[ryanj247]

Henry17 wrote:
[ QUOTE ]

It is also very easy to test if they are. If I suspected that they were rigged I would have tested. As such I'd assume the people who believe they are rigged would also have some form of statistical analysis that they would be willing to submit to peer review. Yet none do.


[/ QUOTE ]

jukofyork wrote:
[ QUOTE ]

The whole title of this thread was "Organizing a project to determine which sites are legit or rigged", yet we still have to suffer from donks and their unsubstantiated "beliefs" with no actual hard evidence presented...


[/ QUOTE ]

this thread tilts me so hard.

i agree with the complaints about the donks who whine but provide no evidence. but now we have an intelligent poster who claims that his statistical tests do in fact indicate a problem. and yet no one wants to acknowledge this.

out of all the smart people who've read this thread, really is there no one who has read about the statistical analysis done by MyTurn2Raise and felt inclined to try to reproduce it? why do the knowledgeable posters keep complaining about a lack of evidence, while just completely glossing over the evidence that's been pointed out to them?

obv MT2R is not going to be posting all kinds of details here. but for chrissakes, can't someone PM him and get the details and either verify the tests he did, or clearly identify the mistakes he made? i was hoping that would be the end result of this "project"...