When I first looked at that, the people saying, "that's not what happened" (the "opposition") said, "no, no. It fixed itself on the next drop."
From what I saw (though I'd have to go look to find it again), what happened was, there was a big drop on everyone except Pratt, then a big drop for JUST Pratt. So indeed, it seemed to "fix itself."
But even if that's what happened (I didn't dig deeper, but I wouldn't be surprised), THAT'S STILL NOT HOW COUNTING WORKS. That's what computer algorithms look like. I should know, I've written hundreds of such algorithms, including counting algorithms (I've written a couple accounting and/or tax auditing software programs in a previous life, not to mention numerical analysis, signal analysis, and expert systems programs ("AI")). I know exactly how to write programs that would produce those results and they are NOT "COUNTING PROGRAMS."
When I first looked at that, the people saying, "that's not what happened" (the "opposition") said, "no, no. It fixed itself on the next drop."
From what I saw (though I'd have to go look to find it again), what happened was, there was a big drop on everyone except Pratt, then a big drop for JUST Pratt. So indeed, it seemed to "fix itself."
But even if that's what happened (I didn't dig deeper, but I wouldn't be surprised), THAT'S STILL NOT HOW COUNTING WORKS. That's what computer algorithms look like. I should know, I've written hundreds of such algorithms, including counting algorithms (I've written a couple accounting and/or tax auditing software programs in a previous life, not to mention numerical analysis, signal analysis, and expert systems programs ("AI")). I know exactly how to write programs that would produce those results and they are NOT "COUNTING PROGRAMS."