S-20 Edgic (editing and logic) in Survivor Speculation Forum

0 Points

S-20 Edgic (editing and logic)

Started By	Comment
fat little fingers	S-20 Edgic (editing and logic)	Lead	[-]
Posts: 6393 (02/07/10 05:11 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Wonderful World Remove this ad Welcome to Edgic for Survivor 20: Heroes vs Villains (or as I like to call it The Return of ASSes) We devote this thread to try and pick the winner by looking at the editing, player by player, and applying logic from past editing patterns or observations about what we have been shown. How Edgic Works Everyone is welcome to participate. For anyone new who wants to jump on board here is generally how it goes: After watching each episode posters rate the players: Step 1: Ratings: OTT, CP, MOR, UTR and INV OTT (over the top) CP (complex personality) MOR (middle of the road) UTR (under the radar) INV (Invisible) Step 2: Tone: NN, N, neutral (no tone), P, PP (Rate players from Really Negative to Really Positive) * M (Mixed) This is a special Tone designation. It is used when a player has both negative and positive scenes in one episode. It helps differentiate from the "nothing" (neutral) tone of a neglected character. It shows active manipulation of a character, rather than a passive or neglected edit. Step 3: Visibility: 1-5 (From 1 or low visibility to 5 or high visibility) First Page Posts Below is all the info you can get here on the first page. Comprehensive Guidelines and Charting: Below in Warrior's next few posts are the more detailed comprehensive guidelines we use, and some great charts that will come in handy for analysis. Visibility Charts: (Warrior). Voting Page Info and Announcements: (Phoenix). About Voting Page access: Anyone who has actively participated in Edgic for a while and shows an understanding for what it's about can ask for the voting site address. My advice is don't ask for it too soon. If I don't feel like I'm familiar with you enough, I will likely ask you to wait and participate longer. We used to require a full season before giving out the website. We want voters to 1) show an understanding of how Edgic works, and 2) show some history of active participation in Edgic ideas and discussions about the episodes. Special Note: Newbies, though you don't have the official voting site: Your ratings (and especially your reasons for them) are appreciated and can contribute greatly to the Edgic outcome. Once again, the voting site is given out when there is a consensus of posters who are comfortable and familiar enough with the new Edgic participant. Your ratings and opinions are important and valued! The simple act of voting will soon enough follow. We have dropped the use of Individual Watchdogs again, this season. There will continue to be Visibility, Tone, and Rating Watchdogs for the purpose of resolving votes that lack a clear majority. Old Edgic Threads Past Edgic threads are here in the Speculation Forum. (Note - not all seasons were saved.) New posters are welcomed and encouraged. New ideas and fresh eyes are good for Edgic. Spoiler Information: We ask that Edgic be kept spoiler-free. Doing so has proven a struggle and this season looks like a nasty one for spoilers. That said, we ask everyone's cooperation in keeping boot spoilers and winner spoilers out of the Edgic thread and discussion. If you know of a winner spoiler, please make that clear in the Edgic thread. Also, refrain from making winner predictions or votes if you have read or heard a rumored winner's name. This thread has always encouraged constructive comments. Make an effort to communicate with some patience and respect, before going straight to the flame-thrower, okay? flf* Last Edited By: fat little fingers 02/08/10 05:51 PM. Edited 3 times.
