Thanks for all the suggested titles. My current favorite remains, “If You Don’t Buy This Magazine, We’ll Kill This Blog.” Although, I have to admit, “Super-Duper-Freakanomics” [sic] wasn’t bad either. And, as much as I like the idea of calling it “Mister P,” I can’t quite pull the trigger on that one.
To respond to some of your comments:
1. No, I can’t just post the general-interest entries at the new blog. That would take a lot of the fun out of the current blog. And the Science Blog people don’t want me to cross-post more than 4 items per month. I will, of course, link to the new items from the current blog, but it’s not as good if I can’t cross-post them.
2. I agree that Science Blogs isn’t the same as what I’m doing here, that’s why I just wanted to post some stuff there, to reach the different audience, without losing what we have here.
3. I don’t plan to be doing anything extra with this new blog; I see it more as a place to post a few things that I was going to post somewhere anyway.
4. Someone commented that it’s strange for me to ask for a title before deciding on a topic. I thought it was implicit that, by asking for a title, I’m also asking for suggestions on a topic. I guess I’ll try two or three posts a week and see how it goes.
Finally, in all seriousness, if nobody comes up with a better title, I’m going to call it “Applied Statistics.” And I’ll kick it off with a few posts about literature. Consider yourselves warned.
It would probably be a good idea to talk a bit about p-values and statistical significance – a few of the science / med bloggers have a bit of a "p-fetish".
I've just looked at the other suggestions, and "Damn Lies" seems like too good a name for a stats blog to not use.
Call it "Counting & Stuff."
"Bayesian Updates" seems like an obvious choice.
How about "Bayeswatch" as a title?
Andrew,
When people uses statistics they often do so to instill some type of fear or inadequation to their listeners. What about:
"Fear and Loathing in Statistics"
etc…
Also, you had a concern a while back that your opinion on some papers that had taken a life on their own in the "pop" culture, should be more forcefully debated/countered by journalists as they are the final filter before some information become urban legends and spread in many different countries. If this new blog wants to address this population, it ought to have a short name that can then be used by journalists when quoting you. The name should also reflect the generic goal of the blog of straightening out misunderstanding on the part of non- specialists like journalists without sounding condescending. What about then using:
"The Statistics Examiner"
"Real World Statistics"
etc…
How can you not go with "BayesWatch"?
The best I could come up with along these lines is "Tales of the Unexpected" or "Great Expectations" ("gr8 E[]s" for the younger folks). Or how about "Professor Y" ("X" is taken, and too theoretical anyway.)
I liked Mr. P, but isn't "Mr Pr" a better play on words?
Seriously, though Igor's spot on. "The Statistics Examiner" is descriptive and has the right journalistic feel — you could shorten to "Stats Examiner".
If you must have a pun, "Sampler" would also work, as in "The Statistics Sampler".
"Applied Statistics" is a great title, simple and direct, but it needs a subtitle for focus. How about "Applied Statistics: making sense of an increasingly complex world"? (Or "making sense of an increasingly complex world, one update at a time"?)
I've never liked that Disraeli quote. So how about a tweak and call your blog Blessed Lies?
Or I like: Conclusions from the Posterior.
Okay, I give in
"ApplYING statistics"
"ApplYING statistics: being less wrong about relevant uncertainties"
"Conclusions from the Joint: being less wrong before and after the data"
Keith
How about something along the lines of "Keep the Distribution" or "The Whole Variation". This blog could be a less focused cushion for SMCISS which would fit well in the more diffuse Science Blogs ecosystem and also direct those who are interested in the "mode" can be linked to here.
I wish I'd thought of Bayeswatch.
My ideas:
"What are the Chances?"
"Statporn"
Drawing on someone above, "Not Damn Lies".
There are other quotes you can draw on for inspiration. For instance:
"Figures don't lie, liars figure" – Mark Twain
A name from that could be "Figures don't lie".
A quote said by the character Sherlock Holmes is:
"while the individual man is an insoluble puzzle, in the aggregate he becomes a mathematical certainty. You can, for example, never foretell what any one man will do, but you can say with precision what an average number will be up to. Individuals vary, but percentages remain constant. So says the statistician."
A name from that could be "So says the Statistician".
Another quote, which I can't find who it's by, discusses statistics, and ends with "In the face of uncertainty".
Finally, I've no idea who this is by, but "Without data, all you are is just another person with an opinion", gives the name "Not just another person with an opinion".
Any good?
"BayesWatch" is a great idea.
Other Bayes-related names don't seem to work. "Diffuse Priors" implies you know little, so why read the blog? Using anything with "Posteriors" in the title may make you the butt of jokes.
Boy, lots of great ideas have been suggested.
"Damn Lies" is my favorite.
I disagree with ZBicylist: I think you should embrace the posterior, as it were. How about: "Don't like my prior? See my posterior!" Ha, I crack myself up.
Bayeswatch is clever, but (1) it's outdated, and (2) it suggests that you will mostly focus on Bayesian stuff, but in fact you talk about lots of other issues too.
"Analyze this."
"We Infer, You Decide"
"p-Values Suck"
"Look at it this way…"
"Damn Lies" is still the best.
"The" name will likely be more important that anyone could fear/hope.
Maybe something reflecting "Statistical second opinions" or "Second thoughts on statistical applications"
If you want to attract postings where statistical methods seemed to matter a lot
Keith