Sociopath Community

 Oh please, Mr. "V", don't be a spoiled brat.

You asked for evidence, I gave it to you. Since I accused you of playing sockpuppet games, it's a no-brainer that you'd try to refute evidence against you. The issue is, you'd have to use facts, but your arguments (for which you give no evidence) can be refuted ridiculously easily with existing data.

Let me just reply to you here:

user22212 said: 

You assume people from a specific sample are uniformly attracted to sc,

You are factually incorrect. The p=1/x is the probability specifically for a Swedish person to enter the forum.

bwhich is wrong. A better way to get that probability is to see what % of internet users have no life and like shitposting on obscure forums. Due to the way social security works in sweeden, you will find that the % of sweeds with no life is higher than your estimate.

You are trying to argue that 1 in 5 or 6 users on every forum is Swedish? Please. Here are some statistics on let's say Reddit:

https://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/07/reddit-demographics-in-one-chart/277513/

Your claim is blatantly wrong, Sweden doesn't even register. Even if I assume 10% of all e-users on average are Swedish it still won't be enough -- I did the calculation.

I already gave a very lenient range -- anywhere between one in 20 and the real expected numbers.

Furthermore, due to how friendships between people work, it's likely that simply having one sweede on a forum will bring in more sweeds -his friends-.

There's a statistically exceedingly high number of Swedes because they were brought in by the existing Swedish users? Do you realize that this can be tested for? So let's do that

Were you brought here by a friend? Was any swede?

 I don't think so.

Since you made the claim, give me at least one example. Even one. I will take one Swede out. Then it'd be 6 swedes, which still gives me the same result. So actually, give me 3 examples.

You're not doing statistics right over there, you're just making some wild assumptions and drawing a probably correct conclusion from those assumptions. The assumptions you are using are wrong, so the conclusion is also wrong. This is why I said you're butchering statistics.

V, you claimed I was butchering statistics before you even had any evidence. I'd say you were highly biased a priori.

You claim my assumptions are "ridiculously wrong", but you base that on arguments which are completely baseless, factually incorrect in part, and in contradiction with common sense.

I don't think you can argue against this, V/Inq/whoever you are.

m8, I never asked for evidence. I don't doubt your math either.

"the situation I have observed is statistically improbable, so reality is a lie" - this is the stance you're taking, and it's plainly wrong.

You have evidence to suggest those people are different from when you did that voice call thing too. So there you have it, 6 sweedes, how bout that.

typo

user22212 said: 

m8, I never asked for evidence. I don't doubt your math either.

"the situation I have observed is statistically improbable, so reality is a lie" - this is the stance you're taking, and it's plainly wrong.

You have evidence to suggest those people are different from when we did that voice call thing too. So there you have it, 6 sweedes, how bout that.

 When *we* did that voice call thing?

You're fucking with me.

There's 7 now: Inqy, Sensy, Fake Sensy, Missy, MissC, Edvard, you.

There are two hypotheses: One is that I am wrong, and there are indeed 7 swedes. But that'd be statistically exceedingly unlikely as I showed. My sane theory is that there are 2-3 swedes, and the rest are socks. Neither of these contradict reality.

I'm not sweedish btw, I've been pulling your leg for a while, trying to get you to think I'm Inq in your delusions but I got bored of it.

Your point is fun, but you haven't addressed my issues properly:

1)  your model of probability for having someone on this forum be sweedish is wrong

2) your assumption implies that it's incrementally harder for a forum to have more sweeds, the more sweeds it has the less sweeds should come in, which is wrong. Sweeds would bulk together on forums, so having only a few is strange, while having none or a lot of sweeds is more likely.

There are more issues with your point as well:

You claim that having two sweeds on this forum is the same as having inq/whoever puppet the other presumed sweed accounts, and that's not true, there are multiple explanations and you just chose one that's convenient to your narrative.

This is not a random forum. It draws its users from a discord server, from that pd forum, and some other places, you did not take into account the population % of those. 

The list can go on, I'm not really in the mood to think about all the things that are wrong with your proof. I'm not providing evidence, I'm just outlining the general ideas where you went wrong.

The bottom point is: You're either delusional, or a troll. Your theory makes no fucking sense. You pulled out some statistics from your ass that prove we're in an "unlikely situation". But that can be said about any of us being born really. 

At least provide a fucking motive for inq to make those puppets. What does he stand to fucking gain from this? Nothing.

The burden of proof that your model accurately represents reality lies on you, and you have not proved that.

What you're saying is interesting, because you're wrong, but WHY you are wrong is not apparent.

It's more of a false-positive thing really. It's like that fun exercise where you have a hiv test that is accurate 99.95% of the times, and one of 10000 people is hiv-positive. You test 10000 people, and 5 are positive, it ends up that only 1 of those 5 actually has hiv.
Same thing here really, 95% of forums will have less than 3 sweeds. But out of the forums that test to have more than 3 sweeds, only a small % will have actual fake sweeds, while the rest will have a genuinely high number of sweeds.

user22212 said: 

sweedes

typo

I like how you went back to edit in a typo.

Legga said: 

I don't think you can argue against this, V/Inq/whoever you are.

Nice graph, but can you actually name all Swedes on the forum?

Inquirer, seven: Inqy, Sensy, Fake Sensy, Missy, MissC, Edvard, user/V for Vendetta

I under-estimated the count by one, since when I drafted my paper I didn't know Vendetta is Swedish too.

user22212 said: 

Your assumptions are ridiculously wrong.

You assume people from a specific sample are uniformly attracted to sc, which is wrong. A better way to get that probability is to see what % of internet users have no life and like shitposting on obscure forums. Due to the way social security works in sweeden, you will find that the % of sweeds with no life is higher than your estimate.

 very interesting

Legga said: 

Inquirer, seven: Inqy, Sensy, Fake Sensy, Missy, MissC, Edvard, user/V for Vendetta

I under-estimated the count by one, since when I drafted my paper I didn't know Vendetta is Swedish too.

Fake Sensy never said they were Swedish, Missy isn't around anymore, MissC is Canadian, Ed never claimed to be Swedish, User isn't Swedish...

Time to up your troll game bruh.