Kasz216 said:
Yes. That is exactly what I am saying. (not fake ones anyway) I thought that was pretty clear. If you'll note. Nobody does this. Specifically because people who might use graphs (Statisticians, journalists, consumer researchers) are taught to NOT do this. Because graphs not based on real data are inerently deceptive. Even when randomly thrown together just to show a concept. Hell, generally a statistics class will spend a whole day on why trunicated graphs are the devil. Let alone fully made up graphs. It's why whenever you see example graphs, even in textbooks they always seem to use something like population demographics from the census in 1946 to make there points. Or in very rare cases. Just label nothing. Example http://www.stata.com/capabilities/publication-quality-graphics/ This is just a statistical program trying to sell it's programs... it's not even trying to illustrate a point through a hypothetical example. Just show "hey look pretty graphs" but rather then just having someone spend 5 minutes typing gibberish and making things up they went out of their way to track down specific (mostly old) statistics that work for each kind of graph. |
That's why I'm asking, would you be fine if i just had no labels on the y-axis?
Again, I just find your objections poiness. Getting rid of the y axis labels wouldn't have done anything, and not having the various variables I had would have made my point unclear (different attributes contribute to WTP differently for customer).
If I had no y axis labels, and have multiple variables without labels and just said "for example, RAM might mean a lot to gamers, but almost nothing for non-gamers" it would be the same exact thing, with the same problems.
Do me a favor. Whip up a visual that conveys my point in a really simple and intuitive way, that is also not deceptive. Show me what you mean.