Warrior		#1	[-]
Posts: 3004 (02/08/10 10:31 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Edgic Guidelines Observations (In new order) 1) The winner may have ups and downs, but is typically not too UTR/INV or too OTT. 2) The winner will typically have a fair amount of meaningful editing and typically won't be ignored in long stretches. 3) Typically the winner is not overly Positive or Negative. 4) The winner is very unlikely to receive an INV rating during the course of the season, and will likely receive at least a 2 visibility in Episode 1. 5) Over the course of the game the winner's presence and visibility should end up closer to the average of all the players. (The winner typically gravitates to near the top in MOR differential, which calculates the closeness to average in presence, tone and ratings). 6) Typically the winner is surrounded by players who keep our focus to distract us from the winner. These players are often OTT and much of the complexity and strategy centers in this core group. This core group can be a combination of members of more than one complex group, rather than all being from one, original tribe. .....old 5) The tribe (or the core group that will surround a surprise winner) that has the most complex dynamics and strategy usually contains the winner. .....old 6) Typically the winner is surrounded by the player/s receiving the distracting edit. 7) The winner will have substantial comments/insight from many of the jury members that may resurface in front of the jury or mislead the audience on voting. 8) The ending is typically set up to be a somewhat of a 'surprise'. You either don't expect the winner or second place to be there. These two are often manipulated in the editing to make each look like they have a chance to win. 9) If two people are a 'known final pair' then the likelihood of them actually being the final two is slim. It would need to be a situation that cannot be avoided (i.e. Amber/Rob) Complex tribe: 1) Complex tribe has nothing to do with strategy -the average person doesn't care. It has to do with dangling, loose ends -anxious for us to revisit. 2) Complex tribe gets the most focus pre-merge. 3) In theory, the reason the tribe seems complex, is because the focus may be surrounding the winner or final core players. Ratings INV - Invisible 1) Irrelevant, no confessionals or tribal council questions in the early episodes, little or no confessionals or tribal council questions in the mid to late episodes. 2) The player's editing was insignificant to any character development. UTR - Under the radar 1) UTR means a character that is either underutilized or deliberately hidden (the trick is figuring out which). In story terms, they are kept out of focus. An UTR edit means the player may be seen, but they aren't seen doing or saying anything of major significance. Since showcasing players who do nothing isn't very entertaining, UTR edits do tend toward low visibility, but that needn't be the case. 2) Players who receive significant face time, but little to no speaking time. 3) The UTR Edit within an episode will typically be void of direct conflicts and character insight. 4) If the player gets some significant screen time, but doesn't do anything special, then you rate it UTR. MOR - Middle of the road 1) MOR means something between UTR, CP, and OTT. They say and do enough to avoid UTR, but they're not emphasized caricatures or developed personalities. This is a holding episode for characters who could be CP, but the story didn't particularly involve them, or for normally UTR characters who couldn't escape inclusion in the story. As such, winners are often portrayed as MOR at some point in the story. However, a consistently MOR edit is not a good thing because these characters are more just kind of there. 2) Someone who gets an odd positive and negative mix, but not in an Over the Top manner. 3) If the player did something that you feel makes them better that UTR, but not enough to qualify for CP, then you rate MOR. 4) MOR can be used to describe characters who were mostly UTR with a fair amount of CP. CP - Complex personality 1) CP means a character that is well-developed. Their editing has depth to it, and their choices are presented to the audience so that we get an insight into their thinking. We generally see their strengths and flaws. Not too surprisingly, these are the major players in the course of the game, and it is their choices that shape the story. 2) CP shows complexity of thought about the game, and or complex emotions that might be construed as Positive or Negative. "Players" like Brian, Shii Ann, Jeff Varner, or Chris, during the normal course of their editing, would in my mind be complex because they were always in the game. and many of their edits related directly to the strategic maneuvering in their tribe (successful or not). 