Easily, problem i see is, whether they do or dom't if the judge is biased, he'll kick matt anyways, and if he isn't, he'll see through this shit instantly. Regardless of action taken, the end result is based solely on that one factor.
The 2nd tweet (and first point) of the debunk that Panda mentions seem to conflate “Fields that were in the table” with “fields that were matched on”.
I hope he’s just highlighted the wrong piece of text in the tweet and he hasn’t actually made that error.
Someone read the debunk for me so I don’t have to fly into a conniption fit this morning. Also, thank you in advance for your brave sacrifice.
TL:DR: Strawman character assassination and lies about used methodology that were proven as lies in about 5 seconds.
Cool, did they submit a rebuttal of the rebuttal?
Easily, problem i see is, whether they do or dom't if the judge is biased, he'll kick matt anyways, and if he isn't, he'll see through this shit instantly. Regardless of action taken, the end result is based solely on that one factor.
The 2nd tweet (and first point) of the debunk that Panda mentions seem to conflate “Fields that were in the table” with “fields that were matched on”. I hope he’s just highlighted the wrong piece of text in the tweet and he hasn’t actually made that error.