ohmylanta1003 said:
It's not accurate and don't tell me how percentages work. You were the one that fucked up in the first place. If you had any inate sense of how numbers worked, you would have realized when you were typing ".04%" that the number was obviously way too low. But in two separate posts, you typed ".04%", which means that you obviously don't have a great understanding of what a high percentage is and what a low percentage is. So why should I accept your OPINION that 4% of the human population is a small percentage? In other scenarios, I totally see what you are saying. Getting a 4% on a test is certainly a low percentage. But we are talking about 4% of the ENTIRE HUMAN POPULATION! And I don't even know why were just talking about 4%. We all know that way more than 4% of people have played a console game recently, because there are tons of people that don't own consoles that still play them. But if we are talking about 4% of the human population vs. .04% of the human population, that's the difference between gaming being relevent to every person in the entire United States and gaming being relevent to every person in only the city of Chicago. That's a huge fucking difference. FYI, just because something isn't relevent to the majority of human beings doesn't mean it isn't relevent. You would be hard pressed to find something that's relevent to more than 50% of the world. Besides stuff like going to the bathroom and eating.
|
I know it's not accurate. I immediately conceded to the honest mistake of putting the decimal in the wrong place, so I'm not sure why you keep harping on it.
If you think 4% on a test score is a low percentage, then you also think 4% of the human population is a low percentage. The percentage is the exact same. It doesn't become a smaller or larger percentage based on what you are applying it to. You can feel differently about it if you'd like, but the percentage is identical in both scenerios.
Are there people that play console games but don't own a console. Yes. Are there console gamers that own multiple consoles. Yes. Do either of those alter the percentage of console gamers significantly? Probably not.
I never said gaming wasn't relevant. I said it wasn't relevant to most humans. It's not. That was the original point and we clearly agree on it. So why are you trying to force this straw man argument on me? Why are you dwelling on the difference between .04% and 4% when it makes zero difference to the original point being made?
I have no idea why you are trying to pin an argument to 4% being a large percentage. It's not. It never will be. Is it larger than .04%? Of course. Is 4% of the human population a lot of people? Yes. Is it a large percentage? No. Can you dismiss that as an opinion? Sure. Is this discussion between us over? Yes.