3) Someone who expresses internal conflict over a situation, someone who expresses a "deep" or turbulent emotion like remorse, loneliness, or betrayal expressed intelligently and not like "You're a liar, T!;" someone who demonstrates a complex strategy or bold strategic move and their reasoning for it. There has to be something shown in interviews that contradicts what we've seen or adds conflict to the scenario. 4) If the player gets quality screen time and is either shown multiple times being strategic or shows a multi-dimensional side, then you go with CP. OTT - Over the top 1) OTT means a character that is being characterized or simplified. In story terms, they are the villains and heroes, the ones we love to love or hate. A consistently OTT character is presented as a distraction to the other players. Of course, not all OTT players stay that way, and often an OTT player will go UTR for awhile if the editors want to bring them back to the main storyline as a more well-rounded character. Contrasting OTT edits in the same player (OTTN v. OTTP) generally mean a more complex edit over the course of the show. 2) OTT players are generally always edited in a Positive or Negative light. 3) A mixture of positive and negative editing ends up being neutral overall. 4) Usually lacking in strategy, or strategy not expressed with much internal conflict - but they can have lots and lots of conflict with other people; no remorse if N and no "evil" strategizing if P - only focusing on loyalty or saving one's own skin Tone PP) Extremely positive. P) Positive. No rating Static neutral M) Dynamic Mixed neutral - If you think someone was noticibly P AND N within one episode. Mixed in the case of OTT represents a disagreement in consensus over the tone. N) Negative. NN) Extremely negative. Visibility Measures the amount of presence that a player had in an episode. Visibility includes confessionals, speaking time, face time, second person visibility and tribal council questions (TCQ). 1) Low visibility. 2) Medium low visibility. 3) Average visibility. 4) Medium high visibility. 5) High visibility. Second Person Visbility (SPV) Second person visibility is a count of the number of times a contestant is talked about by other contestants (either in confessionals or during game play footage) in a significant context. It excludes simple lists of contestants names (e.g. Katie saying that she, Janu, Ian and Wanda will vote for Coby) or simple descriptive passages (e.g. Caryn saying that Jeff looked funny riding a horse). Revision: Many contributors to Edgic have noticed that there are differences among the SPVs shown that we believe might be materially significant to the overall edit. Because of this, the classification of SPVs for Survivor 15 will go beyond a basic tally of number of SPVs and will analyze the nature of each SPV. These are all tallies for the individual that is spoken about the second person. SPV Tone: Positive, Negative or Neutral. Regardless of whether the SPV is accurate or not, the general tone of the SPV content is noted. SPV Type: I) (inconsequential); General in nature, without significant substance or tone. Example: John and I went to get the tree mail. This is a difference in SPV analysis; for S15 all mentions of another person will be tallied. They may be as previously believed irrelevant. But they are SPVs, so they will be tallied. S) (Strategic) The content discusses the strategy of the second person (NOT of the speaker. This will be included in the speaker's rating, not in an SPV rating.) G) (General) The content is of a general nature, more than inconsequential but not strategic. Example: discussions of injuries. I liken this to the standard MOR Edgic rating. R) (Reinforced) The content of the SPV is reinforced by images of the second person acting in a way described in the SPV. Example: John is really lazy, followed by images of John sleeping and lying about when others are working. C) (Contradicted). The content of the SPV is contradicted by images of the second person acting in a way contrary to the SPV. Example: John is really lazy, followed by images of John working very hard. This SPV, which doesn't occur often, has so far without exception been used as a strong negative indicator against the speaker rather than the second person. Not all SPVs will have an R or C. In fact, most won't. Game Strategy Ratings S0 - Nothing Strategic. Either the player is not present in the episode (INV) or his comments are always narration about camp life, not strategy. S1 - Somebody in the background during strategy sessions, or shown making one short confessional about his boot decision. Could even be shown taking a minor role talking about strategy but with no confessionals about strategy. S2 - Somebody who is shown in multiple strategy sessions, or talking with different people, or rallying to boot somebody, etc. - but isn't all over the place when it comes to strategy. S3 - These are the people who dominate the strategy talk. The greatest example of S3 for me is Brian C. in the "bait Blake" episode. Every time Brian is shown, he is being strategic, explaining the game from his point of view, we know what his plan is and how's he going to make it