From: angel0000000001000000000000@mail.ee   
      
   You!   
      
      
   Tim Rentsch kirjutas Laupäev, 31. detsember 2022 kl 16:20:09 UTC+2:   
   > Ben Bacarisse  writes:    
   >    
   > > Tim Rentsch  writes:    
   > >    
   > >> Ben Bacarisse  writes:    
   > >>    
   > >> [...]    
   > >>    
   > >>> I found this problem interesting but only later in the discussion as    
   > >>> I have been using this metric for some time. What got interesting    
   > >>> (to me) was that there is another sound interpretation of the    
   > >>> average as suggested by Tim, [...]    
   > >>    
   > >> It wasn't my idea. I got it from a posting by Mike Terry on    
   > >> December 21. I hadn't seen that formulation of arithmetic mean    
   > >> before and I was amazed that it worked. So I can't really take    
   > >> any credit for the suggestion.    
   > >>    
   > >>> ironically prompted but a general definition of what might    
   > >>> constitute an average that I had posted and failed to follow    
   > >>> through on.    
   > >>    
   > >> I remember your posting as coming after the one by Mike Terry,    
   > >> and so I thought your comments were derived from his. Sorry if    
   > >> my conclusions there were off the mark.    
   > >    
   > > You are right in that MT posted the same general formulation 9 hours    
   > > before I did (though I'd not seen that). My confusion came from your    
   > > explanation, to me, of "conventional average":    
   > >    
   > > "Sorry, I meant to refer to your formulation of average"    
   > >    
   > > followed by the formula I gave rather than then entirely equivalent    
   > > one given by MT.   
   > Ahh, that makes sense. My comment muddied the waters; I was    
   > thinking of your formula and the MT formula as the same, and    
   > rather inadvertently said "your formulation" (after all, I was    
   > responding to and had quoted your formula) without mentioning    
   > that I had also read MT's post before responding.   
   > > Anyway, the credit I'm giving is for your considering this a    
   > > reasonable thing to try calculate for arc lengths, rather than   
   > > [...]    
   >    
   > Thank you for that. And in that respect I think I can modestly    
   > say that some credit is deserved (especially considering the    
   > amount of effort it took to code something up that calculated    
   > this measure).   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)