REAL starting point is $11,514,920.05 [Archive] - Ron Paul Forums / Liberty Forest

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 03:58 AM

$12,516,221.95 = $1,001,30.90 (and proves the real starting point of $$11,514,920.05)

You must have a blockage somewhere.
I dont think you quite understand what I am trying to tell you

Again...

At precisely midnight (my clock was synced to NIST time servers), the campaign was showing 11,551,156.57 collected.

To say that a significantly lesser amount was the starting point is claiming something that is physically impossible,
unless you are claiming the ticker has incorrect data or time travel technology is being utilised.

So, are you claiming the ticker was wrong?

Are you claiming time travel was used?

Please specify for there are no other explanations possible.

Thor

12-16-2007, 03:58 AM

Minor disagreements aside ($1K-2K difference, ie i think it was $11,551,156.57) the campaign had $11.55mil on the ticker at midnight, therefore simple logic would dictate that any lesser amount is simply impossible.

Right, but according to the math they are using in the widget, it shows a different number... so the widget was programmed wrong?

Ozwest

12-16-2007, 04:00 AM

$12,516,221.95 = $1,001,30.90 (and proves the real starting point of $11,514,920.05)
Don't be a killjoy!

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 04:01 AM

Right, but according to the math they are using in the widget, it shows a different number... so the widget was programmed wrong?

I would say that there is something wrong with the weekly total, I am not sure what time they are using for the starting point of that total, perhaps it is significantly earlier than midnight, or perhaps it is aligned with a different time zone, I do not know.

All I do know, is what I saw on the ticker at exactly midnight eastern time.

Unless the ticker was wrong at that time, there is no physically possible way your starting total is correct.

Thor

12-16-2007, 04:01 AM

You must have a blockage somewhere.
I dont think you quite understand what I am tryign to tell you

Again...

At precisely midnight (my clock was synced to NIST time servers), the campaign was showing 11,551,156.57 collected.

To say that a significantly lesser amount was the starting point is claiming something that is physically impossible,
unless you are claiming the ticker has incorrect data or time travel technology is being utilised.

So, are you claiming the ticker was wrong?

Are you claiming time travel was used?

Please specify for there are no other explanations possible.

You must not understand MATH.

I don't care what the widget showed on your NIST time stamp.

Subtract the quarter total from the weekly total and that number is the number that is the starting point. Pretty simple.

I am not saying the new widget was programmed correctly, but that is the total it is showing. Go ahead, do a little math, you will see. Then your blockage will be cleared....

Ozwest

12-16-2007, 04:02 AM

Sorry, I meant to quote the Evil Detector.

JMO

12-16-2007, 04:02 AM

I would say that there is something wrong with the weekly total, I am not sure what time they are using for the starting point of that total, perhaps it is significantly earlier than midnight, or perhaps it is aligned with a different time zone, I do not know.

All I do know, is what I saw on the ticker at exactly midnight eastern time.

Unless the ticker was wrong at that time, there is no physically possible way your starting total is correct.

I will agree to this statement. If the time was started earlier then that means the 24 hours will also end sooner.

JMO

12-16-2007, 04:03 AM

Thor

12-16-2007, 04:05 AM

Does the week start on Sundays?

Ususally. Most calendars do. Some use Monday, but most use Sunday.

LSUiLike

12-16-2007, 04:05 AM

It would be nice to have clarification on the starting number, but there is no need to be insulting... sheesh. Same team, guys.

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 04:05 AM

You must not understand MATH.

I don't care what the widget showed on your NIST time stamp.

Subtract the quarter total from the weekly total and that number is the number that is the starting point. Pretty simple.

I am not saying the new widget was programmed correctly, but that is the total it is showing. Go ahead, do a little math, you will see. Then your blockage will be cleared....

I know where you get your numbers from, you do not need to do any math to derive them.

You just have to have working eyeballs because the number is given to you.

I am telling you that unless the ticker total displayed at midnight is wrong,
there is no way the weekly total is correct (assuming of course it was started at midnight sunday).

Its either the ticker was wrong at midnight or the weekly total is wrong.

I think the weekly total is wrong.

DO
YOU
GET
IT
YET??

I hope so.

Thor

12-16-2007, 04:10 AM

I know where you get your numbers from, you do not need to do any math to derive them.

You just have to have working eyeballs because the number is given to you.

I am telling you that unless the ticker total displayed at midnight is wrong,
there is no way the weekly total is correct (assuming of course it was started at midnight sunday).

Its either the ticker was wrong at midnight or the weekly total is wrong.

I think the weekly total is wrong.

DO
YOU
GET
IT
YET??

