You can eat in restaurants, visit mosques, have conversations with actual real people who are living the life you're writing about! If you don't have the time, money, or spoons to do that, there are other ways to do good research -- films and YT/Tiktok videos made by people from the communities in question, for example. But you'd need to watch a lot of them to get a good representative sample.

I recommend this book to all the writing students I've taught at Clarion, and other writer workshops: Writing the Other, by Nisi Shawl and Cynthia Ward. There's a particular part of it that seems relevant here, which is a kind of hierarchy of "appropriate" appropriation, I think first mentioned by Diantha Day Sprouse but included in Writing the Other. Basically it says that if you want to write about a culture that isn't your own, you can learn about that culture in one of several ways: a) You can be an Invader, and just go take whatever intellectual and artistic tidbits from that culture that you want, regardless of how damaging this might be to members of that group. Example: non-Indigenous people who write about actual secret practices, or who encourage the desecration of sacred places. b) You can be a Tourist, in which you're still mooching from that culture, but at least you're figuratively paying someone for it and accepting tidbits that the culture has chosen to sell. Example: getting a sensitivity reader. Or c) you can be an Invited Guest, who brings in as much as they take out, and who has formed relationships that are beneficial to all involved. Example: being part of an exchange program, both as a student and later as a host, and maintaining those friendships outside of the program.

The goal is to be an IG, but that isn't always possible. Tourist is still better than being an Invader. (...I feel like I'm leaving out a category. It's been a while since I read the book; any more recent readers want to check me here?) But the closer you can get to actually participating in that culture, the more your work will be informed by reality instead of biases or misinformation, and the more likely your work will read as plausible not just to you, but to your widest possible audience -- people familiar with the culture and people who aren't.

(I'm a little concerned about your phrasing of "force myself to include more representation," note. Why would that need to be a forced thing? A writer's goal should be to write something that feels lived-in and authentic to [if it's a real place] most people's experience -- not to meet some arbitrary standard, but because that's how you master immersion and characterization. If good immersion and characterization feel forced to you right now, that suggests you need more practice. I recommend writing short stories!)

[local-hellhound-steals-spaghetti]

This is an embarassingly bad paper based on the use of two aversive based dog trainers who are clearly incompetant in the use of +R - yet the e collar training community is taking a victory lap.

The fact that this got past an animal ethics review is honestly appalling and the university should be ashamed.

Let's go over the main huge flaws with this study:

The positive reinforcement protocol they are using to compare to e collars is laughably incompetant - with no management or use of distance, desensitisation. Just use a leash? Maybe?

Use of aversives to stop chasing is, unsurprisingly, effective. Because, yes, painful consequences tend to work to suppress behaviour. That isn't the problem that people have with e collars.

The author seems to think that use of e collars is justified because it "gets results" in a short amount of time to stop dogs chasing - again, apparently we haven't heard of a leash.

"Aside from presumably pain-induced yelps in the dogs with e-collars when they received shocks, none of the dogs in any groups showed any signs of stress or distress." So we're saying a pain vocalisation isn't a sign of distress? That's your welfare parameter? Jfc.

Love how they didn't even try to get fecal cortisol baselines and just collected samples from a few dogs but not all of them. You tried, I guess?

The fact that the trainers for the study is "Ivan and Ivan's Student" is ridiculously biased. Acting as if both these trainers know how to apply +R effectively as opposed to their heavy aversive tool use is laughable.

"We designed our study’s methods around current trainer practices as well as the recommendations of our senior trainer while attempting to keep continencies as simple as possible." - yeeeah that's a conflict of interest. Especially when your "senior trainer" has an axe to grind with R+ people using scientific papers to support their training methods.

You're chucking treats in a bowl after a few sessions and you think that's going to stop a dog chasing a lure? Oh yeah, you got us. We just throw kibble in a bowl to stop dogs running into traffic. I am genuinely floored that that's how they think a +R protocol for chasing works. They have no business comparing the two when they can't even do one properly.

"We also did not test whether the food rewards we deployed were highly valued." Okay so the majority of my client dogs will go nuts for my meaty high value treats because they've only had store bought dry treats and the client is shocked at how food motivated their dog suddenly is..... So this study was relying on whatever the guardian of the dog brought with them lmao rookie mistake.

"Dogs that chase livestock may be shot or otherwise euthanized, and dogs that chase cars may be killed in traffic." Put. Them. On. A. Leash.

"The practical applicability of either the LIMA or LIFE models is likely limited, at least in the United States where dog trainers are not required to be licensed or certified. In a sample of highly rated dog trainers, more than half did not document any relevant education." Does that include your "senior trainer"? It does. Because he doesn't have any formal education in canine behaviour, welfare and science. You know this. You chose him to be your trainer for your study.

"The speed and effectiveness with which the e-collar inhibited the dogs in this study from chasing may justify the limited number of painful stimulations the dogs experienced if the object the dogs were chasing had been something that could directly or indirectly cause them serious injury or death." Or..... OR.... you could not use electric shocks on your dog and potential cause long term damage, fear responses ect.... And use a leash.

