Loose Change

[GTripp0012]

Originally Posted by Schneed10

But see, it's not about a pissing match and simply trying to win an argument. I've got better things to do. I'm honestly turned off by the fact that he's writing a book about it. To me, it's no better than the scam artists from Nigeria who write countless spam email messages to 75 year old women telling them that they've been granted a royal inheritance.

I'll add some of the Schneed charm here and there throughout the site, but I'm sure you'll recognize that this level of charm was very different. I see jsarno as a scam artist looking to write, publish, and sell a book based on a mathematical fallacy. When it comes down to it, it's morally wrong.

Being right or wrong isn't even priority one here for me. Doing right or wrong is. And if this thread helped to educate even one person on The Gambler's Fallacy, then good.

Like Smootsmack said, it takes a lot of work to publish a book when you have internal questions about the reception of your argument. Additionally, as you would probably say yourself, it's the consumers own damn fault for buying such a book when the Gambler's Fallacy is relatively common knowledge.

I'd say the (im)probability that jsarno is a scam artist who tried to post his knowingly false ideas on a public fourm (after 6,500 posts) free of charge before actually making the decision to publish borders on "insane", but then again I'm not the logical guru in this neck of the woods.

Maybe you did convince one person of the Gambler's Fallacy today, but if that person doesn't post under the alias "jsarno", then I doubt you were successful.

Anyway, I think it's high time to call a spade a spade. IMO, when jsarno tried to pull the "it's not always about stats" argument, he was probably trying to pull the quiet cop out, because we all know it IS about stats when it comes to Roulette. IMO, the competence of this thread died right there, and since then, it's really been an unwarranted pissing match.