no i dont acknowledge bad sources ever, thats just me.
One might wonder if the irony of that statement eludes you, random forum person.
Still, on some topics Reddit can provide quite the refreshing new perspective on things, such as DnD
What if the paper is about the accuracy of Wikipedia?
I’ve seen sources of data that people think is accurate but wasn’t. As someone once said, there are lies, damned lies and statistics.
well then let me shorten it down a bit, from personal experience what the guy on reddit says seems correct and you havent provided anything to counter it and blizzard have never given offical numbers for how high a chance you have to get skill ups from crafting.
to be fair you can’t cite wiki in journals he is right 
I’m wondering if you have figures to contradict the reddit post Morbidian?
Or you can cite your own source of the data for skill ups, apart from anecdotal stuff.
1/10 but nice try. Basically what you’re saying is, prove this guy wrong. The burden of proof isn’t on me.
If this was true there would be code on it floating around.
He might be right about that but he would not even be able to make a paper that could be rejected him self if my post was to long for him to read.
But the burden of disproving it is, just saying it’s wrong is bad science.
I didnt disprove it, i said im not going on reddit.
so far im hearing a lot of QQ and not much in the way concrete evidence.
Well done, you have proved it could be true, Schrödinger would be proud.
yeah and so could the easter bunny.
The Easter bunny is mythical, the data is either right or wrong, it can’t be both.
I have submited my proof and you cant just reject it out of hand you are right now commit a logical fallacy known as argument from ignorance. You cant use Hitchens razor or Sagans standard to get out of this one seeing as we are talking about something provable.
Are you sure about that? Do you have the entier code of wow even the server side code? Didnt think so even the best pservers have a lot of guesse work go into them actually so unless you have the entier code of the game and can find the part of it that contains the crafting skill up system you cant just say that the evidence shown have no merrit.
I believe the following is correct:
(grey skill - your skill) / (grey skill - yellow skill) * 100 = %
You can use wowhead to check what skill recipes are orange/yellow/green/grey at.
Im pretty sure this is what Cupìd’s reddit post also says but I only skimmed it.
Its correct that it averages at the %s previously posted (:
1 Like
yeah thats basicly what it said.
But in reply to the OP you got unlucky.
Edited because I think most are 5 skill up ranges ^^
so the op is just unlucky but the probabilty page on reddit thats been posted is verified how?
It havent been verified really but from personal experience it seems to be something like that, the problem with verifying it is that we would need to have the actual proper code that blizzard is using to see if its true or not. I wouldnt be surprised if it is true though seeing as it would be fairly easy way to have it work and it would make it so that you cant just continue crafting things that cost less and have a great chance to get a skill up still.
I mean im not fussed really, that poster on reddit says he was using a guide on what mats are needed to level a profession cause he was being lazy but in order for his data to be right he qould have had to craft literally tens of thousands of items to get any real reference is all im thinking.
What does it matter anyway just but 10% more than these guides say and you will be fine lol.