<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><rss version="2.0"
	xmlns:content="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/content/"
	xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
	xmlns:atom="http://www.w3.org/2005/Atom"
	xmlns:sy="http://purl.org/rss/1.0/modules/syndication/"
		>
<channel>
	<title>Comments on: Courier versus Australia Post &#8211; Reliability Review</title>
	<atom:link href="http://www.somethinkodd.com/oddthinking/2010/03/20/courier-versus-australia-post-reliability-review/feed/" rel="self" type="application/rss+xml" />
	<link>http://www.somethinkodd.com/oddthinking/2010/03/20/courier-versus-australia-post-reliability-review/</link>
	<description>A blog for odd things and odd thoughts.</description>
	<lastBuildDate>Thu, 02 Sep 2010 05:01:01 +0000</lastBuildDate>
	<sy:updatePeriod>hourly</sy:updatePeriod>
	<sy:updateFrequency>1</sy:updateFrequency>
	<generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=3.0.1</generator>
	<item>
		<title>By: Julian</title>
		<link>http://www.somethinkodd.com/oddthinking/2010/03/20/courier-versus-australia-post-reliability-review/comment-page-1/#comment-225577</link>
		<dc:creator>Julian</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 12:13:40 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.somethinkodd.com/oddthinking/?p=1170#comment-225577</guid>
		<description>Sunny,

The survey covered each quarter from July 2008 - June 2009.

I don&#039;t have any reason to believe Australia Post&#039;s handling of mail has degraded significantly since July 2009.

I haven&#039;t studied the details, but I haven&#039;t any reason to believe that the sampling or analysis was so substandard so as to invalidate the coarse measures I was using. It had an independent auditor.

So, I agree that such a sampling problem is theoretically possible, I don&#039;t see it being a problem here.

&lt;em&gt;Update: Corrected typo. &quot;It&quot; had an independent auditor, not &quot;I&quot; had an independent auditor! :-)&lt;/em&gt;</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>Sunny,</p>
<p>The survey covered each quarter from July 2008 &#8211; June 2009.</p>
<p>I don&#8217;t have any reason to believe Australia Post&#8217;s handling of mail has degraded significantly since July 2009.</p>
<p>I haven&#8217;t studied the details, but I haven&#8217;t any reason to believe that the sampling or analysis was so substandard so as to invalidate the coarse measures I was using. It had an independent auditor.</p>
<p>So, I agree that such a sampling problem is theoretically possible, I don&#8217;t see it being a problem here.</p>
<p><em>Update: Corrected typo. &#8220;It&#8221; had an independent auditor, not &#8220;I&#8221; had an independent auditor! <img src='http://www.somethinkodd.com/oddthinking/wp-includes/images/smilies/icon_smile.gif' alt=':-)' class='wp-smiley' /> </em></p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
	<item>
		<title>By: Sunny Kalsi</title>
		<link>http://www.somethinkodd.com/oddthinking/2010/03/20/courier-versus-australia-post-reliability-review/comment-page-1/#comment-225576</link>
		<dc:creator>Sunny Kalsi</dc:creator>
		<pubDate>Sun, 21 Mar 2010 12:03:02 +0000</pubDate>
		<guid isPermaLink="false">http://www.somethinkodd.com/oddthinking/?p=1170#comment-225576</guid>
		<description>You have come up with an upper bound for how much you should&#039;ve been willing to pay during the time that the survey was taken. For all you know since then 50% of all mail is lost...</description>
		<content:encoded><![CDATA[<p>You have come up with an upper bound for how much you should&#8217;ve been willing to pay during the time that the survey was taken. For all you know since then 50% of all mail is lost&#8230;</p>
]]></content:encoded>
	</item>
</channel>
</rss>
