Talk:List of oldest living men in the United States/@comment-44851562-20200112234812/@comment-44851562-20200124172304

Hi ryoung,

As much as I appreciate you private message entitled "Nasty comments not appreciated", I'd like to say that is your own personal opinion. I express my indignence of what has been referred to as the credible source in this instance, because as previously mentioned the source argued as incredible is in fact more accurate than the reference deemed credible. I made that very clear. The manner in which additions to this list are being administrated is in fact from a source that makes more errors than the "proper" source.

As someone fascinated by longevity claims I find the difficulty in having people who are still alive added to this list is unjustified, when the information is readily available online. Not least to say that your suggestion that because "you can't assume they're still alive" despite no reported death and a clear online description of the person's present existence is what is preventing individuals from having their longevity claims properly documented. This is unambiguous in the comments on this thread and I doubt I'd be alone in thinking that. The purpose of data collection is to continually strive for the most broadly representative collection of individual instances, to reduce error, outliers, and a sufficiently representative sample size. As people with a vested interest in longevity claims, it shouldn't be such an ordeal to encourage you to investigate any plausible claims. Which I have clearly done myself despite being very new to this.

Finally, I'd like to say that none of my comments were intentionally "nasty" and hosted no personal attack on any individual. The only instance I've experienced that on this site is in your own comments and private messages. I am here to learn and contribute, that is not always about being nicey nice to everyone, that's about perusing what, in this case, was the truth.

Regards,

Aaron McKenna, 17:23, January 24, 2020 (GMT)