Jump to content
IndiaDivine.org

GJ List Quiz #1 - general

Rate this topic


Guest guest

Recommended Posts

Guest guest

Dear Chris and others,

 

What I see about the quiz method is this:

 

When Chris proposed my name as a possible master of ceremonies, I begged for

time, seein a great responsibility. Sorry, Chris, you have taken the easy way

out: posed a query, waited for answers and published the answer on the deadline.

Practically no work involved! It is NOT so simple as that!

 

1. Whoever poses a quiz cannot participate, knowing the answer already! So a

permanent Major Domo (MD) can never try and learn.

 

2. Many who´d like to try are afraid of being exposed as failures.

 

3. Every published answer influences later efforts. If I first read a certain

solution, with logical arguments, I am prejudiced: CANNOT think AGAINST that.

 

4. As at present, we have no chance for a second effort. We are not striving to

win a prize, but to learn and refine our methods.

 

5. The right way would be for a person to pose a quiz and also be MD. All

answers go to the MD directly. The MD answers individually, saying, "Right"

"hot", "Irrelevant", "cold" or "Try more positive (or negative)!" etc. to help

without revealing too much.

 

Then the MD publishes the answer - with or without his or her analysis, for the

MD need not be an expert at all!" - as well as all the letters - ANONYMOUS!

vOnly the text. So nobody WHO goofed it!

 

6. One quiz a month is enough, OR, if we want 2 a month. Too much will reduce

the attention paid, for all of you have to earn your living! One is good enough,

I think. But during that month the poser of the Quiz should promise to be MD!

 

7. We must now decide whose question should be posed. You could get a period

when nobody volunteers, or a time when 50 are ready to do so!

 

So we need a small committee or some system to decide. Let us say Chris is Major

MD for three months. His successor can be chosen before the expiry time. This

MMD decides in favour of the first person who offers a quiz: in a letter to the

list or to direct. Naturally after that that person is the MD. If no offers

come in within 2 days of the month, the MMD has to pose a quiz! If he or she

cannot, then go begging for a case amongst the regular contributors on the list!

 

Please comment!

 

regards

Mani

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Namaste Mani,

 

Your suggestion of sending replies to MD seems to be a good idea, but what =

if one wants to learn from others analysis. The idea of posting quiz/puzzle =

is not only to improve ourself but to help others along the way, after all t=

his is a list-group, where ideas etc are exchanged. If somebody is worried a=

bout getting biased by others attempt, let them not read it. As simple as th=

at.

 

So in my opinion we should continue in the current manner.

 

Regards

Narayan

 

 

 

 

 

gjlist, subra@t... wrote:

> Dear Chris and others,

>

> What I see about the quiz method is this:

>

> When Chris proposed my name as a possible master of ceremonies, I begged =

for

> time, seein a great responsibility. Sorry, Chris, you have taken the easy=

way

> out: posed a query, waited for answers and published the answer on the de=

adline.

> Practically no work involved! It is NOT so simple as that!

>

> 1. Whoever poses a quiz cannot participate, knowing the answer already! S=

o a

> permanent Major Domo (MD) can never try and learn.

>

> 2. Many who´d like to try are afraid of being exposed as failures.

>

> 3. Every published answer influences later efforts. If I first read a cer=

tain

> solution, with logical arguments, I am prejudiced: CANNOT think AGAINST t=

hat.

>

> 4. As at present, we have no chance for a second effort. We are not striv=

ing to

> win a prize, but to learn and refine our methods.

>

> 5. The right way would be for a person to pose a quiz and also be MD. All=

 

> answers go to the MD directly. The MD answers individually, saying, "Righ=

t"

> "hot", "Irrelevant", "cold" or "Try more positive (or negative)!" etc. to=

help

> without revealing too much.

>

> Then the MD publishes the answer - with or without his or her analysis, f=

or the

> MD need not be an expert at all!" - as well as all the letters - ANONYMOU=

S!

> vOnly the text. So nobody WHO goofed it!

>

> 6. One quiz a month is enough, OR, if we want 2 a month. Too much will re=

duce

> the attention paid, for all of you have to earn your living! One is good =

enough,

> I think. But during that month the poser of the Quiz should promise to be=

MD!

>

> 7. We must now decide whose question should be posed. You could get a pe=

riod

> when nobody volunteers, or a time when 50 are ready to do so!

>

> So we need a small committee or some system to decide. Let us say Chris i=

s Major

> MD for three months. His successor can be chosen before the expiry time. =

This

> MMD decides in favour of the first person who offers a quiz: in a letter =

to the

> list or to direct. Naturally after that that person is the MD. If no off=

ers

> come in within 2 days of the month, the MMD has to pose a quiz! If he or =

she

> cannot, then go begging for a case amongst the regular contributors on th=

e list!

>

> Please comment!

>

> regards

> Mani

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Om Krsnaaya Namah

 

Hi Mani!

 

Here's my opinions on the various suggestions you put forward with regards

to the runnning of the blind tests:

 

>

> 1. Whoever poses a quiz cannot participate, knowing the answer

> already! So a

> permanent Major Domo (MD) can never try and learn.

