S-17 Edgic (editing and logic) Gabon in Survivor Speculation Forum

0 Points

S-17 Edgic (editing and logic) Gabon

Started By	Comment
TheLurkerSpeaks		#4941	[-]
Posts: 1489 (12/18/08 09:06 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Live life like there is no ads! Remove this ad craig wrote: How do you codify the process of identifying the actual stories being told? You can't do it prescriptively. It's what Phoenix calls right hemisphere analysis. It's what CL calls solving a whodunnit. I asked a while ago what is it that CL does differently when she looks for story threads that find their resolution at the FTC. I was told that CL is scrupulously objective and that she's been here for a number of years. No disagreement there, but what does she advocate (and I apologize in advance if I've misinterpreted her) that's different to what I've been suggesting all along: Look for editing manipulation and try to interpret what it means. Much of the interesting edgic discussion in past seasons has concerned themes or story lines or editing manipulation. Edgic has happily used them when they reiforce the conclusions of edgic. It's just this year there was a conflict in conclusions between quantitiative by the book edgic vs themes, and the quantitative appoach lost. Where do you get the idea that I'm against looking at editing manipulation? OTT and CP edits are editing manipulation. And I'm not opposed to storylines per se. Identifying villain and sweetheart roles (OTT edits) generally is helpful under Edgic, and foreshadowing/irony do give us upcoming events to look for. I do object, however, to the need for some overarching theme that apparently has little relevance to the actual game or show but somehow predetermines the end result. Sure, Edgic lost (not just quantitative analysis). I didn't see these theme theorists picking Bob either though - Panurge picked Corinne! But really, that's irrelevant - what Panurge (and to a lesser extent GR) is doing isn't Edgic so I don't particularly care if they got it right through their method. It still doesn't belong in this thread. *And to correct your statement above, "Edgic has happily ignored them when they don't disagree with the conclusions of Edgic."* I don't recall any interesting thematic arguments for Marcus, or quotes at the beginning (like Parvati changing her game and Alexis knowing the fanes game) that we could follow. CL had some interesting arguments for Kenny that were thematic, by my counter-arguments turned out to be better. And no doubt in retrospect you can come up with a theme for every winner. The problem is that it isn't that hard to come up with a "theme" when it doesn't actually have to correlate strongly with the show. And sorry, but I still don't find your "counterarguments" persuasive even knowing that Ken didn't win. Winner quotes aren't important because they establish some amorphous theme - they are important because they provide early characterization of a player and establish late game connections to be resolved, both of which are good in terms of Edgic. Neither conclusively makes a player a winner however since for every Parvati, there is an Alexis. Getting Real, telling us how you went wrong with your idea that "the Fans win" and "the Couples alliance is too negative to win" early last year. I always disagreed, but it was interesting debating with you. BTW Spec outside Edgic is pretty dead, that's why everything ends up in this thread. So many edgic people are afraid of spoilers and avoid venturing outside, so everybody prefers to post here. The Story Arcs thread in Mess died because it became mostly a justification for spoilers and editing types stayed away. All the more reason for Panurge and GR to set up a new spoiler free thread for people to contribute to. That way, they can argue back and forth about what the "theme" truly is without impinging on the actual application of Edgic. Most importantly, they won't be using preconceived notions of how the game plays out in order to rate players, throwing such ratings completely off kilter.
getting real		#4942	[-]
Posts: 1470 (12/18/08 09:13 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Craig said: Getting Real, telling us how you went wrong with your idea that "the Fans win" and "the Couples alliance is too negative to win" early last year. I always disagreed, but it was interesting debating with you. I'm glad you brought that up, Craig. That was one of your finest moments, as I've acknowledged. As I was explaining in a PM to someone just recently, that was a nightmare for me and it's entirely my own fault for being too dogmatic. I originally thought the rat imagery that accompanied Ozzy and Amanda's frolics, combined with the disapproval voiced by Jonathan, the season's most P character and by Cirie, the voice of reason, would disqualify anyone in the couple's alliance. I then became convinced that Paravati's neglect over long periods mid-game confirmed my earlier assessment. I actually thought she was INV in the episode where she got the fat lip. Where I went wrong was thinking that the rat imagery applied to Parvati as well when it perhaps only applied to Ozzmanda. I came up with a quite a lot of crap last season and I hope it taught me not to be too stubborn although some might disagree. Anyway, that was my only failure to pick the winner in 7 seasons before this one, so I don't begrudge you your finest hour!
