No its not a established fact becouse of the correlation… its a well established fact because of the research… The problem with your correlation you used is that its not backed up by a study, let me give you another example of a correlation that is giving you a false impression of the world. (I have a bunch of those that all are showing the problem but I think this is at enough of a low level to maybe break through to you)
" The faster that windmills are observed to rotate, the more wind is observed.
Therefore, wind is caused by the rotation of windmills. (Or, simply put: windmills, as their name indicates, are machines used to produce wind.)"
Correlation at its finest
PS I just looked on the oxford dictionary and thats not from oxford atleast so if you are going to try to use a argument from authority dont make it up
Literally all I said was that the correlation wasn’t that hard.
If 1/6th of the games lifetime doesn’t drop subs cause of RDF but Cataclysm drops subscribers mere months into it’s existence, that’s clear and obvious correlation.
Is it definitive proof? No, I never claimed it was. Does it dispel the notion that RDF is the sole arbiter of the demise of WoW? Yes, it does. And that was all it was.
Well, it’s a good thing I didn’t say Oxford Dictionary then.