work. Every strategic thing is shown through his eyes. Usually an S3 person will be shown strategizing almost all the time they're on screen. Posting Schedule Thursday - Episode airs and all posters begin posting ratings. Sunday (6:30 pm MST) - All ratings are due. Monday (Noon Pacific Time) - Episode Tally is posted with close calls listed. (any rating where there is not at least 55% agreement), discussion on close calls begins. Wednesday (by Noon) - Discussion on close calls ends. Wednesday (by 6) - After considering discussion, Category Watchdogs and Player Watchdogs make the final call. If they disagree fat little fingers will have the final say. When the vote fails to reach a 55% majority the player WD and Category WD will each choose the rating they feel best represents the edit from any rating consisting of more than 20% of the vote. If they disagree, the overseer will choose the rating he/she feels is best between the two WD ratings or any other rating that consists of more than 33% of the vote. Category Watchdogs 1) Rating watchdog: guatemalafanfic 2) Tone watchdog: OnlyTheHunter 3) Visibility watchdog: Warrior 4) Overseer watchdog: fat little fingers Special Watchdogs SPV Watchdog - scepticA Strategy Watchdogs - MasterDarkNinja T.C. Voting Watchdog - OnlyTheHunter Recap / J.P. Watchdog - OnlyTheHunter Official Tallies: Phoenix1269 Webmaster: Phoenix1269 Edgic Charts: Warrior SPV and Charts: Warrior Confessionals: ILUVTIJUANA (Please check ILT's thread for confessional count and content.) Edgic Guidelines: Warrior Strategic Comments: MasterDarkNinja Episode Reference Episode 1 discussion starts on page ... Tally on page Episode 2 discussion starts on page .. Tally on page Episode 3 discussion starts on page .. Tally on page Episode 4 discussion starts on page .. Tally on page Episode 5 discussion starts on page .. Tally on page Episode 6 discussion starts on page ..Tally on page Episode 7 discussion starts on page ..Tally on page Episode 8 discussion starts on page .Tally on page Episode 9 discussion starts on page .Tally on page Episode 10 discussion starts on page .Tally on page Episode 11 discussion starts on page .Tally on page Episode 12 discussion starts on page .Tally on page Episode 13 discussion starts on page .Tally on page Episode 14 discussion starts on page .Tally on page "Edgic Guidelines" posted by Phoenix The Structure... to facilitate comparing apples to apples each RATING was restructured in the same way, as follows: Definition of how that edit would appear in an EPISODE. The key points: 1) the type or quality of speech 2) the type or quality of screen time 3) their story or "role" 4) SPV 5) complexity within the episode Notes -- Definition of terms: Special or Unusual Focus... - a substantive verbal exchange with Probst or being "highlighted" in some way such as a replay or where where verbal exchanges are subtitled. eg. Bob & Probst's "diamond in the rough" exchange during the E4 pick 'em; JT's Tooth; Parvarti's fat lip. Significant SPV... - where the SPV is part of the character development of a player or where it is regarding relationships and alliances. - not generic SPV like "Susie got treemail" or "Randy smells today"; or someone listing off a bunch of names. Challenge Focus... - being "highlighted" by Probst during the challenge as opposed to being simply mentioned once. - where actions are "replayed" for the audience. eg. Ken beating Bob in the E3 puzzle IC; Matty outlasting Bob in the endurance IC; or Randy scoring ALL three goals in the water polo IC. Note: A single mention of "X scored!" or "X is doing nothing" is not enough to escape the INV unless is was repeated ("highlighted") numerous times during the challenge, caused a fight or was talked about back at camp / in a confessional, etc. -- RATINGS INV - Invisible Definition: A character, within the episode, that is edited to be irrelevant or insignificant to any of the stories. In terms of story... they don't have one. The character... had no confessionals or tribal council questions. was ignored, lacking even in screen/face time; receives NO SPECIAL FOCUS during group exchanges such as intros, pick-ems and challenges was portrayed as irrelevant to the episode or story and/or is lacking in any character development. received NO IMPORTANT OR SIGNIFICANT SPV from other players or in the recap at the beginning of the episode Note: If the character received even one confessional, recap focus or TCQ at any point in the episode, they are "saved" from an INV. --- UTR - Under the Radar Definition: A character, within the episode, that is edited to be either under-utilized or deliberately hidden (the trick is figuring out which). In story terms, they have a role in the story but are being kept out of focus. The character... had low speaking time and / or low content; they may have had a confessional and/or a TC question and/or was involved in camp discussions may have received significant face time / screen time, but isn't seen doing or saying anything special or of major significance; may