Article Alleges that Florida's COVID-19 dashboard Data Being Manipulated

Paranos

All-ACC
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
11,061
Scary if true, but given our Governor's previous attempts to distract from some of the states failings in handling COVID-19 problems I can see this being true.

..


Go Canes
 
Last edited:

Fawk_U Haters

Junior
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
2,851
I'm not sure what she is alleging.
The guy you said was killing it is lying to justify his reopening plan and satisfy his daddy.

You seem to have an opinion on everything else i'm sure you have one on this too, you're just trying to play coy

Funny where is all the fuss from you and your cohorts about the data manipulation. You seem to think the death count is inflated. Where's the outcry for playing politics from you
 

ilovelamp51

Be a cheeseburger
Joined
Jul 25, 2013
Messages
8,682
The guy you said was killing it is lying to justify his reopening plan and satisfy his daddy. You seem to have an opinion on everything else i'm sure you have one on this too, you're just trying to play coy. Funny where is all the fuss from you and your cohorts about the data manipulation. You seem to think the death count is inflated. Where's the outcry for playing politics from you
Outcry’s are only one sided. Are you new to this? I don’t see any problem with any of it. Nothing to see here. 🤫
 

Paranos

All-ACC
Joined
Aug 7, 2012
Messages
11,061
I'm not sure what she is alleging.
She is directly quoted in the article!

Rebekah Jones said in an email to CBS12 News that her removal was "not voluntary" and that she was removed from her position because she was ordered to censor some data, but refused to "manually change data to drum up support for the plan to reopen."

So what are not understanding?

Go Canes
 

tcgrad1014

All-ACC
Joined
Nov 5, 2011
Messages
12,001
She is directly quoted in the article!

Rebekah Jones said in an email to CBS12 News that her removal was "not voluntary" and that she was removed from her position because she was ordered to censor some data, but refused to "manually change data to drum up support for the plan to reopen."

So what are not understanding?

Go Canes
What data was she asked to change?
 

JD08

Non-attorney spokesperson
Joined
Dec 19, 2014
Messages
9,056
This was likely done using one of the common visualization tools like Tableau or QlikSense. Depending on how the data is loaded and refreshed, it could be something as benign as she was asked to refresh with numbers that have been corrected since her initial load.

As it sits now, this is nothing more than a disgruntled employee making a statement that plays to a political motive.
 

Fawk_U Haters

Junior
Joined
Jan 11, 2015
Messages
2,851
Outcry’s are only one sided. Are you new to this? I don’t see any problem with any of it. Nothing to see here. 🤫
Hahahaha oh sooooo true. Depending on what and who you believe everything is 1 sided

Bravo on the post. Lots of truth wrapped in some good wit and humor!!!!
 

JD08

Non-attorney spokesperson
Joined
Dec 19, 2014
Messages
9,056
Any Confirmed analytic/number fudging in either direction (I know the difference between poorly described context in analysis versus clear and obvious bias) in this pandemic should be treated as a crime, imho.
It's very easy for experienced people to make a simple mistake that ends up showing incorrect data. If it were a crime, to actually prove intent would be close to impossible.

Look at NY, they've been accused of padding their numbers. They've also revised their numbers. That would probably be enough to show that they intended to produces a correct total, thus no conviction.
 

LuCane

Administrator
Staff member
Joined
Oct 21, 2011
Messages
13,347
The guy you said was killing it is lying to justify his reopening plan and satisfy his daddy.

You seem to have an opinion on everything else i'm sure you have one on this too, you're just trying to play coy

Funny where is all the fuss from you and your cohorts about the data manipulation. You seem to think the death count is inflated. Where's the outcry for playing politics from you
If what is implied by the article is true, that's fucked up and there should be significant consequences. But, have you considered she was asked to "manually" change the data to include more accurate data? Perhaps that's not the case. There are a number of alternatives to consider here. The article and the information available related to the article don't currently provide a comprehensive set of facts to support your conclusions, though. For what it's worth, I'm not an R. As I've said since this forum was opened, I'm here for the data.

More information: as someone who designs data-driven products, input gets manually changed from databases all the time. Whether there is a clear process and it's for increased accuracy are altogether different things. But, "manual change of data" is not necessarily incorrect or nefarious. Neither is "manual change of data to support re-openings." Because, for example, if it's accurate testing data, while that would support re-opening, it's still a proper change - manual or not (depending on the protocol).

In short, when we put agendas aside, all that article does is throw up an alert about something that should be investigated. Conclusions are premature.
 

RemainMack

Sophomore
Joined
Oct 14, 2018
Messages
1,489
It's very easy for experienced people to make a simple mistake that ends up showing incorrect data. If it were a crime, to actually prove intent would be close to impossible.

Look at NY, they've been accused of padding their numbers. They've also revised their numbers. That would probably be enough to show that they intended to produces a correct total, thus no conviction.
Oh I agree it would be very difficult but if the evidence is overwhelming and intent is established it should be. But I understand how difficult it would be.
 

Zombie-Cane

Freshman
Joined
Jan 24, 2019
Messages
304
If what is implied by the article is true, that's fucked up and there should be significant consequences. But, have you considered she was asked to "manually" change the data to include more accurate data? Perhaps that's not the case. There are a number of alternatives to consider here. The article and the information available related to the article don't currently provide a comprehensive set of facts to support your conclusions, though. For what it's worth, I'm not an R. As I've said since this forum was opened, I'm here for the data.

More information: as someone who designs data-driven products, input gets manually changed from databases all the time. Whether there is a clear process and it's for increased accuracy are altogether different things. But, "manual change of data" is not necessarily incorrect or nefarious. Neither is "manual change of data to support re-openings." Because, for example, if it's accurate testing data, while that would support re-opening, it's still a proper change - manual or not (depending on the protocol).

In short, when we put agendas aside, all that article does is throw up an alert about something that should be investigated. Conclusions are premature.
Logical thinking will get you nowhere I tell you, nowhere! Good day sir!
 
Top