Mypoody2		#4943	[-]
Posts: 8458 (12/18/08 09:21 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	TheLurkerSpeaks wrote: craig wrote: How do you codify the process of identifying the actual stories being told? You can't do it prescriptively. It's what Phoenix calls right hemisphere analysis. It's what CL calls solving a whodunnit. I asked a while ago what is it that CL does differently when she looks for story threads that find their resolution at the FTC. I was told that CL is scrupulously objective and that she's been here for a number of years. No disagreement there, but what does she advocate (and I apologize in advance if I've misinterpreted her) that's different to what I've been suggesting all along: Look for editing manipulation and try to interpret what it means. Much of the interesting edgic discussion in past seasons has concerned themes or story lines or editing manipulation. Edgic has happily used them when they reiforce the conclusions of edgic. It's just this year there was a conflict in conclusions between quantitiative by the book edgic vs themes, and the quantitative appoach lost. Where do you get the idea that I'm against looking at editing manipulation? OTT and CP edits are editing manipulation. And I'm not opposed to storylines per se. Identifying villain and sweetheart roles (OTT edits) generally is helpful under Edgic, and foreshadowing/irony do give us upcoming events to look for. I do object, however, to the need for some overarching theme that apparently has little relevance to the actual game or show but somehow predetermines the end result. Sure, Edgic lost (not just quantitative analysis). I didn't see these theme theorists picking Bob either though - Panurge picked Corinne! But really, that's irrelevant - what Panurge (and to a lesser extent GR) is doing isn't Edgic so I don't particularly care if they got it right through their method. It still doesn't belong in this thread. *And to correct your statement above, "Edgic has happily ignored them when they don't disagree with the conclusions of Edgic."* I don't recall any interesting thematic arguments for Marcus, or quotes at the beginning (like Parvati changing her game and Alexis knowing the fanes game) that we could follow. CL had some interesting arguments for Kenny that were thematic, by my counter-arguments turned out to be better. And no doubt in retrospect you can come up with a theme for every winner. The problem is that it isn't that hard to come up with a "theme" when it doesn't actually have to correlate strongly with the show. And sorry, but I still don't find your "counterarguments" persuasive even knowing that Ken didn't win. Winner quotes aren't important because they establish some amorphous theme - they are important because they provide early characterization of a player and establish late game connections to be resolved, both of which are good in terms of Edgic. Neither conclusively makes a player a winner however since for every Parvati, there is an Alexis. Getting Real, telling us how you went wrong with your idea that "the Fans win" and "the Couples alliance is too negative to win" early last year. I always disagreed, but it was interesting debating with you. BTW Spec outside Edgic is pretty dead, that's why everything ends up in this thread. So many edgic people are afraid of spoilers and avoid venturing outside, so everybody prefers to post here. The Story Arcs thread in Mess died because it became mostly a justification for spoilers and editing types stayed away. All the more reason for Panurge and GR to set up a new spoiler free thread for people to contribute to. That way, they can argue back and forth about what the "theme" truly is without impinging on the actual application of Edgic. Most importantly, they won't be using preconceived notions of how the game plays out in order to rate players, throwing such ratings completely off kilter. IN CONGRESS, JULY 4, 1776 The unanimous Declaration of the thirteen united States of America hen in the Course of human events it becomes necessary for one people to dissolve the political bands which have connected them with another and to assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of Nature's God entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of mankind requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation. We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. - That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted among Men, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, - That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of the People to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that mankind are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. - Such has been the patient sufferance of these Colonies; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present King of Great Britain is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny over these States. