Viewing a single comment thread. View all comments

bruff9 t1_izfye8o wrote

I have an issue with 3. It very much depends on the data set and what is actually being portrayed/the context. Who is to say that 6 years is enough vs 2? We need to know a lot more in order to say xyz is bad because it’s 3 years.

4

Andoverian t1_iziw4pk wrote

Part of the point with 3 is that it assumes whoever made the chart has access to the data going back much further, meaning they knew the last few years are not representative of the longer trend. By only showing the last few years anyway, they're deliberately misleading people.

1