Just baffled by this whole study. My high prey drive whippet will go feral for a lure but only when she knows the context for when she's being allowed to chase. She can be at a lure coursing trial for the whole day not worrying about the lure because 1) I keep her at a distance where the stimulus isn't saliant enough and 2) she gets reinforcement for calmly watching from a distance.

I'm honestly getting second hand embarassment reading this study. It's just such bad science should never have gotten past an ethics board.

[ballsballsbowls]

I've seen a lot of posts saying "don't follow the polls because the margin of error is basically useless."

And I've seen a lot of posts saying "don't follow the polls because they're being entirely run and paid for by the most partisan people imaginable running garbage data."

and I've even seen, "don't follow the polls because the sampling is really biased."

but I've not seen a single one going, "don't follow the polls because even in their extremely small and biased samples, some of these people just straight up fucking lie to them?"

I cannot be the only person in the entire United States who has extended family members who lie to political pollsters for funsies and then boast about it.

[dreaminginthedeepsouth]

A lot has happened this week. On Tuesday, April 1st, several hundred people woke up to an email letting us know we’d lost our jobs working for the federal government. I never believed the claims from the administration that it would only be “waste” that would’ve been eliminated, but after the promises that scientists would be safe I didn’t expect to immediately lose my job on a random Tuesday at 5:10 AM. Since that moment, I have cycled through anger and sadness and grief, knowing that what we worked so hard to achieve is gone forever.

I am a West Virginia girl, through and through. I grew up here. I attended West Virginia University for undergrad and my PhD. When I finished my PhD in Immunology and Microbiology in 2021, I immediately started working at CDC NIOSH in Morgantown, as an Associate Service Fellow. NIOSH was founded to understand diseases that were being seen in coal miners, and as a West Virginian the importance of protecting worker safety is something that you understand really young and really personally. I was beyond thrilled to find an opportunity to use my doctoral education in my home state, conducting research that directly benefits American workers and helps our people live safer, healthier lives. I have been with NIOSH since 2021, working in the building every day as a scientist, studying how exposure to particles and microbes interacts with immune systems.

The type of research that we were doing is not being done anywhere else in the world. And now it’s not being done at all.

We were permitted to come in and gather our belongings, but our building is left vacant, and for what? We have backlogs of samples we were unable to process because of purchasing freezes since January. My data, which is really data that belongs to the American people, is sitting in files that I can only assume will be deleted at the earliest convenience of the administration. We are grieving the senseless loss of our laboratory animals, euthanized because we can’t finish studies. Their lives ended without cause, exacting further torment on the scientists that value animal life so deeply, a core principle held in all animal research. The cruelty and waste in the administration’s plan to “reduce redundancy and government waste” is disgusting and offensive.

What scares me now is not my own job security or what’s next for my career. It’s not what happens next for me as an individual, or even the impact on the larger scientific community, but the ripple that will impact every single American and American worker. Without NIOSH to study the effects of occupational safety and health risks or to study the health hazards that appear and grow and evolve every day, who is going to do that? Who is going to care about the American worker in a way that’s not biased by a company’s bottom line? Who is going to certify respirators and masks? We don’t know. And maybe the answer is no one. That is what scares me most.

[Catherine Blackwood]

+

This is so many kinds of devastating and a microcosm of what the 47 crew are doing.

[Rebecca Solnit] 

[am-i-the-asshole-official]

AITA for creating and running a gimmick blog?

A few months back, I was bored and decided to hop on the trend of gimmick blogs. Since I don't have any crazy skills like identifying cars or programming bots, I settled on something I thought was extremely simple: correcting typos. So I'll sometimes reblog posts that have typos in them and comment with corrections. I would only do this on posts that were already lighthearted or joking in tone; I would never derail a serious post with it. And I really haven't used it very often - maybe a couple times a week at most, just when I happen to notice a good candidate.

Well, recently I was inundated out of nowhere by a bunch of anons telling me this was a horribly offensive idea. According to them, I was insulting dyslexic people, non-native English speakers, people without access to education, and a whole bunch of other groups with these unwarranted corrections.

I had honestly never considered that angle, and I've paused using that blog so I can try and reflect on it. But when I replied to a couple of the asks asking for a better explanation of exactly how this was harmful - because I genuinely wanted to be informed - the vast majority of the replies, with few exceptions, were obscenely rude to me. I've been called classist, ableist, racist, and a lot of much worse words I don't care to repeat here. I blocked exactly two people because they were being extremely hateful in my notes, while still trying to engage with the more polite ones, but of course I still got accused of blocking and ignoring everyone I disagreed with.

The truth is, I'm still not sure whether or not I disagree with any of them on the actual subject at hand; I just can't deal with people being bitter and rude and assuming the worst of me. I tried to make it clear that I was more than willing to listen and have a conversation in good faith, but that has proved impossible.

So now I'm really hurt and really, really confused. I'm not going to just blindly trust a small group of hypocrites on the internet who claim they're worried about people's feelings while at the same time trying to completely villainize me as if I don't have feelings too. But I also understand that they might have a point. Sadly, politeness is not always correlated with correctness.