have had limited screen and little-to-no speaking time BUT receives UNUSUAL or extensive focus during group exchanges like pick'ems, intros, or (possibly) challenges (ie. where verbal exchanges are subtitled; actions are "replayed" for the audience; or the scene is overly-emphasized by Probst) will likely have had some sort of "role" or part in the episode, but will generally be void of direct conflicts and/or character insight. may have had limited screen and little-to-no speaking time BUT received SPV from another player(s) Note: Since showcasing players who do nothing isn't very entertaining, UTR edits do tend toward low visibility, but that isn't a rule, only a generalization. -- CP - Complex Personality Definition: A character, within the episode, that emerges as a "personality" that is well-rounded and well-developed (intellectually, emotionally, personally and strategic/game-wise). The editing has depth, we see their strengths and weaknesses, and their choices are presented to the audience so that we get an insight into their thinking. In terms of story, these characters usually end up being major players in the story (game) and their choices end up shaping the overall, long-term story. The character... had a few-to-several QUALITY confessionals and/or TC questions and/or camp discussions; Confessionals and other discussions showed awareness and a complexity of thought about the game and strategic maneuvering AS WELL AS other complex emotions (like remorse, loneliness, guilt or betrayal) or an internal conflict over a situation. Their thinking process and how these feelings/thoughts/events are affecting them and their game (ie. positively or negatively, successful or not, etc) are expressed intelligently and maturely, as opposed to an irrational outburst ("You're a Liar, T!"). received moderate to significant QUALITY screen/face time, does something notable or important, and was given the opportunity to "talk" about it and showed their thinking process, choices, etc. (ie someone demonstrates a complex strategy or bold strategic move and we see their reasoning for it); may have had UNUSUAL FOCUS during group encounters AND they got to comment on it later. had a fairly significant "role" or part in the episode, and that role is part of the driving force of the story. The story for the episode "revolved" around this character, at least partially. most likely received SPV from another player(s). may very well have moments of OTT (or even UTR) within a single episode since being well-rounded and complex would, by definition, include being obtuse, one-note or single-minded Note: Winners are usually portrayed as CP at several points in the overall story since the story needs to be about them. However, this may not be the case in the early episodes if the winner starts out with a purposeful strategy of UTR. CPs after the merge are common / expected for the winner. A second note: Strategy alone does not equal CP; there needs to be something to back up the strategy. -- MOR - Middle of the Road Definition: A character, within the episode, that says and does more than a UTR edit, but is lacking in character development (ie. we still don't know anything about them or what makes them tick). MOR edits are not oversimplified into OTT nor are they well-rounded into CP. In terms of story, these characters tend towards being a supporting character, the "narrator" or the "survivor is great" commentator. They can be described as being somewhat "bland" or "just sort of there". This edit may contain "very strategic" moments, but without the emotional and intellectual insights necessary for a complex edit. The character... had some confessionals and/or TC questions and/or camp discussions; Confessionals and other discussions generally appear to be reporting or "fluffy" in nature; may have some strategy, but without the necessary thought processes / choices / internal conflict received moderate to significant screen/face time and may have done something notable, but overall, there was a lack in quality... ie. no obvious commentary on the action, no relevant background info, and/or no internal thought processes; May have received UNUSUAL FOCUS during group encounters, BUT this focus was likely linked to someone else and was used as a tool to shine light elsewhere. will likely have had some sort of "role" or part in the episode, but it was as a secondary or supporting role. ie. the immediate story DIDN'T particularly involve them, so they were just there; or the immediate story DID involve them, but this character couldn't "escape" inclusion in the story and we heard very little on their feelings/thoughts on the event; they feel like they are "on hold" may or may not have received SPV from another player(s). Note: Winners are often portrayed as MOR at some point in the story due to the necessity of cooling down, story-wise. However, a consistently MOR edit is not a good thing either, because these characters end up being "just kind of there". -- OTT - Over the Top Definition: A