There is a certain amount of reader overlap when blogs post material on similar or related topics. Some readers of this blog may well have seen a posting on the blog run by bad4shidduchim in answer to where the "10%" number came from. While there are some good points made in the posting, there are also some serious flaws in the letter of Mr. Tropper to bad4shidduchim, flaws in the reasoning and flaws in the supporting statistics used.
I wish I could sit down right now and discuss the posting but I can't. I do want to point out, however, that I definitely will. This is what rational discussion is supposed to be about: you say something then I say something. It is hoped that those who are "listening" to both sides of the conversation will come out the better for it.
2 comments:
Are you saying the Tropper posting isn't true? Sure hope so because what he says scares me. And I sure don't like some of the things he suggests in the Bais Yaakov article.
nowaynever,
If you read my posting on the letter I deal with what I see as flaws. It is not whether the letter as a whole is true or false but rather whether all the data is correct or correctly interpreted.
As to the article, subject of an upcoming post, Mr. Tropper says he doesn't agree with everything in the article either, a funny statement for the co-author of that article to be making.
Post a Comment