I hope so.

I understand what you are saying. I saw the screenshots, however, officially, for this drive, it would appear they are using the $11,514,920.05 number, unless the widget programmer screwed up. Do you get that?

So for the widget purposes, $11,514,920.05 is the STARTING AMOUNT. Unless they reprogram the widget to change it.

Sorry to void your NIST time stamp screen shot.

TwiLeXia

12-16-2007, 04:15 AM

ok hell no the starting point was definitely 11.5 million i saw it with my own eyes

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 04:15 AM

I understand what you are saying. I saw the screenshots, however, officially, for this drive, it would appear they are using the $11,514,920.05 number, unless the widget programmer screwed up. Do you get that?

So for the widget purposes, $11,514,920.05 is the STARTING AMOUNT. Unless they reprogram the widget to change it.

Sorry to void your NIST time stamp screen shot.

Dude,

Do you not understand the implications of what you are saying??

If the ticker was incorrect at midnight, then it can be just as incorrect now.

Therefore any numbers derived from the ticker currently are suspect.

The "weekly" total may be very wrong, for it uses the ticker, but the ticker is wrong since it disagrees with the official starting point.

DO YOU GET THIS?
THINK!!

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 04:17 AM

ok hell no the starting point was definitely 11.5 million i saw it with my own eyes

2nd decimal point is the point of the argument here

11.55 versus 11.51

Thor

12-16-2007, 04:19 AM

Dude,

Do you not understand the implications of what you are saying??

If the ticker was incorrect at midnight, then it can be just as incorrect now.

Therefore any numbers derived from the ticker currently are suspect.

Therefore the "weekly" total may be very wrong, for it uses the ticker, but the ticker is wrong since it disagrees with the official starting point.

DO YOU GET THIS?
THINK!!

Of course I "get it" as I have stated a couple times now (no need to ask me the same question over and over).

I said the widget programmer screwed up. Either this widget, or the old widget. But according to the total for the quarter in THIS widget, we started @ $11,514,920.05.

Could this widget be wrong, yes. Could the other widget be wrong, yes. But I would think the official total is going to stem from the numbers used and shown in this widget. But I could be wrong. And they may correct this widget. But as of now...

Castrensis

12-16-2007, 04:23 AM

Upon closer inspection both rpgraphs & paulcash graphs show us not breaching the 1Million mark yet. Unfortunately it looks like the widget may be skewed.

Thor

12-16-2007, 04:24 AM

Upon closer inspection both rpgraphs & paulcash graphs show us not breaching the 1Million mark yet. Unfortunately it looks like the widget may be skewed.

Those are always delayed. They were on 11/5 too... by 100,000's of dollars. And if the widget is wrong, that is fine. But that is what the widget shows as the starting point currently.

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 04:25 AM

Of course I "get it" as I have stated a couple times now (no need to ask me the same question over and over).

I said the widget programmer screwed up. Either this widget, or the old widget. But according to the total for the quarter in THIS widget, we started @ $11,514,920.05.

Could this widget be wrong, yes. Could the other widget be wrong, yes. But I would think the official total is going to stem from the numbers used and shown in this widget. But I could be wrong. And they may correct this widget. But as of now...

I am more inclined to believe the higher starting total, which is my position.

Think about what it would mean for that number to be wrong:

It would mean the campaign accidentally over reported donations at midnight on the ticker (and yes I knew it was exactly midnight because I synced my computer clock with NIST and there are screenshots taken by others that show the same amount anyways), which is extremely unlikely if you think about what such a scenario would require.

Furthermore:

A) If indeed the campaign posted a higher than actual number at midnight (around 40K too high), then we should have seen a correction at some point (donations going "backwards"), however we did not see that. So assuming the number is still wrong, then the weekly total is also wrong for it relies on the ticker.

B) If the number was always correct, then the weekly total is wrong for it relies on the wrong starting point.

Conclusion:

Either way the weekly total as reported currently is wrong.

So I consolidate my earlier position that its one or the other.
I now believe the weekly total is wrong in any case.

Therefore I continue to believe 11,551,156.57 was the amount raised at midnight.

Of course we are assuming here that the week started at exactly midnight sunday ET and this may not necessarily be the case,
particularly when week's starting time was not communicated by HQ.

Castrensis

12-16-2007, 04:25 AM

Perhaps. Just an observation. Thanks for the info.

JMO

12-16-2007, 04:30 AM

On the widget at the campaign site you can use the red arrows to get the weekly total. I will agree with Thor that is the number the campaign will use whether its correct or not, just like on Nov 5th when they add in about 300k at the start from offline donations, they also used that in the final total.

