Quiz #1 - general-answer

[Guest guest]

Dear Chris, Narayan, Pursottam et al,

 

Whereas I respect all your answers and objections, I´d like to say to say the

following:

 

1. My suggestion re. limiting the number of quizzes was based on this: in the

past when I asked people to test this o that, thereply was invariably that they

had no time, having to earn a living. So I assumed that they would not have time

to really analyse a chart fully to be able to get the solution. I do not have

this problem myself, for I only do quickies, not being a professional in any

manner.

 

2. Being influenced is not a myth. When giants like Pursottam present a view, I

find it difficult to take up a new avenue. I think at least in this respect -

apart from need to accept failures etc. - I think all answers should be

anonymous.

 

One could also post all the letters the day before giving the answer, the later

ones on the last day, but give the answer separately. Since we want only to

learn, we won´t "cheat ourselves if we read the answer first". Say 5 goof it and

2 guess right. By reading all the goofs I don´t really learn, for how much can I

store in my head as to what NOT to do? So I´ll skip through them and read the

right answers, so I can remember what to look for.

 

But of course we can refrain from reading the answers of others until the answer

is published. In this cae the reference: "quiz answer" should be there, so that

we just store the letter for later reading.

 

 

3. First come first served is what I suggested too, but what if 5 quizzes are

posted the same day? We may all end up dealing with different quizzes. I know

one can look up the mail path etc. but has to work out the time zones, times,

dates etc to decide which was really first on the list. If Wendy posts a quiz on

tuesday and Chris on Monday, we could me mislesd: Wendy might have been earlier.

So someone has to clearly say which quiz is valid for the week, fortnight or

what you wish.

 

4. I still don´t know hw the MD can be chosen for any period. Maybe Chris can

choose out of hose who volunteer.

 

 

5. Pursottam wrote:

 

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.

 

 

Mani: Yes and NO! These are the pitfalls we have to learn to avoid: jumping to

conclusions on a purely logical basis, instead of allowing intuition - the

astrologer´s most valuable tool - to lead us! I don´t think we should trim

data. Prasna and returns depend heavily on the place of permanent residence till

the moment. If I did not see emigration, it was my fault, not through being

influenced by the residence factor. In fact I find returns do not immediately

change by relocating, till the new home is sort of settled, which may take a few

months. But birthplace is always valid as a second source of info, even after

years of exile.

 

 

6. Chris wrote:

 

>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!

 

 

MANI: This is actually contrary to the spirit of the excercise: there is no

favouritism involved, for we are NOT trying for praises or prizes! We are only

trying to learn. That is why I feel anonymity is good. A private answer like

"Okay" saves the time for the contributor, his mind is freed for other things!

An answer "Try again" or "try to get closer" helps him to study more, take a

different angle. The idea is not to get an answer and a good explanation, but to

strive to get the answer oneself.

 

The idea of finding the event is the hardest test of all and I think it should

not be thrown overboard. The idea of finding the time of a given event is also

interesting, but probably easier. So I think both thes tests should sort of

alternate.

 

Zoran mentioned the need for rectification. It may be useful always to give the

date of some other incident to help rectify the chart before going too deeply

nto it. That is why I go by the LSRs, which are not too time-sensitive.

 

regards,

Mani

[Guest guest]

Om Krsnaaya Namah

 

Hi Mani!

 

>

> 2. Being influenced is not a myth. When giants like Pursottam

> present a view, I

> find it difficult to take up a new avenue. I think at least in

 

Perhaps these blind tests will establish that we're all babies to Jyotish -

not giants. While I may have an assertive tone, and have conviction and a

strong belief in what I state, when it comes to blind analysis, we're all

pretty much on the same level. Like everybody else on the list, I'm a

jyotish baby :-)

 

> the moment. If I did not see emigration, it was my fault, not

> through being

> influenced by the residence factor. In fact I find returns do

 

I completely agree - it was my own incompetence that lead me to ignore the

prashna chart. I don't blame Chris for it. But what I am saying is that some

sort of standard must be established with regards to data, so that all data

is posted with the puzzle, and other bits don't come through later that may

influence us. For example, on the third, this same type of thing happened,

and now it influences our opinions positively - we have more info. So if we

have standard data that is posted with each quiz - nothing more, nothing

less - there will be less chances of us being influenced by other stuff

coming through later. After all, we all know that after we know the event,

we can find dozens of factors causing it. Similarly, I think that knowing

certain things beforehand could influence us just as strongly.

 

Just my opinion,

 

Pursottam

 

 

_______

 

Get your free @ address at