RE: Proof that content is more important than style

[JB Foster <jb -dot- foster -at- shaw -dot- ca>]

If Keith is using statistics as part of a scientific deduction on this
topic - then the 'Scientific Method' requires others to re-reproduce his
results, before they become valid.

My 'Goggle Fact/Logic Validation' porthole gave the following results
(subtracting out 'King County'):

Content is King: 1,960,000

Style is King: 2,280,000

Elvis is King: 435,000

Which does validate Keith's findings!

Now, I needed a way to prove that his method was also valid. I decided on
using 'logic' based on the Aristotle's (old scientific) principal of:

'if a dog moves' + 'an animal moves' = 'a dog is an animal.'

Therefore, if: 'content is king' and 'style is king', then 'style' +
'content'  = 'not Elvis' (i.e. false)  ... Goggle did agree! (Elvis is style
and content: 51,500). This was very encouraging, since it validates his
methods!

Finally (and non-the-less) I conducted another statistical validation, to
check for errors in the logic. Since I personally know (experimented with?)
that maintaining both 'writing content' and 'writing style' while drunk, is
impossible. I did a statistical search on Goggle, both of which came up
false:

drunk while maintaining writing style 9,770

drunk while maintaining writing content 9,700

To validate my hypothesis, I had to make sure that writing can result in
drunkenness:

writing causes drinking 183,000 (which I have observed many times, as true)

... and Goggle says 'yes':

So therefore, Keith's findings are indeed valid and reproducible! ... and
'STYLE is KING.'

Bruce ;-)

(p.s. always wondered when those science-courses would be useful).



Keith Cronin analyzed:

> Sorry folks, but all you "content is king" advocates are wrong.
> That means you too, Andrew. When in doubt, Google it out.
>
> ? Googling on "king" and "content" yields 2,160,000 hits.
>
> BUT ...
>
> ? Googling on "king" and "style" yields 2,430,000 hits.
>
> So STYLE is king. The people have spoken.
>
> And to those who suggest that my methods are neither scientific
> nor thorough, I offer you further proof:
>
> ? Googling on "king" and "Elvis" only yields 668,000 hits.
>
> Now THAT's a shocker. It's probably best that he's not around to
> hear this. It would be like stepping on his blue suede shoes...




^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Order RoboHelp X3 in November and receive $100 mail in rebate, FREE WebHelp
Merge Module and the new RoboPDF - add powerful PDF output functionality
to RoboHelp X3. Order online today at http://www.ehelp.com/techwr-l

Check out SnagIt - The Screen Capture Standard!
Download a free 30-day trial from http://www.techsmith.com/rdr/txt/twr
Find out what all the other tech writers, including Dan, already know!

---
You are currently subscribed to techwr-l as:
archive -at- raycomm -dot- com
To unsubscribe send a blank email to leave-techwr-l-obscured -at- lists -dot- raycomm -dot- com
Send administrative questions to ejray -at- raycomm -dot- com -dot-  Visit
http://www.raycomm.com/techwhirl/ for more resources and info.