Thor

12-16-2007, 04:30 AM

I am more inclined to believe the higher starting total, which is my position.

Think about what it would mean for that number to be wrong:

It would mean the campaign accidentally over reported donations at midnight on the ticker, which is extremely unlikely if you think about what such a scenario would require.

Furthermore:

A) If indeed the campaign posted a higher than actual number at midnight (around 40K too high), then we should have seen a correction at some point (donations going "backwards"), however we did not see that. So assuming the number is still wrong, then the weekly total is also wrong for it relies on the ticker.

B) If the number was always correct, then the weekly total is wrong for it relies on the wrong starting point.

Conclusion:

Either way the weekly total as reported currently is wrong.

So I consolidate my earlier position that its one or the other.
I now believe the weekly total is wrong in any case.

Therefore I continue to believe 11,551,156.57 was the amount raised at midnight.

Of course we are assuming here that for some reasons the week started at exactly midnight sunday ET, this may not necessarily be the case.

Or maybe the old widget had the mail in donations from the last couple of days (after the $500,000 fold in earlier in the week) folded in, and the number used for the new widget has not yet had them added. Who knows. And I do understand what you are saying. Over reporting is not good. But the starting point this widget is currently indicating is less than the time stamp screen shot you got.

And one would have to think they are going to use this total as the total they claim.

After the 11/5 drive people were saying $4.2, $4.3, $4.38 was rasied. I never got the "exact" amount. And probably will not here either.

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 04:35 AM

Or maybe the old widget had the mail in donations from the last couple of days (after the $500,000 fold in earlier in the week) folded in, and the number used for the new widget has not yet had them added. Who knows. And I do understand what you are saying. Over reporting is not good. But the starting point this widget is currently indicating is less than the time stamp screen shot you got.

And one would have to think they are going to use this total as the total they claim.

After the 11/5 drive people were saying $4.2, $4.3, $4.38 was rasied. I never got the "exact" amount. And probably will not here either.

I do not think your statement in any way invalidates my conclusion that the weekly total cannot possibly be correct (assuming that week starts sunday 12am ET), UNLESS the campaign OVER-REPORTED the amount leading up to midnight.

Given that OVER-REPORTING is unlikely (if you spend just a few seconds to think about how something like that can happen), it is safe to say that 11,551,156.57 is the correct starting point.

PS. The only thing that can possibly lead to over reporting I would think is the addition of post-dated (ie. dated 16th) mail-in donations to the ticker prior to the 16th.

In any case, we will probably get some stats from HQ when all is said and done.

Thor

12-16-2007, 04:43 AM

I do not think your statement in any way invalidates my conclusion that the weekly total cannot possibly be correct, UNLESS the campaign OVER-REPORTED the amount at precisely midnight. Given that OVER-REPORTING is EXTREMELY unlikely (if you spend just a few seconds to think about how something like that can happen), it is safe to say that 11,551,156.57 is the correct starting point.

I don't know how many time I need to repeat myself before you hear what I am saying. I have repeatedly said that the programmer who made the widget could have programmed in the wrong amount to kick it off. Not denying that. Your number might be right. Both numbers could be wrong.

But at the end of this discussion, the widget is showing a different starting point than your NIST time stamp screen shot. And the number in the widget (unless they correct it) is probably what will be used by the campaign, and thefore the "real" number that will be used, whether "real" or not...

So for this fund raising drive, the current widget shows the $11,514,920.05 as the starting dollar value. How that number got there versus the screen shot, no telling. But when anyone does the math on the widget, unless they change the base starting number, $11,514,920.05 is the starting dollar value.

I am going to bed. L8R.

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 04:45 AM

I don't know how many time I need to repeat myself before you hear what I am saying. I have repeatedly said that the programmer who made the widget could have programmed in the wrong amount to kick it off. Not denying that. Your number might be right. Both numbers could be wrong.

But at the end of this discussion, the widget is showing a different starting point than your NIST time stamp screen shot. And the number in the widget (unless they correct it) is probably what will be used by the campaign, and thefore the "real" number that will be used, whether "real" or not...

So for this fund raising drive, the current widget shows the $11,514,920.05 as the starting dollar value. How that number got there versus the screen shot, no telling. But when anyone does the math on the widget, unless they change the base starting number, $11,514,920.05 is the starting dollar value.

I am going to bed. L8R.

How do you know they will use the "real" number?

If the weekly total programmer got it wrong, we may see a correction ie. a subtraction from the weekly total, thus moving the weekly starting point.

I do not think we will see a donation subtraction from the main total.

Sweet dreams.