I absolutely do not want to continue running this gimmick blog if it's truly harmful and offensive to people. I've just never encountered this take before, and it was delivered with such vitriol that I had to take a break from tumblr entirely just to recover my sanity. So I'm hoping a much broader and less biased sample size will help to clear this up. I know an AITA poll isn't perfect, but it should do.

If I get a YTA verdict, I will delete the typo-correcting blog and stop immediately, no questions asked. If not, I'll know I just angered an extremely vocal minority that has no idea how to deal with conflict.

AITA?

What are these acronyms?

[youcouldmakealife]

KS Fill: Mike/Liam; happy place

For the always welcome prompt: Anything where Mike and Liam are happy

Teensy bit NSFW because, well, it's Mike and Liam.

The kitchen’s always been Mike’s favourite room of the house.

Well, Liam would like to think it’s his second favourite room, but it probably isn’t. It’s not like they keep shit confined to the bedroom or anything anyway. There isn’t a surface in this house that Liam hasn’t gotten bent over at some point, though Mike was very, very thorough about disinfecting the kitchen counter after. Totally anal about it.

“Why are you snickering to yourself,” Mike says.

It doesn’t even come out suspicious, he’s gotten into such a rhythm cutting little stars out of a sheet of cookie dough. He probably wouldn’t admit this even to himself, but while Mike may like to cook, he loves to bake. Only ever does it for others, though, like the baking itself isn’t unmanly but eating the results is.

That means Liam usually only gets to sample his baking one filched cookie at a time, which is bullshit. But also, probably good for his career. Mike’s just as good at baking as he is at cooking. Possibly even better, but Liam’s got a sweet tooth, so he’s probably biased.

“Liam,” Mike says, and Liam realises he hasn’t bothered to answer.

“Thought of a sex joke,” Liam says.

Mike snorts. “Of course you did,” he says. “Do I want to hear it?”

“You always do,” Liam says. Mike secretly thinks he’s hilarious.

“Go ahead,” Mike says, trying and failing to sound long-suffering. Cutting little stars is clearly his happy place. Liam’s going to go completely nuts online later buying cookie cutters. He wonders if they have little skulls and crossbones or rockets or something. Maybe Mike will let them keep a batch of cookies if they’re badass enough. Probably not, but a man can hope.

“Remember how we fucked in the kitchen?” Liam asks.

“Which time?” Mike asks.

Liam waves a hand. “Irrelevant to the joke.”

“Okay,” Mike says. “Yes, I remember.”

“So I was thinking about how you were, you know, super thorough cleaning the counters off after?” Liam asks.

“I prepare food on these counters,” Mike says. “They need to be—“

“Not saying you shouldn’t have been,” Liam says. “Just, you know. That was kind of anal of you.”

Mike doesn’t stop himself from snorting in time. “That was bad,” he says, a second too late. “Completely juvenile.”

“I know,” Liam says cheerfully. Made Mike snort, though, so what does that say about him?

Mike looks down at his handiwork, a sea of stars across the baking sheet, enough for every member of the roster.

“You’re making two batches, right?” Liam asks. It’s just the team for this one, no significant others or kids, so technically only one batch is needed, but one per person doesn’t work out well. There are thieves on that team. He should know: he’s one of them.

“Three,” Mike says. “Make sure there’s enough for the support staff.”

Once again, Mike is going to be the most popular person at the team Christmas party. Third straight year. Liam thinks they should make him a trophy or something.

“Can we decorate them to be North Stars?” Liam asks. “Or is that not Christmassy enough?”

“Why do you think I picked stars, Fitzgerald?” Mike asks, and Liam grins at him. “Why don’t you make yourself useful, find the green food colouring for me?”

Liam has no idea where the fuck it would be, but he has eyes and hands and enthusiasm, and the full awareness that Mike will gripe at him from across the room like a backseat searcher until he locates it.

“Why would it be in there?” Mike asks, as Liam opens the cupboards, and Liam grins at the mixing bowls. The griping’s already begun.

“Baking stuff,” Liam says.

Mike sighs, and Liam moves one over.

“Liam,” he says, and Liam grins wider. “Really?”

“Tell me where to go, and I’m there,” Liam says, but instead Mike pins him against the counter, basically surrounding him. Liam leans back into him, closes his eyes when Mike wraps an arm around his chest, brushes his lips against Liam’s temple, the kind of thing he’d deny was a kiss if asked. ‘What? Kiss you? My mouth just happened to be in the area, don’t flatter yourself’.

Liam tilts his head up, and he gets a proper kiss for that, though Mike pulls away just as he’s starting to get a crick in his neck. He always seems to know, somehow.

Mike presses another not-kiss to his cheekbone, then smacks his ass. “Go find me the food colouring,” he says.

It takes ten minutes, and Mike almost throws the cookie cutter at him, but eventually Liam locates it.

“Can I help make the frosting?” he asks.

“You just want to lick the beaters,” Mike says, but he doesn’t say no.