Oh, sorry. I was implicitly making the following assumptions:
(0) Reactions can be quantified - assigned numerical values, roughly corresponding to our intuition of a “positive”, “neutral” or “negative” reaction.
(1) The possible reactions can be meaningfully averaged, and the result can be interpreted as a reaction value as well.
So by “expectation”, I meant “expected value”, in the usual sense. If your objection is that “expectation” can't be used as this, I have evidence that suggests otherwise:
It's rather non-standard to say "I expected" in this sense but since you've gone to the trouble to define your terminology and back up your claim, fair enough!
Yeah, to clarify, my initial gripe was that he didn't clarify his terminology to begin with. His definition is correct, it's just uncommon, and confusing as a result. He really should have clarified this in the head comment.
(0) Reactions can be quantified - assigned numerical values, roughly corresponding to our intuition of a “positive”, “neutral” or “negative” reaction.
(1) The possible reactions can be meaningfully averaged, and the result can be interpreted as a reaction value as well.
So by “expectation”, I meant “expected value”, in the usual sense. If your objection is that “expectation” can't be used as this, I have evidence that suggests otherwise:
(0) http://ocw.mit.edu/courses/mathematics/18-05-introduction-to...
(1) https://www3.nd.edu/~rwilliam/stats1/x12.pdf