[tommiegannert]

A few years ago, HN comments complained about the censorship that only leaves successful studies. We need to report on everything we've tried, so we don't walk around on donuts.

What's missing in my mind is admitting that results were negative. I'm reading up on financial literacy, and many studies end with some metrics being "great" at p 5%, but then some other metrics are also "great" at p 10%, without the author ever explaining what they would have classified as bad. They're just reported without explanation of what significance they would expect (in their field).

[nix0n]

> ...so we don't walk around on donuts

I agree with what you're saying, but I don't understand this phrase.

[rootusrootus]

I don't know where that turn of phrase comes from, but I imagine it's synonymous with 'walking around in circles'.

[Imnimo]

The phrase "walk around on donuts" has one Google result and it's this thread.

[potatoman22]

You know how sometimes you'll accidentally step on a donut and you'll have to call your dog over to lick all the jelly off your toes? That.