[Unofficial wiki] - maintained by boistordu - referencing of the case open/closed/status unknown for flash sale of december


There’s no point man, @bfuentes could just as well claim the tower of Pisa stands upright as long as you yourself lean over in the same angle, and he’d be right in his frame of reference…
In that sense I agree with him: data is data. It’s a matter of perspective. The problem is few people seem to be willing to acknowledge and take that into account and nuance said data with regard to the bigger picture.
Though that’s admittedly difficult to do, since there is no conclusive data about the big picture. Which is why I also agree with you in that this is a distorted view of overall satisfaction etc.

In the end this is what it is: an overview of the situation people on the forums here are in, no more, no less.


then it’s because you don’t read nor what I wrote, nor what Konta wrote nor didn’t you ask support :slight_smile:
anyway I will write a longer explanation alter


and as always @ownerer I know you are never agreeing with me and if you do, then I need to deploy a lot of personal stories like my credit card’s explanation, to be trustworthy by you, but for this time I ask you to let me the benefice of the doubt, would you ? thank you in advance


Lol, you need to read what I wrote as well man, I’m not disagreeing with you nor am I challenging the validity of the data you collected. I’m basically saying the same thing @bfuentes was: interpretations of data can be skewed, the data itself is not. Depending on what kind of analysis/conclusion people are looking for this data can be seen as either very comprehensive or more than likely very incomplete. That’s all.


I know I know you don’t disagree completely … Don’t worry I noticed that. You try to be as objective as you can. But I can tell you there are some certainty on what you can base some assumptions, is that more correct? So when I will finish some other things you will see what can and can not be assume from a statistician point of view. That’s all I’m saying so be patient a little bit and don’t disregard any assumption that we could take from these data just yet


OK, what happened: @adt asked a question. I answered, gave an example for better understanding.
bfuentes did not understand that this was an answer and fast as always concluded that this was data distortion.
That is all, no reason to default_argue


don’t worry don’t worry I’m not mad :slight_smile: I still need to answer you by the way but will do later


Well, in general: shooting faster than one’s shadow doesn’t always aim well. :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:


As the people at Eve refuse to provide any data, we can only go with the data available less to us. The idea that all the people that got V’s mysteriously never check out this site after they receive their V is so ludicrous it is laughable. If the data acquired from analysis of posts skews the reality then why is no data showing this presented. Saying 65% of orders are fulfilled is not data. We do not know if it is accurate and do not know if 65% means 65, 250 or 1000. No one can complain about the conclusions reached from the data if there is no other data available to analyze. The tower of pisa analogy is faulty as to be foolish. There are other data points to consider for example all the other buildings in Pisa that do not lean. Seems a few people here have no idea how science and data analysis work. If people think the data is bad, show better data.


Lol, herptiderp, which is why I added:

frame of reference being only considering the tower itself, i.e.: yes of course there are other buildings that do not lean, that’s my point. I’m agreeing with you dumbass :joy::joy:


Science does not need to prove that something is laughable.
Science just shows (at least tries to) grasp reality by observed available facts, not by one’s personal opinion.
Science directed/ colored by opinion stays opinion.
Opinions don’t prove things, an opinion needs to be underlined by as strong words as possible.
Aaaaaand it may show some murky character information :stuck_out_tongue_winking_eye:


Sure, the data in the spreadsheet is self-selected, self-reported. I personally wouldn’t claim it to be representative of anything other than the known knowns gleamed from this forum. But honestly, it’s more concrete (and more verifiable) than the information provided by the eve team. And it’s troubling.

It seems to me that Eve never changed how it operated once it got out of the crowdfunding stages. Heck, their failure to predict a Chinese New Year twice in a row was a sign. But at the moment they took orders during the flash sale, they had customers. They should not have taken on new customers when their crowdfunders still hadn’t gotten their (beta) product and accessories as proof their manufacturing and assembly lines were ready for a full launch. They should have been better prepared but their excitement and hubris got the best of them (and us).

Business schools could be teaching Eve as a case study for years on what not to do. But lets hope they eventually right their ship and emerge stronger. I just don’t have the strength to endure the wait and the drama and the disappointment much longer.


Science does not prove anything. Science does not work on opinion. Science looks at data and interprets it. Those of you whining about this are like creationists. Your mind is made up and you are looking for data to support your opinion. When you can find no data to support it you make claims that if we just looked elsewhere or looked at more data your conclusions will be validated, but as of yet there is no data to override the stunning conclusions gleaned from the available data.
Why won’t Eve release data showing how many have been shipped? How many are defective? How many have requested replacements? How many received replacements?
To those saying happy owners will never come here that is laughable. We have some already This is not a support or bitch website. It is supposed to be for the community of owners. Eve sold this whole idea as a community thing where people will come here to support other owners. Are you claiming that all V owners are heartless pricks that don’t want to support each other. You guys can’t have it both ways.


What kind of science are you mentioning here, I never heard this before.

And where is the logic of introducing creationist?
Is this a scientific argument or is it just throwing names? Scolding has something to do with lack of arguments isn’t?

Tell us where this applies, I’m lost, really


Science is not about proof it is about probability. I suggest reading a bit about what science. Here is a start.

Where it applies is the people saying the data presented on this thread is a misrepresentation of reality and some hidden facts are causing a faulty conclusion.


There was no scolding. I was just pointing out people are using the same lack of logic that creationists use. It was an attempt to make clear the lack of logic. You cannot claim conclusions from data are invalid just because you think there is other data that would support you. You need to dispute the conclusions based upon the available data, not data you think or hope exists.


Have a cookie for being correct! :cookie:

Something that is sorely lacking in this thread.


Nice cherry picking and quoting out of context. How about we look at the full quote.

If you or Eve want to dispute the data and conclusions, then provide additional data. Everyone would love to see data that shows the current conclusions are incorrect. Science and data analysis is always tentative, waiting new data to change conclusions. It would calm a lot of fears. Withholding data that counters this narrative seems kind of silly and incompetent.


OK, no scolding, accepted. Please add a no scolding sign next time :joy:

As far as "science doesn’t prove anything " hypothesis: The arguments are coming from a philosopher belonging to a certain philosophic school, there are other philosophic schools too with very convincing arguments.

Anyhow, without oxygen, I will die, even if the science supporting this fact cannot prove it. :sunglasses:


Where are those disputing the data from @boistordu?
I may have missed it, so please help.
There was some discussion on the width covered by those data, but nothing more.
Our good friend @Wickedly quoted @kendg8r in his own special way, he has a point.

That seems to be a correct way to see/ and use it.