Quote from: Sapereaude on March 25, 2015, 01:29:10 AM

Quote from: fluffypony on March 25, 2015, 01:06:28 AM

Quote from: Sapereaude on March 25, 2015, 12:56:05 AM

Quote from: Sapereaude on March 25, 2015, 12:54:09 AM

3 subjects lol, wow to even get a basic t-test of this proof you would need at least 30 ppl for a weak application of statistical validity to apply.

Also fine go ahead I will pay up, it will just prove your stop-gap is so shit you have to pay people to vote for it.

A "weak"?

Also, are we talking about face validity or just conclusion validity? Part of me wonders if you're not alluding to some sort of convergent validity that would be expected from this.

But, really, I was just talking about a relatively simple acid test, best-of-3 to ensure there's no accidental skew. For $500.

Would you like to suggest someone that is known and unbiased that can hold our funds in escrow and facilitate this? I suggest we offer them 50% of the pot for the effort they'll need to expend, and the remaining 50% goes to the winning cryptocurrency's donation address.

Clearly you need to brush up on statistics and the importance of sample size.

But I would be happy for a poll on Bitcointalk to decided this, limited to users with at least 50 posts. If the poll reaches 800 users and the result is 60% in your favor I will be happy to say you have won the the bet.

Poll Question - Is a working GUI wallet better than Moneros current Stop-gap solution?

A)Yes
B)No

As for holding the funds in escrow I am happy with those terms and any of the bigwigs in the darkcoin thread works for me.

But the question leaves out the reasoning. It's not black and white

A, yes, because more is better
But if yes is at the expense of the actual underlying engine behind the skin, then of course not, and it ignores the fact that there are several implementations of Monero GUIs.