# Don't Just Say "You're Wrong."  Tell What's \*RIGHT\*

**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-just-say-youre-wrong-tell-whats-right/756208
**Category:** About This Message Board
**Created:** [June 1, 2016, 4:15am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-just-say-youre-wrong-tell-whats-right/756208 "2016-06-01T04:15:38Z")
**Posts on this page:** 1
**Showing post:** 41

<div class="post-metadata">

### Author: ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)
#### Post date: [June 5, 2016, 7:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-just-say-youre-wrong-tell-whats-right/756208/41 "2016-06-05T19:26:25Z")

</div>

I googled my screen name and the word “um” for this message board. Here is the wall of shame or imprudence. I will bold the word um where needed.

> [@Kickstarter... in... Sp-a-a-a-a-a-ce](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/kickstarter-in-sp-a-a-a-a-a-ce/720269/3):
>
> …  
> Space cup. They have a working prototype in the International Space Station. Now they want to make them out of glass for zero g and 1 g encounters.
> 
> Q1) **Um** , why? I know 3-D laser printing is expensive, but c’mon.  
> My guess: because it’s cool for earthbound folk. Eh, ok.  
> Q2) That base looks a little narrow for 1 g environments.
> 
> The group also says, “With this project supported we’ll also have resources to invest in more like-minded living-and-working in space demonstrations. We’ll let you know what we mean soon…” That I can get behind. I’m pretty excited about working out nuts and bolts stuff.  
> [https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/spaceware/space-coffee-cup](https://www.kickstarter.com/projects/spaceware/space-coffee-cup)

That wasn’t directed against a poster, but rather at a kickstarter project. Probably ok (???)

> [@orgasmatron finally here](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/orgasmatron-finally-here/53624/3):
>
> Um, beg to differ. Has **not** “been invented”. **Is** “in the process of being researched” if he ever gets any funding. Notice the words “could offer”, “could allow”, “could begin”, and “could be”.  
> We now return you to your regularly scheduled debate on The Ethics of the Orgasmatron.

That seems ok to me, and way not ok to others. Or so I guess.

> [@Children abducted by gypsies?, Part II](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/children-abducted-by-gypsies-part-ii/503092/5):
>
> Um, wow.

Not helpful, but mainly due to vagueness.  
Ok, here’s where I apparently messed up due to cluelessness. I’ll present the exchange.

> [@Rorschach Test - Science or Pseudo-science?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rorschach-test-science-or-pseudo-science/114281/6):
>
> In my intro Psychology text, it said that for what it was designed for, this test had a correlation coefficient of 0.33, which means that if you wanted to find the answer to a yes-no question, you’d get it right about 66% of the time. Of course, flipping a coin gets you the right answer 50% of the time. You wouldn’t want to say that it’s absolutely useless, but if you were trying to determine something, you’d probably use more than just this test.
> 
> I think I should point out that, IMO, there are a few things in Psychology that the average person believes would be absolutely useless, but that have been shown through scientific studies not to be.

> [@Rorschach Test - Science or Pseudo-science?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rorschach-test-science-or-pseudo-science/114281/7):
>
> **Achernar** : Um, I believe you’re thinking about the [coefficient of determination (R2)](http://www2.chass.ncsu.edu/garson/pa765/correl.htm) which is the _square_ of the correlation coefficient.
> 
> In your example a correlation coefficient of .33 implies that one variable can explain about 11% of the variance.
> 
> .33^2=.11  
> Not sqrt(.33) (=.57)
> 
> FWIW, .33 might indicate a moderate effect, except that I’m not sure what variables are being studied here.

> [@Rorschach Test - Science or Pseudo-science?](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/rorschach-test-science-or-pseudo-science/114281/8):
>
> Okay, my apologies for getting that wrong. I don’t remember that certainly the measurement that was given in the book, but I’m fairly sure about the 66% figure.

## I certainly did not think Achernar was an idiot and am fully capable of making a similar mistake. It’s easy to do. I was trying to be conversational and even polite. ☹ I suppose I may have wanted a “Wake up” word of some sort, but there was absolutely nothing dumb about what I was responding to.

Proposed expression: “Just to clarify”. Then add softener at the end. I dunno.

---

_[View the full topic](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/dont-just-say-youre-wrong-tell-whats-right/756208)._