Thor

12-16-2007, 04:50 AM

If the weekly total programmer got it wrong, we may see a correction ie. a subtraction from the weekly total, thus moving the weekly starting point.

Just like I have said like 4 times now....

Do you not read my posts, or just feel the need to restate what I have said.

But if there is no correction to the widget, then the total for our purposes is in fact the $11.514 M

If they change it to match your screen shot, fine with me. I don't care.

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 04:52 AM

[QUOTE=TheEvilDetector;620177]
If the weekly total programmer got it wrong, we may see a correction ie. a subtraction from the weekly total, thus moving the weekly starting point.
[QUOTE]

Just like I have said like 4 times now....

Do you not read my posts, or just feel the need to restate what I have said.

But if there is no correction to the widget, then the total for our purposes is in fact the $11.514 M

If they change it to match your screen shot, fine with me. I don't care.

Even if there is no correction, that doesn't mean that 11.55 isn't correct. It may mean that the wrong number is left in the weekly. We do not even know when the week commenced. Why so much faith in the weekly data? Why does the weekly data define the total for you? It doesn't for me. It is a recent addition and is probably buggy for all we know.

fogger

12-16-2007, 05:00 AM

Thor

12-16-2007, 10:12 AM

bump

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 10:14 AM

Umm... as long as you're using the same reference, who cares what the starting number is?

at 12am, the widget said $1.00
at 1am, the widget said $4.00

the answer is $3.00 for the hour even if the original $1.00 was wrong.

Start with the widget, count with the widget.

That is the stupidest thing I have ever read.

Btw the starting amount was 11,551,156.57

THAT is the AMOUNT DISPLAYED at MIDNIGHT.

Thor

12-16-2007, 10:17 AM

That is the stupidest thing I have ever read.

Btw the starting amount was 11,551,156.57

THAT is the AMOUNT DISPLAYED at MIDNIGHT.

According to the WIDGET, which we are ALL watching, that is NOT the starting amount. $11,514,920.05 is the starting amount. And until the campaign tells us the total, I am using the widget's numbers.

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 10:18 AM

According to the WIDGET, which we are ALL watching, that is NOT the starting amount. $11,514,920.05 is the starting amount. And until the campaign tells us the total, I am using the widget's numbers.

It is impossible for the lower number to be correct, WHEN the higher number displayed at precisely midnight.

You are advocating stupidity by clinging to a number that physically makes no sense.

Thor

12-16-2007, 10:20 AM

It is impossible for the lower number to be correct, WHEN the higher number displayed at precisely midnight.

You are advocating stupidity by clinging to a number that physically makes no sense.

No sir, you are advocating stupidity when you know not the reason for the differences in the 2 numbers, yet completely refuse to accept the amount the current widget is telling us is correct.

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 10:21 AM

No sir, you are advocating stupidity when you know not the reason for the differences in the 2 numbers, yet completely refuse to accept the amount the current widget is telling us is correct.

Neither do you, and until that is explained to us in full, it is smarter to use the number that not only displayed at midnight but makes more sense.

You sir do not use your brain.

Your logic is as follows:

Let DONATIONS be the amount raised on Sunday.

Let X be midnight ticker display ie. 11,551,156.57

Let X-Y be your starting point where Y is roughly 40K

Let DONATIONS be the total raised on sunday

TICKER=X + DONATIONS.

The total raised according to you is Z = TICKER - (X - Y).

total = X + DONATIONS - X + Y = DONATIONS + Y.

Contradiction.

I very much doubt you will understand that.

fogger

12-16-2007, 10:23 AM

Thor

12-16-2007, 10:23 AM

Neither do you, and until that is explained to us in full, it is smarter to use the number that not only displayed at midnight but makes more sense.

You sir do not use your brain.

I am able to do math a deduct the total for the week (and therefore today) from the total for the quarter from widget.

mactaggart

12-16-2007, 10:24 AM

ED - Stop being such a know-it-all. Let's have fun with this.

homah

12-16-2007, 10:25 AM

Christ, this is supposed to be a day of celebration. Why are people arguing over a 36k and change discrepancy?

Thor

12-16-2007, 10:26 AM

That is the stupidest thing I have ever read.

Btw the starting amount was 11,551,156.57

THAT is the AMOUNT DISPLAYED at MIDNIGHT.

I don't think you understood what you read. Or read what I said. Because you said the same thing I said.

He has had a tendency to do that through this whole thread dialog here if you reveiw it. Just ignore him.

allyinoh

12-16-2007, 10:29 AM

I don't think you understood what you read. Or read what I said. Because you said the same thing I said.

