Sorry, one word is clearly unclear and I should've expanded, as it turns out I misunderstood the context of Christian's comment.
I think it's farcical to establish the opinion of the entire community based on a small RFC. I think Fabrice's proposal to gather the opinion of a much larger audience is great and I look forward to supporting it. Most importantly, I think in the future we should lead with such an approach, and I call on Analytics folks to encourage / support that.
p.s. Sorry for the off-topic message, Dan. On-topic, I agree with Erik Z's approach of A/B testing which viewer is default, it seems like good science.
On Wed, Jul 16, 2014 at 2:03 PM, Dan Garry dgarry@wikimedia.org wrote:
The issue of the RfC is way outside the scope of this list. Please, let's keep things focussed.
Dan
On Wednesday, 16 July 2014, Dan Andreescu dandreescu@wikimedia.org wrote:
What a farce that we have a vote and then ignore clear outcomes as
1:4, and even 1:13 if we do not like them :-(
Agreed
-- Dan Garry Associate Product Manager for Platform and Mobile Apps Wikimedia Foundation
Analytics mailing list Analytics@lists.wikimedia.org https://lists.wikimedia.org/mailman/listinfo/analytics