>

 

Agreed. This is unfair, and means someone has to miss out on the fun!

 

> 2. Many who´d like to try are afraid of being exposed as failures.

 

I don't think this is such a serious problem. As Chris said, anyone who

wished to do so could have written to him directly. So it's not such a big

problem.

 

>

> 3. Every published answer influences later efforts. If I first

> read a certain

> solution, with logical arguments, I am prejudiced: CANNOT think

> AGAINST that.

>

 

Perhaps analysis should be left till later, if someone got it correct as I

think the majority of those who do answer will do so on an astrological

basis. Or perhaps if one has a really strong desire to ask something about

their analysis such as whether something they saw was correct at some other

time or not, maybe they can ask and present their reasons for thinking

afterwards.

 

> 4. As at present, we have no chance for a second effort. We are

> not striving to

> win a prize, but to learn and refine our methods.

>

> 5. The right way would be for a person to pose a quiz and also be MD. All

> answers go to the MD directly.

 

As I said, this is up to the person, but I like seeing the various ways of

thinking while the element of mystery is still there.

 

> The MD answers individually,

> saying, "Right"

> "hot", "Irrelevant", "cold" or "Try more positive (or negative)!"

> etc. to help

> without revealing too much.

 

I can understand what you mean here, and was dying for the answer to be

revealed - a week seemed too long! But I also appreciate that Chris wanted

this to be done in a completely scientific manner, and there is only one way

to do that - completely blind, so that there is no private gossip or

whatever, and so that one doesn't end up guessing so much that there is a

high likelihood of being correct e.g. On TV, you often see predictions like

"problems related to health, wealth or family." That kinda covers

everything. So as much as I'm pulled in both directions, I think completely

blind is probably the best way to test our methods. Of course there is

nothing stopping an individual from trying a different approach and having a

secondary opinion in private, to see whether this other approach is more

effective or not. But part of real life astrology is the ability of being

able to decide which factors take precedence in different circumstances, and

having one answer encourages one to think about other systems more

seriously, whereas having lots of chances means one looks at them more

whimsically "if not this, then how about this, if not that then what about

this etc.".

 

I also think that there should be some definite agreement with regards to

what data is posted as standard. On the first day that I got the puzzle,

foreign travel (although I didn't see it as going to the extent of

emmigration) initially seemed to be a definite possibility based on the

horary chart - Movable Lagna, with Lagna Lord in the Movable seventh, in

Ithasala yoga with retrograde own house (ninth) Mercury, who was also

twelfth Lord, and associated with Rahu. But after Chris said residence at

the time of the event was in Manila, well...the prashna chart went down the

drain - after all you can't travel while being in the place of birth! So I

think we should standardise the data posted and nothing about the

circumstaces of the native should be revealed afterwards, as they may

influence others either positively or negatively.

 

>

> 6. One quiz a month is enough, OR, if we want 2 a month. Too much

> will reduce

> the attention paid, for all of you have to earn your living! One

> is good enough,

> I think. But during that month the poser of the Quiz should

> promise to be MD!

 

I definitely disagree! :-) I think once a week is just about right (it felt

too long waiting for the answer!). It means that those who are going to

answer have the time to answer, and others don't have to wait too long in

astrological agony. It seems to me that pretty much everyone who would have

answered, did so before the deadline, and that sufficient interest was

sustained throughout the week. Any more, and people would have forgotten all

about it.

 

>

> 7. We must now decide whose question should be posed. You could

> get a period

> when nobody volunteers, or a time when 50 are ready to do so!

 

Why not just first-come, first-serve?

 

Just my thoughts,

 

Pursottam

 

 

_______

 

Get your free @ address at

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Mani:

 

>

>2. Many who´d like to try are afraid of being exposed as failures.

 

As Pursottam has said, it's OK to mail me privately. One person did in

this case. As they say, "confidentiality assured!"

 

>

>3. Every published answer influences later efforts. If I first read a

certain

>solution, with logical arguments, I am prejudiced: CANNOT think AGAINST that.

 

This is a relevant question. One ongoing quiz I contribute to doesn't post

answers. Members are asked to mail to the quizmaster (a permanent one) and

he then reveals the answer at a set time and tells who got it right. If

you get it wrong, nobody knows about it. I find this isn't as conducive to

thinking and learning but it is an alternative to the way we've started

here. However, our approach feels more natural, more educational somehow.

The other test I regularly participate in does it exactly as we've done it

here. Clearly, there are advantages and disadvantages to both approaches.

 

>

>4. As at present, we have no chance for a second effort. We are not

striving to

>win a prize, but to learn and refine our methods.

 

I don't get this. Second efforts can be made on the second quiz.

 

>

>5. The right way would be for a person to pose a quiz and also be MD. All

>answers go to the MD directly. The MD answers individually, saying, "Right"

>"hot", "Irrelevant", "cold" or "Try more positive (or negative)!" etc. to

help

>without revealing too much.