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world. He has refused his Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good. He has forbidden his Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till his Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, he has utterly neglected to attend to them. He has refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts of people, unless those people would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only. He has called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of their Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with his measures. He has dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with manly firmness his invasions on the rights of the people. He has refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to the People at large for their exercise; the State remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within. He has endeavoured to prevent the population of these States; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands. He has obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing his Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers. He has made Judges dependent on his Will alone for the tenure of their offices, and the amount and payment of their salaries. He has erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass our people and eat out their substance. He has kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without the Consent of our legislatures. He has affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power. He has combined with others to subject us to a jurisdiction foreign to our constitution, and unacknowledged by our laws; giving his Assent to their Acts of pretended Legislation: For quartering large bodies of armed troops among us: For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants of these States: For cutting off our Trade with all parts of the world: For imposing Taxes on us without our Consent: For depriving us in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury: For transporting us beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences: For abolishing the free System of English Laws in a neighbouring Province, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule into these Colonies For taking away our Charters, abolishing our most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of our Governments: For suspending our own Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for us in all cases whatsoever. He has abdicated Government here, by declaring us out of his Protection and waging War against us. He has plundered our seas, ravaged our coasts, burnt our towns, and destroyed the lives of our people. He is at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy the Head of a civilized nation. He has constrained our fellow Citizens taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms against their Country, to become the executioners of their friends and Brethren, or to fall themselves by their Hands. He has excited domestic insurrections amongst us, and has endeavoured to bring on the inhabitants of our frontiers, the merciless Indian Savages whose known rule of warfare, is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes and conditions. In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. A Prince, whose character is thus marked by every act which may define a Tyrant, is unfit to be the ruler of a free people. Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our British brethren. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement here. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them, as we hold the rest of mankind, Enemies in War, in Peace Friends. We, therefore, the Representatives of the united States of America, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good People of these Colonies, solemnly publish and declare, That these united Colonies are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent States, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance to the British Crown, and that all political connection between them and the State of Great Britain, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent States, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent States may of right do. - And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of Divine Providence, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor. - John Hancock New Hampshire: Josiah Bartlett, William Whipple, Matthew Thornton Massachusetts: John Hancock, Samuel Adams, John Adams, Robert Treat Paine, Elbridge Gerry Rhode Island: Stephen Hopkins, William Ellery Connecticut: Roger Sherman, Samuel Huntington, William Williams, Oliver Wolcott New York: William Floyd, Philip Livingston, Francis Lewis, Lewis Morris New Jersey: Richard Stockton, John Witherspoon, Francis Hopkinson, John Hart, Abraham Clark Pennsylvania: Robert Morris, Benjamin Rush, Benjamin Franklin, John Morton, George Clymer, James Smith, George Taylor, James Wilson, George Ross Delaware: Caesar Rodney, George Read, Thomas McKean Maryland: Samuel Chase, William Paca, Thomas Stone, Charles Carroll of Carrollton Virginia: George Wythe, Richard Henry Lee, Thomas Jefferson, Benjamin Harrison, Thomas Nelson, Jr., Francis Lightfoot Lee, Carter Braxton North Carolina: William Hooper, Joseph Hewes, John Penn South Carolina: Edward Rutledge, Thomas Heyward, Jr., Thomas Lynch, Jr., Arthur Middleton Georgia: Button Gwinnett, Lyman Hall, George Walton
