I infer that James was one of those writers, but she didn’t say that outright.
That’s the basis for your 2 million number, the number which largely determines the result, some guesswork about something your source never says and probably would have said if it was actually the case? Then the entire analysis is bunk—garbage in, garbage out. And you should especially not infer that low number of total pageviews when everything else disagrees with it.
You can send her an email and ask her yourself. She came up with the 2 million number for this particular story; she said she came up with numbers for stories based on screenshots. It isn’t too hard to connect the dots.
Give me a break—why should I have to do that when a plain reading suggests otherwise and you’re the one trying to make these sweeping generalizations based on your own guesswork?
That’s the basis for your 2 million number, the number which largely determines the result, some guesswork about something your source never says and probably would have said if it was actually the case? Then the entire analysis is bunk—garbage in, garbage out. And you should especially not infer that low number of total pageviews when everything else disagrees with it.
You can send her an email and ask her yourself. She came up with the 2 million number for this particular story; she said she came up with numbers for stories based on screenshots. It isn’t too hard to connect the dots.
Give me a break—why should I have to do that when a plain reading suggests otherwise and you’re the one trying to make these sweeping generalizations based on your own guesswork?