But how many users do you expect sit on the same IP? And thus, what is the prior probability that basically the only spammer in weeks (there was only one another) would happen to have the same IP as one of the few dozen (or less) of users active enough to notice a day’s IP block? This explanation sounds like a rationalization of a hypothesis privileged because of availability.
I didn’t know the background spamming rate but it does seem a little unlikely doesn’t it? A chance reuse of the same IP address does seem improbable but a better explanation doesn’t spring to mind at the moment.
But how many users do you expect sit on the same IP? And thus, what is the prior probability that basically the only spammer in weeks (there was only one another) would happen to have the same IP as one of the few dozen (or less) of users active enough to notice a day’s IP block? This explanation sounds like a rationalization of a hypothesis privileged because of availability.
I didn’t know the background spamming rate but it does seem a little unlikely doesn’t it? A chance reuse of the same IP address does seem improbable but a better explanation doesn’t spring to mind at the moment.
Not a reason to privilege a known-false hypothesis. It’s how a lot of superstition actually survives: “But do you have a better explanation? No?”.