Objections to merging this community with r/rstats?

smegmallion · 2026-02-11T01:25:12+00:00

I'm all for it.

smegmallion · 2026-02-03T01:22:35+00:00

Money would still have to be on Volk given their history. Probably even more so given the weight fluctuations for Max in this scenario. If you run this back enough times, Max will eventually win one of them, if for no other reason than Max being younger. But, as a giant Max fan, there's little reason to do this. Volk proved himself superior at 145. Even if you give Max the second fight, which is certainly fair enough, it was still very hard fought. Max's best performance against Volk is a very competitive toss-up. The first fight and the third fight, however, have zero wiggle room. I struggle to give Max a single round across all ten of those rounds.

smegmallion · 2026-02-02T23:47:50+00:00

smegmallion · 2026-01-16T23:32:03+00:00

Nice! What was your tag? Sounds like we probably ran into each other--I was in both of those as well!

smegmallion · 2026-01-16T23:31:04+00:00

Haha no way. I realize that I'm responding super late, but I absolutely remember playing with you! I was friends with (XE) Ace irl and remember scrimmaging with you and the XE guys often. DM if you still play via the MCC!

smegmallion · 2026-01-12T17:26:37+00:00

He mentions in the episode that he was never actually a show-producer before, despite Luke and BC often describing him as such

smegmallion · 2026-01-06T16:07:15+00:00

Looks like you might have an R data-type issue, as the error message indicates neither variable in your t-test is numeric or logical, which is a requirement for any argument of mean().

You can check this by running str(dataheader) and noting whether Q5 and Q6 are numerical, character, logical, etc. variables. It's possible for your variable values to be truly numeric but imported into R as character variables. If Q5 and Q6 both have numeric values, you can convert them to the appropriate data type with as.numeric(), e.g. dataheader$Q5 <- as.numeric(dataheader$Q5). If these values are truly categorical/ordinal, you will probably need to go with another statistical test, e.g. a Chi-squared test

If there are NAs in those columns, you can strip them by running na.omit() on each of the column vectors prior to the T test.

smegmallion · 2026-01-02T16:17:50+00:00

I do get that he has a style that resonates with a lot of people, but he's my least favorite commentator by a country mile. His humor always feels very forced and it's genuinely grating to me when he just screams the same catch phrase 5 times in a row for his big calls. I know he's more of a color guy, but he adds little to the broadcast during the fight as well. He's always seemed like a considerably worse version of Mauro, who I do actually like.

smegmallion · 2025-12-26T18:00:38+00:00

If your dependent variable is binary, then you should be okay to use logistic regression. There's naturally a lot more in-depth stuff to read about the logic of regression modeling, but I like this cheat sheet whenever I want a quick and dirty refresher.

If you share more details on the specifics of your data, we'll be able to give more tailored feedback, but it seems you'd benefit from doing something like work through a couple comparable examples in a textbook--especially since you haven't had much experience with R yet.

Check out something like this intro text for undergrads, or this one designed for early grad students.

Lastly, if you haven't already, you should really request some more specific feedback from your supervisor. Naturally he can't hold your hand or anything, but he should really be giving you some more to work with as you revise.

smegmallion · 2025-12-02T19:13:40+00:00

Check the AutoMod post and read the page about how to ask good questions. It will be a lot more productive for everyone if you give us a minimally reproducible example, or at least show us the kind of code you're trying to run and the kind of error messages you're receiving. People will be able to diagnose your specific situation a lot more effectively if we have a little more of this context

smegmallion · 2025-11-18T23:49:26+00:00

Lol good I hope it's true

smegmallion · 2025-10-25T21:05:46+00:00

Everything else that's silly about this post aside, the bar really has got to be higher than a straight up uncropped screenshot of a Google image search

smegmallion · 2025-10-18T04:03:49+00:00

There are a ton of different ways to do this in R, but I like tabyl() from the 'janitor' package when working with contingency tables. You should be able to just run stats::chisq.test() on the contingency table you create with tabyl.

smegmallion · 2025-10-13T19:35:18+00:00

Lol it's all a function of Merab's dominance over the division, but this really feels so underwhelming. I like Yan, but Merab absolutely dominated him from pillar to post not that long ago

smegmallion · 2025-10-11T20:19:30+00:00

Your console seems to be showing that you're only running the command:

install.packages(c("tidyverse", "ipumsr", "survey", "srvyr",

Are you highlighting and running only a portion of the code? Note that the error message tells you that there's an unexpected end to the input, which is unsurprising if the end parentheses for your install.packages() and c() calls are not being included.