I think with the arguing he might not have caught that but you're right, you and him said the same thing, you just used different X amounts.

I'm going to go with what the widget said right before midnight which would be the $11,551,56.57.

It only makes sense.

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 10:31 AM

I think with the arguing he might not have caught that but you're right, you and him said the same thing, you just used different X amounts.

I'm going to go with what the widget said right before midnight which would be the $11,551,56.57.

It only makes sense.

Precisely.

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 10:34 AM

I am able to do math a deduct the total for the week (and therefore today) from the total for the quarter from widget.

You are not working anything out, you are taking some new feature and using its number as gospel when the week start point has not even been divulged and ignoring what actually showed up at midnight. If that's your thing fine, but don't start pushing this as the correct number. Lower number makes no sense and until the campaign reveals the details behind the weekly calculation and explains the discrepancy the correct number to take is the NUMBER THAT CAME UP AT MIDNIGHT before this new weekly thing ever came into being.

werdd

12-16-2007, 10:36 AM

so as of 11:35 eastern, its been 2,139,362.06

Thor

12-16-2007, 10:38 AM

You are not working anything out, you are taking some new feature and using its number as gospel when the week start point has not even been divulged and ignoring what actually showed up at midnight. If that's your thing fine, but don't start pushing this as the correct number. Lower number makes no sense and until the campaign reveals the details behind the weekly calculation and explains the discrepancy the correct number to take is the NUMBER THAT CAME UP AT MIDNIGHT before this new weekly thing ever came into being.

As I have maybe 5 or 6 times ALREADY, that could be true, the higher number could be right, a programmer could have screwed up, but the widget the campaign has put forward shows a very clear starting point for 12/16. And it is in the title of this thread.

The difference could be offline donations they will add later. It might be chargebacks that came off, who knows.

But for all purposes, the widget is displaying a current running total. and the starting point is pretty clear for the total they currently show.

ProBlue33

12-16-2007, 10:39 AM

I have to go with this screen shot

http://urbanlife.net/ronpaul/meter.jpg

Here is my thinking on why.

At 11:59 they are still collecting money from THAT day, when the clock first turns over to 12:00 am they are still finishing collecting from THAT day too. By 12:01 it fresh money coming in.

Thats my opinion and am sticking to it.

Thor

12-16-2007, 10:41 AM

I have to go with this screen shot

Here is my thinking on why.

At 11:59 they are still collecting money from THAT day, when the clock first turns over to 12:00 am they are still finishing collecting from THAT day too. By 12:01 it fresh money coming in.

Thats my opinion and am sticking to it.

That is perfectly fine. And might be right. And when the widget is changed to use that number, then I will too... but the media and everyone else is going to use the running total from today in the widget as the total donations for the day, and that starting point is different than the screen shot. I don't know why, and don't care. Whatever they campaign states is probably correct. So perhaps the widget will be adjusted later.

ayort

12-16-2007, 10:43 AM

Thor

12-16-2007, 10:44 AM

The count as recorded by 5 people on this site at 11:59pm was $11,551,006.57. One min later at exactly 12:00 am the count jumped to $11,552,561.57.

These were agreed as the first two numbers of the day. Argue all you want but these numbers were confirmed by multiple people and WILL be used by most as the "start point".

Do the math in the widget to see what the campaign thinks is the starting point.

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 10:53 AM

The count as recorded by 5 people on this site at 11:59pm was $11,551,006.57. One min later at exactly 12:00 am the count jumped to $11,552,561.57.

These were agreed as the first two numbers of the day. Argue all you want but these numbers were confirmed by multiple people and WILL be used by most as the "start point".

There is a group of people who think 11,551,156.57 was the starting point.

One thing we all have in common is that it started at 11.55mil

TheEvilDetector

12-16-2007, 10:55 AM

That is perfectly fine. And might be right. And when the widget is changed to use that number, then I will too... but the media and everyone else is going to use the running total from today in the widget as the total donations for the day, and that starting point is different than the screen shot. I don't know why, and don't care. Whatever they campaign states is probably correct. So perhaps the widget will be adjusted later.

We have a difference of opinion, except your is backed by blind faith in the accuracy of a new feature and a range of assumptions, whereas ours is based on the actual displayed number at midnight.

The only way you can defend your position is to imply that:

a) the week count started at midnight sunday
b) the number displayed at midnight was wrong by around 40K
c) the week count feature being new is correctly setup.

Too many assumptions. I along with many other people are sticking with the number we saw at midnight.

For the purposes of this debate I don't care much for the "real" number the media chooses to use, I just want to know how much was ACTUALLY raised.