data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/277f8/277f86e59dcd9b7e049850fa450a6ba38bdde3db" alt="This is a question"
Are you a QOTWer? Do you want to start a thread that isn't a direct answer to the current QOTW? Then this place, gentle poster, is your friend.
( , Sun 1 Apr 2001, 1:00)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/277f8/277f86e59dcd9b7e049850fa450a6ba38bdde3db" alt="This is a QotW comment"
You are attaching an emotional meaning to something in which emotion has no relevance.
That number was stastically no less likely to wrong dial you than any other number. Do you think there's some deeper meaning to every wrong number you get? because any of them are equally as likely as that one.
( , Mon 9 Dec 2013, 14:45, 2 replies, latest was 11 years ago)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/277f8/277f86e59dcd9b7e049850fa450a6ba38bdde3db" alt="This is a QotW comment"
Weird, eh?
( , Mon 9 Dec 2013, 14:47, Reply)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/277f8/277f86e59dcd9b7e049850fa450a6ba38bdde3db" alt="This is a QotW comment"
On which note, Derek Acorah has been charged after crashing his car at the weekend. I really, really, hope that, as well as the drink driving, they charge him for "not seeing it coming"
( , Mon 9 Dec 2013, 14:51, Reply)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/277f8/277f86e59dcd9b7e049850fa450a6ba38bdde3db" alt="This is a QotW comment"
They fed him a name 'Creed Kafer' which was an anagram of Derek Faker. Not only did he come up with the name but he hilariously said it when he was "possessed" and yelled it out. CREEEEEEEEEEEED KAAAAAFERRRRRRR!
ilol'd
( , Mon 9 Dec 2013, 14:54, Reply)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/277f8/277f86e59dcd9b7e049850fa450a6ba38bdde3db" alt="This is a QotW comment"
has to be statistically smaller than all the other buildings in the world.
never mind the fact that nobody is in a non-boarding school at 5am...
( , Mon 9 Dec 2013, 15:01, Reply)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/277f8/277f86e59dcd9b7e049850fa450a6ba38bdde3db" alt="This is a QotW comment"
( , Mon 9 Dec 2013, 15:04, Reply)
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/277f8/277f86e59dcd9b7e049850fa450a6ba38bdde3db" alt="This is a QotW comment"
OK, I'm not being patronising here, I swear, because this part of probability tends to confuse a lot of people, but the subset of phone numbers or buildings you do know (very small) vs the subset of phone numbers of buildings you don't (very large) has no bearing at all on those phone numbers calling you. It's just statistically irrelevant, assuming you assume that the call isn't meant for you. It simply comes down to the number, and each number has an equal chance of calling you. Same as each lottery ball has an equal chance of being drawn.
If the call WAS for you, of course, then the opposite of what you think is actually true, it's much more likely to come from a number of a building you do know, but that's not a straight probability question.
( , Mon 9 Dec 2013, 15:11, Reply)
« Go Back | See The Full Thread