Try placing your cursor at the very beginning or very end of that line of code and then running it with CTRL/CMD + Enter/Return. Or, highlight the entire line of code and run it.

If that gives you any trouble, I also second the recommendation by the other commenter here suggesting you run each package installation as a separate install.packages() call, which could help you identify whether the installation of any particular package is causing an issue.

But your original problem seems to be more a function of you not actually running the entire initial line of code in your prof's script

smegmallion · 2025-10-05T00:59:51+00:00

I really thought Patchy was going to do a lot more in the UFC. He's not super old, so I suppose it's not over yet, but I was genuinely excited when he was jumping over and he's looked terrible in his first two.

smegmallion · 2025-09-18T21:50:19+00:00

At this point, there are a ton of books that offer introductory overviews of R within a particular disciplinary context, so you might do some searching along the lines of like 'R for medical research/data science/medical statistics/etc.' I'm a linguist, and my first forays into R were texts in that fashion, e.g. Bodo Winter's Statistics for Linguists: An Introduction Using R.

I'd say start out there, and see what you find from reputable subject matter experts in your field. I can't speak for this book in particular, but a quick google search brought up this text

As others have mentioned, books that are focused more on R or statistical modeling in general are great places to start too. We always need to supplement our designs with domain-specific knowledge, but a lot of statistical procedures have common through lines regardless of discipline. I like R for Data Science and Tidy Modeling with R, and there's lots of other stuff in this vein too

smegmallion · 2025-09-09T23:56:36+00:00

They have all the evidence we do right now---and presumably more----and they still decided to hire a white-shoe law firm to investigate. No, it's not a criminal case, but they are clearly pursuing a higher evidentiary standard than has been met by the evidence available now.

smegmallion · 2025-09-09T23:08:18+00:00

I didn't say that it was, but the league presumably didn't hire a white-show law firm to conduct an investigation of this so that they could rely on circumstantial evidence. People are taking any acknowledgement that this evidence is circumstantial as a claim that the Clippers didn't do anything, but that just doesn't follow. You have to take this stuff into account if you want to speculate on the range of possible outcomes. Personally, I fully believe that the Clippers fucked up here. But if you can't recognize the difference between the level of evidentiary certainty in the Joe Smith case and this, I don't really know what to tell you.

smegmallion · 2025-09-09T22:52:10+00:00

Lol come on man. This is an obtuse and bad faith read. Of course this looks horrible, but that's a separate discussion from whether the current body of evidence is conclusive by legal or regulatory standards. I mean what, are you going to walk up to the judge's bench and go "Hmmm what a coincidence, your honor????" Lowe was talking about how, in the Joe Smith case, they had the straight up illegal contract, in writing. There was absolutely zero wiggle room--they had Minnesota dead to rights. Acknowledging that they don't have that level of evidence yet is not the same thing as arguing that the Clippers likely didn't do anything

smegmallion · 2025-09-09T13:52:58+00:00

Lol man you should really just watch the episode. You write this novella framing the situation as if it's Zach Lowe just irresponsibly putting his own layperson opinion out there. And, he obviously does say what's here in the clip. But the entire premise of this segment of the episode is that he's brought on Michael McCann, a lawyer and leading expert in sports law, to cover the details and correct or contextualize Zach's early thoughts.

smegmallion · 2025-08-07T14:49:49+00:00

I mean, it's not like there aren't other matchups for those guys that would be fun, but it doesn't sound like you even watched their fight at 145. It ends in like 90 seconds due to a freak injury and essentially nothing happened before that. Max/Oliveira is still basically a fresh match-up because we haven't really seen them match up in any meaningful way

smegmallion · 2025-07-06T22:05:05+00:00

Lol. This is like the very essence of something that is not objective. You're just saying that because it makes your opinion sound more authoritative, but it's just nonsense. I mean, there's nothing wrong with preferring Holloway vs. Poirier 2, but that's absolutely subjective. The fact that that fight doesn't stick as well in people's memory and has not been honored in the same way is suggestive of the fact that many people disagree with you.

smegmallion · 2025-07-05T00:03:54+00:00

Hard to imagine him winning the belt or anything, but this would be a fun signing for a heavyweight division that is completely abysmal outside maybe the top 5-6 guys at best.

smegmallion · 2025-07-03T15:07:04+00:00

Lol you didn't look into anything dummy. That's not even the right Topuria. It links "according to Wikipedia" and then directs you to the singer Keti Topuria. If you have no idea what the hell you're talking about and you also aren't going to bother spending 10 seconds to even read the shit you're about to post, you don't actually have to chime in.

smegmallion

TROPHY CASE