<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
	
	xmlns:media="http://search.yahoo.com/mrss/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Data Versus Information &#8211; Financial Bailout (Part 1 of 2)</title>
	<atom:link href="http://supportanalytics.com/blog/2009/03/data-versus-information-financial-bailout-part-1-of-2/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://supportanalytics.com/blog/2009/03/data-versus-information-financial-bailout-part-1-of-2/</link>
	<description></description>
	<lastBuildDate>Sat, 30 Apr 2011 08:44:13 -0400</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.1.3</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Mark L. Westerman, MBA</title>
		<link>http://supportanalytics.com/blog/2009/03/data-versus-information-financial-bailout-part-1-of-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3257</link>
		<dc:creator>Mark L. Westerman, MBA</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Tue, 21 Apr 2009 15:33:09 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://supportanalytics.com/blog/2009/03/data-versus-information-financial-bailout-part-1-of-2/#comment-3257</guid>
		<description>You have done a number of good things transforming data into useable information! 

However, we have two &quot;quantum leap&quot; standards for money above, using (B)illions and K(Thousands).  Couldn&#039;t we use millions like $9.7M and $11.4M rather than $9,690K and $11,379K so that you have more of an apples to apples parity when visually comparing the columns?  Plus, the precision for the spending on lobbying (to the nearest thousands of dollars) is not relevant  when comparing to the rounded bases of multiple billions.</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You have done a number of good things transforming data into useable information! </p>
<p>However, we have two &#8220;quantum leap&#8221; standards for money above, using (B)illions and K(Thousands).  Couldn&#8217;t we use millions like $9.7M and $11.4M rather than $9,690K and $11,379K so that you have more of an apples to apples parity when visually comparing the columns?  Plus, the precision for the spending on lobbying (to the nearest thousands of dollars) is not relevant  when comparing to the rounded bases of multiple billions.</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Naomi B. Robbins</title>
		<link>http://supportanalytics.com/blog/2009/03/data-versus-information-financial-bailout-part-1-of-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3138</link>
		<dc:creator>Naomi B. Robbins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 19:25:28 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://supportanalytics.com/blog/2009/03/data-versus-information-financial-bailout-part-1-of-2/#comment-3138</guid>
		<description>Right now I&#039;m writing an article on Trellis Display for an interdisciplinary
journal &quot;Computational Statistics&quot; by Wiley/Wire. Anyone want to comment on it for me before I submit it?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Right now I&#8217;m writing an article on Trellis Display for an interdisciplinary<br />
journal &#8220;Computational Statistics&#8221; by Wiley/Wire. Anyone want to comment on it for me before I submit it?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Tony</title>
		<link>http://supportanalytics.com/blog/2009/03/data-versus-information-financial-bailout-part-1-of-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3136</link>
		<dc:creator>Tony</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 16:56:04 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://supportanalytics.com/blog/2009/03/data-versus-information-financial-bailout-part-1-of-2/#comment-3136</guid>
		<description>Naomi - Welcome to Support Analytics and thank you for posting a comment.  To be honest, my first thought was to truncate the numbers by using a K instead of all the extra zeros.  In part 2 of the series I wanted to go back and reverse that decision because I wasn&#039;t happy with the way it looked.  Since it was already done, I chose to not try to undo it.  You make excellent points about the other columns that use a % or $ as well.

I agree that a better approach would be to utilize the header of the columns instead of using the signs in the actual data part of the matrix.

Thanks again!

P.S. - Any new books in the works that build on &quot;Creating More Effective Graphs&quot;?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Naomi &#8211; Welcome to Support Analytics and thank you for posting a comment.  To be honest, my first thought was to truncate the numbers by using a K instead of all the extra zeros.  In part 2 of the series I wanted to go back and reverse that decision because I wasn&#8217;t happy with the way it looked.  Since it was already done, I chose to not try to undo it.  You make excellent points about the other columns that use a % or $ as well.</p>
<p>I agree that a better approach would be to utilize the header of the columns instead of using the signs in the actual data part of the matrix.</p>
<p>Thanks again!</p>
<p>P.S. &#8211; Any new books in the works that build on &#8220;Creating More Effective Graphs&#8221;?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Naomi B. Robbins</title>
		<link>http://supportanalytics.com/blog/2009/03/data-versus-information-financial-bailout-part-1-of-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3135</link>
		<dc:creator>Naomi B. Robbins</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Fri, 20 Mar 2009 15:43:30 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://supportanalytics.com/blog/2009/03/data-versus-information-financial-bailout-part-1-of-2/#comment-3135</guid>
		<description>Surrounding each number with $, % and/or K clutters the table and makes it more difficult to read the values. Your percent columns are labeled. Why put % after each value? Why not label columns with $ and/or K and let the numerical values stand out?</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Surrounding each number with $, % and/or K clutters the table and makes it more difficult to read the values. Your percent columns are labeled. Why put % after each value? Why not label columns with $ and/or K and let the numerical values stand out?</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: DSA Insights &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Data Versus Information - Financial Bailout (Part 2 of 2)</title>
		<link>http://supportanalytics.com/blog/2009/03/data-versus-information-financial-bailout-part-1-of-2/comment-page-1/#comment-3126</link>
		<dc:creator>DSA Insights &#187; Blog Archive &#187; Data Versus Information - Financial Bailout (Part 2 of 2)</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Thu, 19 Mar 2009 11:47:36 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://supportanalytics.com/blog/2009/03/data-versus-information-financial-bailout-part-1-of-2/#comment-3126</guid>
		<description>[...] Links                               &#171; Data Versus Information - Financial Bailout (Part 1 of 2) [...]</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>[...] Links                               &laquo; Data Versus Information &#8211; Financial Bailout (Part 1 of 2) [...]</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>

