I recently had to do this a lot and there are valid reasons for it. Quite often the things I'm testing or analyzing are decided on razor-thin margins, so you have to truncate to give any meaning to the graph. Other times there are conflicting scales at work on the same graph and truncation can help cut out a lot of noise. But it's also a great way to willfully mislead people, for sure.
I made a chart for my co-written blog about how the Australian Football League distributes funding to the 18 clubs. For reference, the salary cap is was about $12.5 million this year.
I think they are referring to "above sea level". Everest, for example, isn't the tallest mountain in world, from its base, but is the highest point above sea level. That's true because the base of the mountain is so high above sea level to start from. So looks like it's a way to measure from a common reference. The tallest mountain from base to peak is actually in Hawaii, Mauna Kea. But nearly 20,000 feet of that mountain are beneath sea level.
This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.