[jinst8gmi]

> You seem to be implying that this personal anecdote isn't representative of a larger trend, which is strange.

In what sense does a single data point represent a trend?

> It's certainly possible to do business with developing countries, but one has to be especially careful with regards to work quality.

You also need to be careful of work quality from developed countries. There is no shortage of examples of shoddy work being done in developed countries.

[omginternets]

>In what sense does a single data point represent a trend?

It doesn't. It's the other way around: a single datapoint can be congruent or incongruent with an observed and measured trend. This is the case with the present example.

>You also need to be careful of work quality from developed countries.

You always have to be careful of craftsmanship, but to imply that there's no systematic variance as a function of national origin is disingenuous at best and insane at worst.

Again, I'm positively flabbergasted by the extent to which people want to play with words and run in circles around such issues, especially given the extent to which these problems are documented.

Has it really become that taboo to observe that certain countries have a poor track record, on the whole? Am I only allowed to criticize my home country, now?

[jinst8gmi]

There are many highly competent people and organisations in "developing" countries. It only makes sense to evaluate things on a case by case basis. Making blanket generalisations is not constructive as there are countless cases where naive generalisations and prejudices turn out to be false.

[omginternets]

>There are many highly competent people and organisations in "developing" countries

Yes, you're repeating yourself.

> It only makes sense to evaluate things on a case by case basis.

I disagree. Case-by-case evaluation is necessary, but general trends are highly informative, useful, and not intrinsically racist/xenophobe/bigoted.

You're arguing that we should ignore evidence on the basis of political correctness, and I'm arguing that this is silly and dangerous.

[jinst8gmi]

> You're arguing that we should ignore evidence on the basis of political correctness, and I'm arguing that this is silly and dangerous.

I'm arguing that we should only consider evidence. You're arguing in favour of generalisations and prejudice.

[omginternets]

>I'm arguing that we should only consider evidence.

This is false, and borders on an outright lie, as evidenced by the fact that you're actively endorsing the dismissal of documented evidence on accounts of political correctness.

I invite you to re-read this entire conversation, and the absurdity of your comment will be apparent.

[jinst8gmi]

I have zero interest in "political correctness". I'm in favour of considering data at a finer granularity than you are in order to obtain a more accurate picture. Consider the example of someone who is an expert on a particular subject and happens to live in a country which on average has a poor education system. Is it better to use the generalisation about that country having a poor education system, or the more detailed case-specific facts?