Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: "Arny Krueger" <arnyk@xxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 26 Jun 2006 11:57:30 -0400
"paul packer" <packer@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message
news:449fec1e.46366031@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
On Mon, 26 Jun 2006 07:31:25 -0400, "Arny Krueger"
<arnyk@xxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
Please, for your own happiness, consider this.
Stop externalizing Jenn. I'm really quite a happy person.
Arnie, do you ever wonder why everyone says the same
thing to you, about you?
That is a false claim.
Since everyone does not say the same thing to me, about me Paul; your
question is irrelevant.
.
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: paul packer
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Shhhh! I'm Listening to Reason!
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- References:
- A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: j.
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Robert Morein
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: j.
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Harry Lavo
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Arny Krueger
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: jeffc
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Arny Krueger
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Jenn
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: Arny Krueger
- Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- From: paul packer
- A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- Prev by Date: Re: More snot from Slimeborg
- Next by Date: Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- Previous by thread: Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- Next by thread: Re: A reasonable argument against double blind tests?
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|