• Eager Eagle
      link
      English
      298 months ago

      that’s a ~40% increase looking like a 300% increase

    • @SchmidtGenetics
      link
      English
      158 months ago

      Read the left side? 7k-11k, the removed useless information, provided you read what is actually there first.

      • strawberry
        link
        fedilink
        -168 months ago

        no one reads that. didn’t even bother to look. should be more transparent IMO but whatever

        • @SchmidtGenetics
          link
          English
          78 months ago

          If you don’t how are you supposed to know what information it’s telling you? It could shades of purple for all you know.

          • @[email protected]
            link
            fedilink
            English
            28 months ago

            If you realize how most people act and think, you can tell them lies while telling the truth. Which is what people are usually trying to do when they start graphs away from zero.

            • @SchmidtGenetics
              link
              English
              1
              edit-2
              8 months ago

              Or it’s removing white space so you can actually see the difference in the data. Like stocks, if stocks started at zero, you wouldn’t be able to see day to day or even a week to week difference…. Not everything can be covered by general rules.

              You can only properly understand the data by reading it, if you glance at it and make assumptions and conclusions, that only speaks volumes about yourself.

              • @[email protected]
                link
                fedilink
                English
                18 months ago

                If counting from 1 to eleven is too hard for you, I don’t think observing that the scale is from 7 to 11 is within your grasp. So, why do this. Absolutely, there are reasons to not start a scale from zero, stocks are a great example, but I don’t think those reasons apply to this graph or the information they’re trying to convey.

                • @SchmidtGenetics
                  link
                  English
                  18 months ago

                  Yeah… it just doesn’t work with the given information, there is actually a reason why they specifically posted the other one….

          • strawberry
            link
            fedilink
            -78 months ago

            well yea but this also isn’t like important stuff so I didn’t bother looking

              • strawberry
                link
                fedilink
                -48 months ago

                you say that as if everyone analyses every aspect of everything they encounter. most people will glance at the graph, see a huge jump, and not look into it more. that’s why statistics are so easy to falsify or make misleading

                • @SchmidtGenetics
                  link
                  English
                  5
                  edit-2
                  8 months ago

                  If you want to engage in a conversation or use that information, yes you should properly read it. What could possibly be added to a discussion otherwise? Just having people have to correct and call out your bullshit? Lmfao.

                  Since you are engaging in comments within a post about this, everyone would assume you read the graph properly, since you obviously can’t add to a conversation without actually knowing the information.

                  So yes, leave your idiocy elsewhere next time, read the shit, or don’t add your opinion, really simple concept.

    • @doublejay1999
      link
      English
      48 months ago

      Welcome to the transparency of Brave !