character, within the episode, that is over-simplified or presented as a one-dimensional, one-note caricature. In terms of story, these characters are usually used to create drama and to distract us from the winner. They are the ones we love to love (the hero, the sweetheart) or the ones we love to hate (the villain, the buffoon, the arrogant jerk, the right-royal-beyotch). The character... had a few-to-several confessionals and/or TC questions and/or camp discussions; confessionals and other discussions were generally one-sided, emotional and repetitive, without depth of thought or rationality expressed, lacked in strategy or strategy not expressed with much internal conflict (but probably had lots and lots of conflict with other people); Confessionals were used to "paint" the character into a certain type of cartoon-like role (like the evil villain twirling their mustache, etc) or other extreme behaviour such as no remorse for hurtful actions, focusing only on loyalty or saving one's own skin, an absence of "evil" strategizing when there should be, etc. received moderate to significant screen/face time and/or received a disproportionate amount of time during one or two events, where the focus of the screen-time was used to show the character repeating the same actions over and over; may have had UNUSUAL FOCUS during group encounters, BUT it was used to highlight the extremeness of the person or situation and the character didn't receive an opportunity to talk about it or to express themselves rationally. had a fairly moderate to significant "role" or part in the episode, often the "scene-stealer" or the "drama-maker" for the episode. The story for the episode "revolved" around this character, at least partially. most likely received SPV from other players; SPV was used to reinforce the OTTness and the SPV was extreme or underscored the actions of the player in question. WILL NOT have moments of depth or a "range of complexity" within a single episode. This is a one-dimension edit, and if the edit contains moments of "CP" then it is not OTT. Note: not all OTT players stay this way, and often an OTT player will go UTR for awhile if the editors want to bring them back to the main storyline as a more well-rounded character. Contrasting OTT edits in the same player (OTTN v. OTTP) generally mean a more complex edit over the course of the show. --- *******I added recap focus to the INV rule. I'm not sure if everyone is cool with it or not, but I think being in the recap at the start of the episode should save a person from being INV from now on--it should be a rather rare rating to give out, and both Natalie and Amber's INVs wouldn't have counted, nor those 'debatable' ones--we included 'special focus' like Parvati's fat lip to the definition, so I think recap focus should be included as well. I think this is the only way we can keep the INV rule alive: redefine it's meaning (by including recap focus as part of its use), or completely take out the rating, because then there's no use in having it over UTR if INV isn't going to be used as an elimination tool. Also, I think we should include master KQ's opening spiel that he always posted in his first post of the season in the new thread: [this was copied from the S7 thread to get an idea of how the data can be used to predict the winner or just as important to discount the losers!] Now as you can see, Sandra was a Middle of the Road player and had Medium Visibility. I'm guessing her final rating was probably CPP. That's good. Being OTT or UTR is not as good, although we have had two UTR winners in Tina and Ethan (UTRP). Although they had much meaningful editing as apposed to a Darrah or a Butch. Sandra came from the tribe that was edited as more strategic. Sandra was never ignored in the editing, but she was also not the 'front stage' kinda player (like ruppert or Jon) Basically, we chart these players editing from week to week. Early on we can rule out players like Osten, Jon, Ruppert etc. because they are too OTT or too Negative or even too positive. Then the players in the background - with little or no story. After 4-5 weeks, you only have a handfull of players. Apply the logic - alliances - secret pairs etc. Then its all an educated guess. Keep in mind these 'similarities' have been in all six survivors since the first on. We usually don't count S1 editing as heavily, because MB was just getting started. The concept is easy, but applying it is tricky. That is why if anyone can come up with other 'similarities', then we will add it to edgic. If you look past to all past winners, you can logically satisfy all the elements of this theory. Obviously some fit better than others. As a definition clarafication, when I say Middle of the Road, I mean not too OTT or not too INV - I hope that makes sense, because Sandra being CPP is still considered Middle of the Road editing. I hope that helps people understand the concept. I'd be happy to answer any specific questions. KQ Last Edited By: Warrior 02/08/10 04:55 PM. Edited 2 times.
