Rightly so. It's such a hilariously bad graph that I almost thought it was satire when I found it a week ago on HN. Sales from "a store in Silicon Valley"? Axes not starting at zero? C'mon now.
I agree that it is a design choice, but it obfuscates the scale and indirectly the significance of the numbers used so I generally find it a bad choice. Here's the same graph with axes to zero: R^2 is 0,44 with n=7 but drops to 0,10 when you leave out the Q1 2016 outlier.
The question is: Is it an outlier? If it's the beginning of a change, then it might not be. As I said above, the range needs to be greater. That's why I think Junk Charts doesn't make an effective point by dropping it. IMO there's nothing wrong with a silly hypothesis, only the poor test of one. 0.44 says it all.when you leave out the Q1 2016 outlier.
I will never forget me social media buzz around Paul the Octopus during the World Cup. People will believe the darndest things. PS. this might just be the best sentence on Wikipedia ever:The President of Iran, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, criticised Paul, accusing him of being a symbol of Western decadence and decay. [29]