View Single Post
Old 09-10-2010, 05:29 AM   #38
murraypaul
Interested Bystander
murraypaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.murraypaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.murraypaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.murraypaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.murraypaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.murraypaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.murraypaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.murraypaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.murraypaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.murraypaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.murraypaul ought to be getting tired of karma fortunes by now.
 
Posts: 3,726
Karma: 19728152
Join Date: Jun 2008
Device: Note 4, Kobo One
Quote:
Originally Posted by TGS View Post
Your point was that the gender break down of Booker winners contained no evidence of gender bias. I re-framed your claim to point out that it implied that about two thirds of winners were men. Does that not prove, just as a statistical matter, that the Booker is biased in favour of men?
No, not unless the proportion of books being written that are worthy of winning are assumed to be 50:50 by men and women.
An unbiased process is one that treats everyone purely on merit. One that attempts to 'balance out' the results in an artificial way is biased.
murraypaul is offline   Reply With Quote