How Worcester Wonderland blogger Claude Dorman cooks the numbers …

Claude Dorman, the Worcester Wonderland blogger (Will WW)

Old Will WW (Claude Dorman of 38 Sever St.) has been inflating his numbers, deflating everyone else’s. Here are portions of Steve’s letter to authorities, re: how Claude manipulated the number of visits Steve made to Claude’s website, Worcester Wonderland. I have deleted the name of Steve’s former employer and made some sentences of Steve’s letter bold. Here is the letter …. – R. Tirella
***************
Dear …

… However, the analysis I have done of the documents provided Monday is devastating to [XXXXX] assertion I was fired because of excess use of the Internet. I am bringing it to your attention so that you know it is with good reason that I ask the Attorney General to order the release of further documents.

The information on the analysis done by [XXXX] on my computer usage (the “XXXX Documents”), shown at Exhibits M-138 through M-150 (faxed you on Tuesday), is misrepresented. I spent only 27 minutes on company time over a two-month period looking at the websites in question.

… In the attached spreadsheet is a detailed analysis of the XXXX Data. Recently XXXX has been advertising my job on the Internet at a greatly reduced pay scale, which I suspect is the real I was discharged.

What Dorman did on the analysis he sent XXXX was to double count my visits to his website. What XXXX did was ignore, or not even investigate, the data provided by Dorman. The data showed I was on the Internet during my lunch break or before work.

We had flexible work hours. We could start at 8:00 AM or 8:30 AM. Most days I would come in prior to 8:30 AM, turn on the computer, check my personal email, and sometimes Dorman’s website, which I monitored to see if Dorman smeared me on his website, as he had done with so many others.

Lunch breaks were also flexible at XXXX. The cafeteria was jammed after noontime, so I would break for lunch between 10:45 AM and 12:00 AM to use the microwave. I believe there was only one microwave available in December.

The spreadsheet analysis was done as follows:

1. In the first tab, entitled “Baseline”, I loaded in the data from exhibits M-138 through M-150. XXXX’s lawyer said they analyzed my visits to two websites: Worcester Magazine and Worcester Wonderland. However, because Dorman bragged about the spyware his website attached to his visitors’ computers, I normally entered his web site via Worcester Magazine, where there is a link to Worcester Wonderland. It’s obvious from the formats and titles that the analysis was done by Mr. Dorman, who mentions in his January 9, 2013 letter that he included a computer analysis with his letter (See M-135).

2. In the second tab entitled “Duplicates”. I highlighted the “News /Media” data in yellow and the Worcester Wonderland data (Dorman’s site) in green. I sorted all the Data by date and time. There were sixty or so identical entries. These showed that eight or nine times in one minute I accessed both sites, which is absurd. I then highlighted in blue the entries that were identical.

3. In the third tab entitled “WW Not Duplicates Sorted by Size” the remaining forty-five green (Worcester Wonderland) entries. Theoretically, these could be entries where I entered the Worcester Wonderland directly. However, as I will show below, it is highly likely that many of these were fraudulent. The data was then sorted by the “Bytes Out” column. As I suspected, much of this data had similar size quantities and measurements. In the tab this data is highlighted in yellow. Sixty percent of this data was of blocks of identical size, with the Bytes Out, Bytes In, and measurements being exactly the same. This strongly suggest, give the statistical size of the universe being analyzed, that the data was either redundant or fraudulently manipulated. Half the forty-five items in this tab were timed during my lunch break or pre-work period.

These facts strongly suggest two conclusions: the analysis submitted was distorted by the fact that I entered the Wonderland website through Worcester Magazine; or Dorman fabricated this study to exaggerate my computer usage. Dorman has been known – which I can prove in court – to fabricate charts and statistics about numerous people and place them on his website. …

I concluded by putting the Worcester Magazine data into the next tab, and extracting out the data where I accessed the website on my own time. This showed that I used the XXXX computer for a grand total of twenty-seven minutes during the two months in question. My analysis here may not be perfect, I may have spent another ten or fifteen minutes on the Worcester Wonderland site than this shows. But it is a lot closer to reality than what XXXX claims about me.

Sincerely yours,

Steven R. Maher

Leave a Reply