getting real		#4944	[-]
Posts: 1471 (12/18/08 09:28 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts
scepticA		#4945	[-]
Posts: 1467 (12/18/08 09:40 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	I don't think you understand what I'm getting at with my "hankering" for guidelines. Edgic already has guidelines. They're on page 1. Edgic is based on them. They never tried to explain every single image or scene, real or imagined, that appears on the show. And once again: If we are going to include themes in edgic they should conform at least in some modest respect to the guidelines already in place. So I've asked those who want themes included here to try, in some small way, to have that idea conform to the guidelines on which edgic is based. And you are now pretty much admitting you can't. Themes are too right-brained, too subjective, too fuzzy, too personal, too blurry to have guidelines. That is exactly my point! Edgic never tried to analyze an isolated scene like the boat scene. Yeah, people discussed it (I never did, with the exception that I thought it was funny.) But for the themesters among us it seemed the scene had huge import, huge significance. You seem unable to come up with some guidelines to explain that scene, though. And that's fine - such analysis as "what does this scene mean to my themes" is your issue, not edgic's - no more than trying to figure out how edgic deals with stars of david. Ah, but themes are probably in the edit and edgic is about the edit, so they belong here... No, they don't, no more than family final four or stars of david do or any of the other spec threads that have come and gone. Edgic, for some weird reason, is now the dominant analysis in speculation. But that doesn't mean it's a grab-bag for every hypothesis about the show. I've tried - quite politely, I believe - to invite the proponents of themes to try and merge them into the edgic guidelines. It's pretty clear that you are acknowledging they can't be. You write: "I bring up this particular scene because a lot has been made about separating 'Edgic' and story-line or theme analysis." No. You are blurring the issue here. We are simply pointing out that theme analysis isn't part of edgic. You can't separate things that aren't combined in the first place - that is, they're not combined within edgic principles. to say we're trying to separate them out is like someone complaining we're separating out Family Final Four or MESS or Goat/Bear/whatever. They were never combined with edgic in the first place. The issue is your effort to combine them, not other people who rather obviously state that themes aren't in edgic. So regarding your "exercise" for us hankerers: You are now inviting me and the other "sceptics" here to do the heavy lifting of merging themes into edgic by developing thematic guidelines to explain your theories. I admit it - it can't be done! Themes don't belong here! You've now convinced me. Themes should get their own thread.
Green Coffee		#4946	[-]
Posts: 145 (12/18/08 12:48 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Perhaps TLS really can get into KQ's head retrospectively and pronounce KQ's caution about only adhering to mathematical formulae as something KQ didn't really mean. I won't go down that path. I think it should be mentioned that even traditional Edgic is not purely a math game. There's lots of interpretation and analysis to be done along that path as well. Edgic is (at most) inferential statistics. This is just about the least objective type of math you can have. You could hand two experts the same data and get two different interpretations of it. So casting Edgic as some set of fomulae that produces an answer is not entirely correct (if indeed that is what people are suggesting). I put my ideas out there, hoping for discussion. That's what a good forum is about. To derive enjoyment from a rigorous exchange of ideas of people interested in the same thing The issue most people are taking is that they don't believe it's the same thing. It can generate all of the great discussion in the world but if people think it is off-topic, they will be grumpy about it. What formula can you come up with that doesn't depend on your subjective perspective? That scene would mean different things in different contexts and in different seasons. That's where your right hemishere, as Phoenix might say, is best indulged. Editing patterns, Edgic numbers (yes, those too), context, subtext, they all get pressed into service and only you can decided what weight to give to them. I think the subjectivity of the approach is what most people are actually suggesting is the divide with Edgic - not just the mathematics of it. With traditional Edgic, you still need a bit of right brain interpretation. You take the scientific side (the data) and mesh it with the personal, subjective interpretation of the data. Future interpretations should be guided by theories (guidelines) based on previous patterns. With Edgic, it is possible to make