Free State Project Forum

Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Down

Author Topic: Extended spreadsheet analysis: It's all over, folks!  (Read 12970 times)

ZionCurtain

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 404
  • I'm a llama!
Re:Extended spreadsheet analysis: It's all over, folks!
« Reply #30 on: July 01, 2003, 02:44:28 pm »

Your post is exactly what I am talking about. People making judgements based on opinion rather than fact. If people do that then it is on them not me.
Logged

Kelton Baker

  • Former FSP President
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
  • Freedom is Free, it's tyranny that costs us dearly
    • Kelton Baker
Re:Extended spreadsheet analysis: It's all over, folks!
« Reply #31 on: July 01, 2003, 03:39:08 pm »

The problem with any spreadsheet analysis is that it is impossible to give accurate weights to the various factors, and critical variables, such as those you quoted, are missing entirely.

Yes, a good point, thank you.
All I am asking is that we all consider what is there and make some of our own decisions based on quantifiable analysis. I reference the report, ( http://www.freestateproject.org/spreadsheetstellus.htm )  The results I pulled were based on various weightings, you are free to make your own, of course.

In the report, Paul (Zxcv) clearly states that, "Spreadsheets are not the be-all or end-all. There are a fair number of factors that are not easily quantifiable, and thus are not found in the spreadsheets. But those factors ought not be the only thing you base your decision on."

Quote
Some claim that the spreadsheet is objective, yet its results are based on extremely subjective choices on weights, in which several vital factors are missing and essentially given the weight of "0."


Yes, in fact, putting New Hampshire on the main spreadsheet and weighing population at zero and jobs high will put New Hampshire ahead of Wyoming quite frequently, depending on how you weigh each factor.

Quote
If the spreadsheet was intended to be a primarily a "fun exercise" then why is it being promoted as the tool of choice for state selection?

No, no, I said one part of his report on the spreadsheet, i.e. the various weightings that he was playing with.

The spreadsheet is a very valuable tool of choice to help you form a rational opinion, no matter how you decide to weigh each factor.  I'm sure each one of us is apt to fall in love with one state for their #1 slot, no matter what the spreadsheets may tell us or what, but the spreadsheet really comes in handy when trying to weigh each of those states you are a little less passionate about!

Quote
...in which several vital factors are missing and essentially given the weight of "0."
I'm not aware of any thing being excluded in the big, weighty, everything-but-the-kitchen-sink latest version, but if it is, I'm sure it can be added, but remember the primary purpose of this big spreadsheet was to try to make a measurement of all of these, "this state is the best because 1.2.3...." lists.

New Hampshire, Idaho,Wyoming,Alaska, South Dakota (not necessarily in any order here ) consistently get high rankings on the Freedom Culture,  Personal Freedom, and Economic Freedom measurements.  I hope that these factors are weighed heavily in the minds of our FSP voters and this points to only one of these states being chosen.  Like Zxcv states, "If you have a favorite state that, with a reasonable selection of weights, does poorly in the spreadsheets, you have a problem"

358
« Last Edit: July 01, 2003, 03:40:31 pm by exitus... »
Logged
Give me some men who are stout-hearted men Who will fight for the right they adore. Start me with ten, who are stout-hearted men And I'll soon give you ten thousand more...--O. Hammerstein

Zxcv

  • ****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 1229
Re:Extended spreadsheet analysis: It's all over, folks!
« Reply #32 on: July 04, 2003, 02:32:17 am »

Quote
The problem with any spreadsheet analysis is that it is impossible to give accurate weights to the various factors, and critical variables, such as those you quoted, are missing entirely.  Some claim that the spreadsheet is objective, yet its results are based on extremely subjective choices on weights, in which several vital factors are missing and essentially given the weight of "0."

Spreadsheets do have these sorts of problems. However, any other way you can devise to rank states, suffer from the same problems, and more besides (one example is the "list of bests" like the 101 Reasons things - you never get to hear about the bad side of things).

Just because spreadsheets have potential problems (some of which can be avoided with care), does not mean they still don't beat any other method of ranking states. I believe they do beat other methods.

As to factors being missed, I have added rows in the big sheet at the request of others, including requests from NH proponents. I do not first see if Wyoming does well in some factor before including it! If you want to add more rows, I'm pleased to do so. It is supposed to be everything but the kitchen sink, after all! Just don't ask me to do all your work for you. First get my spreadsheet (free for the asking), then find some variable I have not already covered that needs covering, then get the data, quantize it, discuss it with others on the list here to make sure you've done a fair job with it, then send it to me and I'll put it in. That's essentially what's been done for every row in that spreadsheet. Sound like work? Yes, it is. Welcome to the game...

BTW, if you run the spreadsheet with a high weight in jobs and none in population (as someone noted above), then you are essentially penalizing states like Wyoming for having a small population! This is because jobs are closely correlated with population. Does it make sense to penalize states for having low populations?

Thanks for defending my work while I was gone, exitus.
Logged

Kelton Baker

  • Former FSP President
  • FSP Participant
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 757
  • Freedom is Free, it's tyranny that costs us dearly
    • Kelton Baker
Re:Extended spreadsheet analysis: It's all over, folks!
« Reply #33 on: July 05, 2003, 12:04:31 am »

Any chance you might post some of the raw data with zero weightings from your everything-but-the-kitchen-sink monster spreadsheet, Zxcv?

This will give every state committee a chance to cherry-pick out some of the data that best represents their state for the state data ballot sheets-- lots of good stuff to go around for everyone!  --despite the fact that Wyoming looks really, really good, and despite the rumors otherwise, that spreadsheet represents a lot of hard, honest work by proponents from all sides of issues and states.

Of course, by Monday preferrable, Zxcv, because after Monday for the state ballot sheets,  It's all over, folks!  
418
« Last Edit: July 05, 2003, 12:05:45 am by exitus... »
Logged
Give me some men who are stout-hearted men Who will fight for the right they adore. Start me with ten, who are stout-hearted men And I'll soon give you ten thousand more...--O. Hammerstein
Pages: 1 2 [3]   Go Up