 

As you know, I strongly object to this approach. It is not impartial as the

various hints made to different people could be more revealing or less

revealing by chance or by MD bias. The whole idea opens the door to

favouritism. And it's not blind anymore either. To be honest, I wouldn't

participate in such a quiz. I would say if you wanted to make the quiz

easier, then just change the format of the quiz. This is exactly what I

will do for Quiz #2 when I'll ask for a date only for a given event. One

can also conceive of multiple choice questions, or true false or whatever

your imagination can conceive of. But please, no hints!

 

>

>Then the MD publishes the answer - with or without his or her analysis,

for the

>MD need not be an expert at all!" - as well as all the letters - ANONYMOUS!

>vOnly the text. So nobody WHO goofed it!

 

I think we have to get over our fear of failure folks. It's good to fail

in public. It makes you humble. When failure is shared, then the suffering

is halved, or however that phrase goes. We have to get all this mythology

about astrologers being know-it-all gods and all that pretentious nonsense

from out behind closed doors. Without public testing, it's easier for

self-appointed experts to lord techniques and theoretical double-talk over

novices. Let the light shine in for all to see.

 

>

>6. One quiz a month is enough, OR, if we want 2 a month. Too much will

reduce

>the attention paid, for all of you have to earn your living! One is good

enough,

>I think. But during that month the poser of the Quiz should promise to be MD!

 

I'm with Pursottam on this. One week is long enough if you're interested

and have time and short enough that you don't forget about it.

 

 

>So we need a small committee or some system to decide. Let us say Chris is

Major

>MD for three months. His successor can be chosen before the expiry time.

This

>MMD decides in favour of the first person who offers a quiz: in a letter

to the

>list or to direct.

 

I don't really want to go overboard on the organization here. I'm happy to

do it for a while since I identify strongly with the goals of testing. On

the other hand, I appreciate that others may want to contribute as well and

I certainly want to have my kick at the can -- and reveal how lame some of

my astrological reasoning can be.

 

In any event, I think it's important to whoever is posting the quiz that

week has good clean data and is trustworthy enough not to reveal answers or

give hints to other members. To me, impartiality is a concern. I can

easily envisage a situation where some unfortunate astrologer is troubled

by his or her consistent mistakes on the quiz and starts asking for hints

from the that week's quizmaster. If that person happens to be a friend

with a sympathetic ear, then the possibility for collusion is all too real.

Sorry, but that's my paranoia at work! This raises the importance of the

blind aspect to the whole enterprise. People will only participate in a

blind test if they're convinced that they've got as good a chance as the

next person to get the right answer. I would love to find someone who was

beyond reproach (beside me, that is!) so they could administer the thing.

As it is, a rotation of quizmasters may be the next best thing.

 

Chris

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Guest guest

Dear Mani and list members,

 

You have proposed a very well thought out plan. My complements.

 

Please implement at the earliest.

 

Best wishes

 

Anil

 

-

<subra

<gjlist>

Tuesday, 12 June, 2001 12:58 PM

Re: [gjlist] GJ List Quiz #1 - general

 

 

> Dear Chris and others,

>

> What I see about the quiz method is this:

>

> When Chris proposed my name as a possible master of ceremonies, I begged

for

> time, seein a great responsibility. Sorry, Chris, you have taken the easy

way

> out: posed a query, waited for answers and published the answer on the

deadline.

> Practically no work involved! It is NOT so simple as that!

>

> 1. Whoever poses a quiz cannot participate, knowing the answer already! So

a

> permanent Major Domo (MD) can never try and learn.

>

> 2. Many who´d like to try are afraid of being exposed as failures.

>

> 3. Every published answer influences later efforts. If I first read a

certain

> solution, with logical arguments, I am prejudiced: CANNOT think AGAINST

that.

>

> 4. As at present, we have no chance for a second effort. We are not

striving to

> win a prize, but to learn and refine our methods.

>

> 5. The right way would be for a person to pose a quiz and also be MD. All

> answers go to the MD directly. The MD answers individually, saying,

"Right"

> "hot", "Irrelevant", "cold" or "Try more positive (or negative)!" etc. to

help

> without revealing too much.

>

> Then the MD publishes the answer - with or without his or her analysis,

for the

> MD need not be an expert at all!" - as well as all the letters -

ANONYMOUS!

> vOnly the text. So nobody WHO goofed it!

>

> 6. One quiz a month is enough, OR, if we want 2 a month. Too much will

reduce

> the attention paid, for all of you have to earn your living! One is good

enough,

> I think. But during that month the poser of the Quiz should promise to be

MD!

>

> 7. We must now decide whose question should be posed. You could get a

period

> when nobody volunteers, or a time when 50 are ready to do so!

>

> So we need a small committee or some system to decide. Let us say Chris is

Major

> MD for three months. His successor can be chosen before the expiry time.

This

> MMD decides in favour of the first person who offers a quiz: in a letter

to the

> list or to direct. Naturally after that that person is the MD. If no

offers

> come in within 2 days of the month, the MMD has to pose a quiz! If he or

she

> cannot, then go begging for a case amongst the regular contributors on the

list!

>

> Please comment!

>

> regards

> Mani

>

>

>

>

>

> gjlist-

>

>

>

> Your use of is subject to

>

>

>

>

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...