multiple interpretations of the data. Some people think Matty fits the theory best based on the data. Some people think Ken does. The trick is that anyone who thinks Susie fits best can be said to not be following the theories and thus probably incorrect. There's SOME subjectivity but not so much that every single person is viable based on previous data and theory. It is both left and right brain activity. With a purely theme-driven analysis, the personal and subjective interpretation of the show is all you have. There is no theory to guide interpretations. There can't be, as you say, because every season is different. Therefore, we can't learn much from previous seasons. We can't identify patterns other than "the theme points to the winner." Also unlike Edgic, no one can ever be objectively eliminated by theme based theory. Susie is just as viable this season as Kenny as Bob as Crystal, etc. Susie may not fit theme analysis person A's themes, but she fits theme analysis person B's themes. Who's got it right? We have no idea. The only way to know is to let the season progress. You could have a theory supporting all remaining players and each one would be on equal ground until they were eliminated by the game itself. This is entirely a right brain activity. ----------- Does it belong in Edgic, even being different in many major qualitative ways? Because it is similar in some ways, should the differences be enough to exempt them from the thread? Here's what I think: I honestly don't think a purely theme driven analysis is Edgic. It's simply not the same thing in that it isn't at all scientific and it's somewhat of a winner free-for-all. The art and interpretation part of Edgic is necessary but I don't think throwing out the science side is generative at all because there's no long term progress (sorry that's just my bias). Should pure theme users be sent out into their own thread? I'm ambivalent. On one hand, Edgic is a HUGE thread anyway so what's a few more posts each week? On the other, if people start debating which style is better, that's detrimental. If the combination of the two prevents progress in either one, then a divide is needed. That just makes for a noxious and unproductive environment. But how's it going to be? We don't know. Just some comments to consider.
Francois40		#4947	[-]
Posts: 2706 (12/18/08 12:55 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	ZOMG! It's a thematic spoiler! The fact that a waterfall is shown clearly tells us that the first person to fall during a water challenge is the winner! ZOMG ZOMG!!! PS--when quoting another post, could people please go back and cut it down to only the section being replied to instead of entire posts? PPS--what's with the margin fucks in the past 3 pages? Last Edited By: Francois40 12/18/08 01:01 PM. Edited 1 times.
CSCin3D		#4948	[-]
Posts: 10854 (12/18/08 01:13 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	This is why Bob was UTR (and therefore not "edgically viable") this season: the editing of the show now is very heavily focused on strategy. Bob didn't strategize, and therefore wasn't shown that much. The past few winners have been very involved in the strategical story of their seasons and they all had decent airtime. Bob did not. Done.
dennydoylelives		#4949	[-]
Posts: 2759 (12/18/08 02:16 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Francois40 wrote: ZOMG! It's a thematic spoiler! The fact that a waterfall is shown clearly tells us that the first person to fall during a water challenge is the winner! ZOMG ZOMG!!! RAFE WINS!!!!!!!!!!!!
cindidindi76		#4950	[-]
Posts: 14101 (12/18/08 02:20 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Live life like there is no ads! Remove this ad PPS--what's with the margin fucks in the past 3 pages? I'm not getting any...
getting real		#4951	[-]
Posts: 1472 (12/18/08 02:55 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Scep, just because you now agree with me on the futility of imposing guidelines on right hemisphere activity, the conclusion that this kind of activity should have its own separate thread doesn't necessarily follow. As I suggested, most people, including a lot of the 'purists', already use a hybrid form of analysis. After all, most people enjoy the benefits of being endowed with two hemispheres, not one. And, barring any descent of these boards into dictatorship, I shall continue to do what I've been doing all along.
Kitty Pryde1		#4952	[-]
Posts: 7494 (12/18/08 02:59 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	getting real wrote: Scep, just because you now agree with me on the futility of imposing guidelines on right hemisphere activity, the conclusion that this kind of activity should have its own separate thread doesn't necessarily follow. As I suggested, most people, including a lot of the 'purists', already use a hybrid form of analysis. After all, most people enjoy the benefits of being endowed with two hemispheres, not one. And, barring any descent of these boards into dictatorship, I shall continue to do what I've been doing all along. Already happened. Hence people thinking Corinne was a viable winner choice.
