Permalink Submitted by PhilRM (not verified) on Sun, 01/21/2024 - 08:45
Thanks so much for taking the time to do this; the graphs are a great tool for showing just how anomalous the 2023 results are.
You've also answered a question that occurred to me after reading one of Cam's posts: whether there was a way to distinguish between JJ's suggestion that a block of nominees were omitted and your hypothesis #3, that the numbers have been fudged ('fudged' meaning 'not the result of a normal nominating process'). The very unusual correlation of nominees Cam discussed in his "Mind the Gap" post already inclined me to the latter (or equivalently, that there was massive slating, although that raises the question of why Babel was on the slate), but your analysis is quite definitive.
Thank you!
Thanks so much for taking the time to do this; the graphs are a great tool for showing just how anomalous the 2023 results are.
You've also answered a question that occurred to me after reading one of Cam's posts: whether there was a way to distinguish between JJ's suggestion that a block of nominees were omitted and your hypothesis #3, that the numbers have been fudged ('fudged' meaning 'not the result of a normal nominating process'). The very unusual correlation of nominees Cam discussed in his "Mind the Gap" post already inclined me to the latter (or equivalently, that there was massive slating, although that raises the question of why Babel was on the slate), but your analysis is quite definitive.