I'm curious now that I've made several edits and additions to the main article over the last few weeks whether people think the article "works." Is it useful? Is the information presented in as clear a fashion as possible? Is it accessable -- that is, does it avoid being too complicated and avoid only appealling to statistics nerds like myself? I've arrived at the idea of referring readers to the article thread (specifically, post #28) for a more in-depth discussion of the data. Does that seem like a good idea? For those who've brought up issues concerning the statistical methods used, have your concerns been addressed in either the article or post #28? And finally, does the article in its present form meet the standards that an article here at WhiteBlaze ought to meet?
Now that the weather is nicer here in my neck of the woods (Iowa), I'm out hiking on weekends instead of messing around with the raw data used in the study like I was this winter, but I'd still like to hear from people if you have any suggestions at all to make the article better.