The Raiders being absolute garbage for a quarter century made this decision for me.

Could you give us a hint? Is it methodological, editorial bias, specific examples, particular issues, color scheme, layout choice?

Ohhhhh

Okay I read it was the problem on methodology? The PAC relationship wasn't a good indication of moderate vs extreme? Do you think they purposefully put the "somewhat ideological" (received money from moderate and non-moderate pac) into ideological to gin the numbers? Or the overall centrist message?

@chezvoila.com‬ need this too plz

Hey I typed the url plus reddit into my google and it didn't give me anything I didn't know there was an entire account dedicated to it! Thank youuuuuuuuuuuu

I don't have a subscription to the NYT and Alberto's post makes no specific claims whatsoever... it's not really great discourse.

"ordinary" he says

Love it! I think there's a real verdant field for real work doing real analytics views using physics metaphors.

Order the special.

I feel like you're one glass of absinthe away from being the H R Geiger of dataviz.

We can only hope so.

Most people don't know that Avicenna only spoke English when enacting metaphors from the Greek pantheon.

I feel like the relentless drumbeat of superficial color accessibility has lead to just terrible color decisions.

I appreciate that you remind us of the seagull attack at just the right rate so it doesn't seem like you're milking it for laughs and that we can earnestly relive it and totally have sympathy and not at all amusement at your being maimed in such an absurd way.

Growing up in the central valley, we would say "yo-se-MITE" as a fun way of referring to Yosemite and everyone I knew thought it was cute and fine. Just own it and be cooler than those pronunciation police.

But that doesn't work so well when your color names include "ruby dust" or "seasoned green apple" in your available names...

Gee, I wonder if this rule was coined during GB1's term...