Win / TheDonald
Sign In
DEFAULT COMMUNITIES All General AskWin Funny Technology Animals Sports Gaming DIY Health Positive Privacy
Reason: None provided.

His second presentation he did went into more depth, but that was because people were trying to debunk his first one because they didn't understand his methods.

He made it a point of not being too technical, so anybody could easily digest it. Same thing with Matt Braynard. He specifically said he didn't want to get too detailed, because that would mean that people who aren't a mathematician would have to just trust him on face value. He wanted to make sure you didn't need any special education or qualifications, so anybody could go over and easily understand the point.

But, it want just the way he phrases it, it just seemed like he was nervous or something, and he jumped around to different data without clarifying the significance or how he came to the conclusion. I wasn't sure what specific data he was referring to when making some statements. It didn't help that I couldn't really see his data on the screen either, and he had to rush towards the end. I think he may have benefited from having a script written up where he could systematically go through the import points instead of just playing it by ear, ESPECIALLY with the amount of data he was presenting.

136 days ago
1 score
Reason: Original

His second presentation he did went into more depth, but that was because people were trying to debunk his first one because they didn't understand his methods.

He made it a point of not being too technical, so anybody could easily digest it. Same thing with Matt Braynard. He specifically said he didn't want to get too detailed, because that would mean that people who aren't a mathematician would have to just trust him on face value. He wanted to make sure you didn't need any special education or qualifications, so anybody could go over and easily understand the point.

But, it want just the way he phrases it, it just seemed like he was nervous or something, and he jumped around to different data without clarifying the significance or how he came to the conclusion. I wasn't sure what specific data he was referring to when making some statements. It didn't help that I couldn't really see his data on the screen either, and he had to rush towards the end.

136 days ago
1 score