Frank Solensky wrote:
Brian E Carpenter wrote:
This is goodness. Can I ask that you publish the *method* before
you publish any results? I have seen various attempts to
tackle this in the past, and they have all given results that
are very hard to interpret and whose meaning depends very much
on the method used. I think we could react to the numbers more
rationally if we discussed the method first.
Would it make sense to spin this off as a separate list?
big-internet is probably still there.