Robert Morein wrote:
"j." wrote:
I've looked around a bit for this, and it seems it must have been
mentioned before - but I think there's a pretty compelling argument as
to why double blind tests aren't always the be all end all. (yeah,
this could get bad - I'm no expert

You're right - you're no expert.

Get lost.

Right, as I said I am no expert. I also said I'm sure this argument
must have come up before, but I was unable to locate the thread.

So obviously, there is a common counter augment to this - I'm just
trying to find out what it is.

If there is already a consensus on this, I'm just trying to determine
what it is.