What happened in 2013? Must be no records for that year. No way they were clean for 12 months in a row!
1. How is this constitutional? 2. How are they immune from prosecution/punishment?
Make it make sense.
And Thomas brings home the gold
Really bad graph, it hides the 10x difference between 10k and a 100k
In the Spirit of the Olympics: THOMAS GOES FOR THE GOLD!!!!
What is happening with the vertical graph??
Scale really minimizes the huge discrepancy between Thomas/Alito and all other justices.
The only thing logarithmic graphs are good for is linearizing exponential data (edit: and looking at noise). In all other cases, it obscures the data and confuses non-STEMs.
No offense, but this is pretty bad – basically impossible to glean anything from this past “blue line shows up a lot”. Even from that, I can only be sure that’s Thomas and not Barrett because I know the context for it. IMO, this is a case where just showing the table itself is probably more clear – [whipped it up myself here](https://imgur.com/hQt8c8R).
It should say disclosed gifts. We keep finding more and more from Thomas…
Hey guys, this Clarence Thomas fella may need to be investigated…
Your colors choices are too close together. I’ve got a decent eye for color and even I can barely tell your yellows and oranges apart.
Using logarithmic scale on this, particularly with the y-axis cut off where it is, is borderline unethical.
Great first pass, here are some things to make it better.
Changes:
1) Background color white or off-white 2) use a regular scale not log scale 3) use distinct colors; certain shades of blue in your graph are indistinguishable on mobile 4) Decrease the gap width so bars are thicker & increase the chart’s size on page 5) Legend on the bottom of page 6) sources/notes on the bottom left of page 7) add some call outs “Thomas’s largest gift was $100k from Epstein…” “only one justice has received zero gifts” “Total gifts to justices in 2008 were $X.00” etc.
Keep analyzing important data! Consider a bubble graph representing time & size; color by justice
Which Supreme Court is this for?
Wow, I guess it’d just be a bunch of random blue lines if it wasn’t logarithmic
Yeah this graph is misleading for what it wants to tell, it took me a while to notice that it has a logarithmic scale on the Y. Please OP fix it. Also I would like to see a total-cumulative donations from 2004
Thomas gets a lot of gifts! I wonder if his cases does he side with the person giving the gifts? Also this is what they declared to the court how much and who gave the gifts?
![Supreme Court Justices by Gifts Received Each Year [OC]](https://www.europesays.com/wp-content/uploads/2024/08/8hpywblg8zfd1-1920x1024.jpeg)
19 comments
Source: https://fixthecourt.com/2024/06/a-staggering-tally-supreme-court-justices-accepted-hundreds-of-gifts-worth-millions-of-dollars/
Tool: Canva, Google Sheets
What happened in 2013? Must be no records for that year. No way they were clean for 12 months in a row!
1. How is this constitutional?
2. How are they immune from prosecution/punishment?
Make it make sense.
And Thomas brings home the gold
Really bad graph, it hides the 10x difference between 10k and a 100k
In the Spirit of the Olympics: THOMAS GOES FOR THE GOLD!!!!
What is happening with the vertical graph??
Scale really minimizes the huge discrepancy between Thomas/Alito and all other justices.
The only thing logarithmic graphs are good for is linearizing exponential data (edit: and looking at noise). In all other cases, it obscures the data and confuses non-STEMs.
No offense, but this is pretty bad – basically impossible to glean anything from this past “blue line shows up a lot”. Even from that, I can only be sure that’s Thomas and not Barrett because I know the context for it. IMO, this is a case where just showing the table itself is probably more clear – [whipped it up myself here](https://imgur.com/hQt8c8R).
It should say disclosed gifts. We keep finding more and more from Thomas…
Hey guys, this Clarence Thomas fella may need to be investigated…
Your colors choices are too close together. I’ve got a decent eye for color and even I can barely tell your yellows and oranges apart.
Using logarithmic scale on this, particularly with the y-axis cut off where it is, is borderline unethical.
Great first pass, here are some things to make it better.
Changes:
1) Background color white or off-white
2) use a regular scale not log scale
3) use distinct colors; certain shades of blue in your graph are indistinguishable on mobile
4) Decrease the gap width so bars are thicker & increase the chart’s size on page
5) Legend on the bottom of page
6) sources/notes on the bottom left of page
7) add some call outs “Thomas’s largest gift was $100k from Epstein…” “only one justice has received zero gifts” “Total gifts to justices in 2008 were $X.00” etc.
Keep analyzing important data! Consider a bubble graph representing time & size; color by justice
Which Supreme Court is this for?
Wow, I guess it’d just be a bunch of random blue lines if it wasn’t logarithmic
Yeah this graph is misleading for what it wants to tell, it took me a while to notice that it has a logarithmic scale on the Y. Please OP fix it. Also I would like to see a total-cumulative donations from 2004
Thomas gets a lot of gifts! I wonder if his cases does he side with the person giving the gifts? Also this is what they declared to the court how much and who gave the gifts?