gokuyum....I can respect and appreciate that you would like to see more positives reported here on TC and a bit less negative but in your effort to promote positivety, you are being very negative! 

With that said, if you read any newspaper, watch any news program, or read news on line, I am SURE you will find that MOST news reports are negative.  That is the nature of news.  I think it is important for people to see the "downside" of Turkey as well.  A lot of people vacation there and think that all of Turkey is one big holiday land with rainbows and kittens.  

Anyway, it is nice to see good things about Turkey.  We are all here on this website because we love Turkey and are connected to it in someway.  Perhaps many of us need to be reminded that Turkey is a place just like any other, with problems and unrest.  Maybe you could spend your energy reminding us that it is also a place of great beauty and wonderful people. 

 I haven´t read the whole topic, just got through the first couple posts so sorry if someone else may have already but I´m just wondering.....who´s to say what is necessary and what is not? 

(And sorry to tell you this but statistics can absolutely lie.  While the facts are the facts, the stats can be skewed by whoever is compiling them so that they come out in the way the statistician wants) 

 You know they say there are three types of lies:

1)  lies

2) damn lies

3) Statistics

The third negative one, the one I posted about Saban is not negative for Turkey in my eyes. It´s the Dutch legal system that f....,I mean "messed" up. It was the Turkish police who caught the guy, so hooray for them!

 If you try to use statisticcs for lottery games, it will not work. Don´t blame the statistics. 

 I mentioned "according to me". I asked your opinions because they are not absolute.Statistics don´t lie but people lie.

When you walk your dog, statistically, both of you have 3 legs

Gokum, you´ve got way too much time on your hands, haven´t you?

Besides, discussing news you consider negative, may lead to positive conclusions. I think everything we read teaches us something, so in the end, there are no unnecessary posts - your TC membership does not obligue you to read every single post on the site - be selective and it will help your blood pressure stay on a healthy level

I 100% agree with turkaturk.

I am amazed with the way your brain works. Tell me, for god´s sake, are you aware of what kind of world you live in? You say, "Statistics don´t lie but people lie". Who makes the statistics?  There is no pure science.

If you go to the doctor with pain in your ear, he doesn´t give you brain surgery, because statistically it would be more likely for you to have an ear infection. Without statistic, the doctor wouldn´t know what is more likely and just act on the worst case scenario in every single case, and put you through a crazy amount of health-tests.

Statistics are just a way to try and comprehend the complicated real world. You can never check every thing or every body in the world, so you take a part of the world and make likely estimations. Sometimes statistics do cover everything they´re trying to investigate (in case we´re investigating something that can be more easily recorded). Statistics are not evil. There just numbers on a piece of paper or on a computer screen. People can twist and turn the numbers, fake them, or make unsound assumptions based on the numbers. This does not mean statistics are always wrong. Some people make mistakes and, even more disturbing, some people manipulate.

Speaking of statistic, I recall the following question where statistics misleads you paradoxically (as stated in red text):

Suppliers ´A´ and ´B´ provided the following numbers of products for the luxury hamper market:

Although the suppliers try very hard to ship their goods in perfect condition, there is inevitably some spoilage - i.e. products gone bad.

The suppliers compare their performance using two types of statistic:

• The five per-product spoilage rates for each supplier are equal to the number of products gone bad divided by the number of products supplied, for each of the five products in turn.
• The overall spoilage rate for each supplier is equal to the total number of products gone bad divided by the total number of products provided by that supplier.

To their surprise, the suppliers found that each of the five per-product spoilage rates was worse (higher) for ´B´ than for ´A´ by the same factor (ratio of spoilage rates), m>1; and yet, paradoxically, the overall spoilage rate was worse for ´A´ than for ´B´, also by a factor of m.

There are thirty-five m1 for which this surprising result could have occurred, the smallest of which is 1476/1475.

What´s the largest possible value of m?
Give your answer as a fraction reduced to its lowest terms, in the form u/v.

.