Green Coffee		#4953	[-]
Posts: 146 (12/18/08 04:22 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	getting real wrote: Scep, just because you now agree with me on the futility of imposing guidelines on right hemisphere activity, the conclusion that this kind of activity should have its own separate thread doesn't necessarily follow. As I suggested, most people, including a lot of the 'purists', already use a hybrid form of analysis. After all, most people enjoy the benefits of being endowed with two hemispheres, not one. And, barring any descent of these boards into dictatorship, I shall continue to do what I've been doing all along. You're misconstruing the issue and painting it as if theme has a monopoly on "right brain" analysis. It doesn't. It simply uses exclusively right-brain analysis. Edgic uses both (and their right brain analysis is a completely different kind - interpreting the fit of data to theory). Edgic is NOT anti-right brain analysis and I think that no one is making that argument. Instead, Edgic is about combining objectivity and subjectivity. No one in Edgic uses a purely left-brain analysis because it isn't possible. There is no entirely mathematical formula for the winner that does not require subjective interpretation (if there is and I've missed it, someone needs to point it out). You're acting as if the combination of "left and right" comes from two different camps using two different types. Instead, one side uses both and the other side uses only one. The reason people are calling for separate threads is due to the ABSENCE of objectivity in theme, not because of the INCLUSION of subjectivity. Is that justified? I don't know. But I think I'm pretty clear on why it's being suggested.
CAPSattack		#4954	[-]
Posts: 363 (12/18/08 04:32 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	LOL INTERNET E FIGHTS OVER FLAWED LOGIC
getting real		#4955	[-]
Posts: 1473 (12/18/08 04:38 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	GC said: Instead, Edgic is about combining objectivity and subjectivity. No one in Edgic uses a purely left-brain analysis because it isn't possible. There is no entirely mathematical formula for the winner that does not require subjective interpretation (if there is and I've missed it, someone needs to point it out). OK, good, it's settled then. Now that we can acknowledge the subjectivity elephant in Edgic's room, can we agree that almost everyone uses story/theme analysis to varying degrees and get on with S18? Last Edited By: getting real 12/18/08 05:28 PM. Edited 1 times.
Green Coffee		#4956	[-]
Posts: 147 (12/18/08 04:48 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	You're cherry picking the argument and ignoring anything that points out the differences between the approaches. If that really makes you feel better about your position there isn't much for us to discuss on this, then. Best of luck.
TheLurkerSpeaks		#4957	[-]
Posts: 1490 (12/18/08 04:52 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Whoo, GR! Great job tackling that straw man argument! Now maybe you'll address the real differences, namely that Edgic has a foundation to work off of, and you ... don't.
getting real		#4958	[-]
Posts: 1474 (12/18/08 05:15 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	GC, I've got nothing against what you say; in fact, I agree with it. But you talk about absence of objectivity in my approach when I have made it abundantly clear that my use of both 'traditional' and story/theme analyses is enough to put to bed any accusations about lack of objectivity. To use Scep's stated criteria for traditional Edgic, I'm happy to use 'CP, OTT and SPV' and the entire formulaic Edgic arsenal as an awesomely useful tool, even though I don't think Edgic can really claim exclusive authorship of the term SPV. (I'm joking Scep, I know you were only using those abbrevations indicatively). All I'm saying is that almost everyone is already using a combination of formula and story/theme based analysis. I will, once again, rephrase an earlier question: If the proponents of a separate thread have their way, will CL be asked to go there based on her stated methodology?
cindidindi76		#4959	[-]
Posts: 14119 (12/18/08 05:38 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	I thought cl was a he? I need this cleared up IMMEDIATELY!!! PS. Yuku spell check apparently recognizes cl as a word.
getting real		#4960	[-]
Posts: 1475 (12/18/08 05:46 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Live life like there is no ads! Remove this ad I thought cl was a he? I need this cleared up IMMEDIATELY!!! OMG! If he is, my penance should be moving to a new thread immediately! Instead, I'll have to settle for begging for his forgiveness, if you're right, Cindi. MEA CULPA!

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

S-17 Edgic (editing and logic) Gabon