Warrior		#2	[-]
Posts: 3005 (02/08/10 10:32 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	CHARTS Overall Ratings Courtesy of guatemala funfic. S-1 thru S-19 Courtesy of Blake S-1 Courtesy of 9RedWing19 S-2 Courtesy of 9RedWing19 S-3 Courtesy of gualemala funfic and TheIsraeliDevil. S-4 Courtesy of guatemala funfic and cantthinkofaname. S-5 Courtesy of 9RedWing19 S-6 Courtesy of 9RedWing19 S-7 Courtesy of 9RedWing19 S-7 Rated to the 2006 guidelines by Warrior and Crew. S-8 Courtesy of 9RedWing19 S-8 Rated to the 2010 guidelines by Blake and Crew. S-9 Courtesy of 9RedWing19 S-10 Courtesy of 9RedWing19 S-11 Courtesy of 9RedWing19 S-12 CHARTS * Player was sent to Exile Island S-13 CHARTS *Player was sent to Exile Island and shown there. Player was sent to Exile Island but not shown there. S-14 CHARTS *Player was sent to Exile Island and shown there. Player was sent to Exile Island but not shown there. S-15 CHART S-16 CHART S-17 CHART S-18 CHART S-19 CHART S-20 CHART *Player was sent to Exile Island and shown there. Player was sent to Exile Island but not shown there. CLOSE CALLS Second Person Visibility Second Person Visibility (SPV) is a count of the number of times a contestant is talked about by other contestants (either in confessionals or during gameplay footage) in a significant context. It excludes simple lists of contestants names (e.g. Katie saying that her, Janu, Ian and Wanda will vote for Coby) or simple descriptive passages (e.g. Caryn saying that Jeff looked funny riding a horse). A cell highlighted in blue indicates that the contestant was either booted or in danger of being booted in that episode. This data is being counted to test the theory that the winner has a relatively high SPV count (postulated by KQ based on his observation of JennaM in S6). This data is being counted and categorized by ScepticA, see his post below. S-9 S-10 S-11 S-12 S-13 S-14 S-16 Voting Results: F-9 S1-No switch, Tagi majority 5-4, Tagi winner S2-No switch, Ogakor majority 5-4, Ogakor winner S3-Switch, Boran majority 5-4, Boran winner - exception S4-Switch, Rotu majority 7-2, Maraamu winner S5-No switch, Chuay Gahn majority 5-4, Chuay Gahn winner S6-Switch, Tambaqui majority 5-4, Jaburu winner S7-No switch, Drake majority 5-4, Drake winner S8-No switch, Chapera plurality 4-3-2, Chapera winner S9-Switch, Yasur majority 6-3, Lopevi winner S10-No switch, Koror majority 8-1, Koror winner S11-Switch, Yaxha majority 5-4, Nakum winner S12 - No switch (the tribes once down to 2 early stayed intact), Casaya majority 6 - 3, Casaya winner. S13 - Switch (the mutiny surely counts as such), Aitu majority 6 - 3, Aitu winner. S14 - Switch, Moto majority 6 - 3, Ravu winner. S15 - Switch, Fei Long majority 6 - 3, Fei Long winner - exception. S16 - Switch, Malakal majority 5 - 4, Malakal winner - exception. Last Edited By: Warrior 09/15/10 02:12 PM. Edited 15 times.
Warrior		#3	[-]
Posts: 3006 (02/08/10 10:39 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Last Edited By: Warrior 05/14/10 07:04 AM. Edited 8 times.
Phoenix1269		#4	[-]
Posts: 801 (02/08/10 02:47 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	The Voting Site Voting Deadline: Monday Evenings 8:00 pm MST that's 10:00 pm for Eastern Canada / USA and 7:00 pm for West Coast Canada / USA.... everyone else please verify for your specific time zone . Please note time change Stats will be posted same night for close calls. Reminders: Please use your proper Sucks Handle If you are spoiled... even a little bit, please indicate that you are at the voting site and do not make winner/loser picks. I have spies and i will know if you are spoiled or not and your winner/loser votes will be removed. Please ensure that you are happy with your votes. Once you submit, you are done. (no redos... it's too messy) Reminder... there is a reset button for you if you need, please make sure you don't accidentally "reset" instead of "submit" Newcomers & and veterans alike... it's important to post your ratings and reasonings. The discussion is helpful to everyone in determining the winner. (The voting site is just statistical data of the discussions.) Newbies As long as you have been posting regularly so that everyone can see that you've got the hang of it... and when you feel like you've got the hang of it, send a private message to Fat Little Fingers for the voting link Edgicers who haven't voted since Micronesia please PM FLF directly with for the link. Edgicers who have voted since Gabon but who have misplaced the link, you can PM me (Phoenix1269) Last Edited By: Phoenix1269 02/08/10 04:30 PM. Edited 1 times.
Phoenix1269		#5	[-]
Posts: 802 (02/08/10 02:48 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	reserved for MORD Analysis stuff Last Edited By: Phoenix1269 02/08/10 04:31 PM. Edited 1 times.
Phoenix1269	reserved	#6	[-]
Posts: 803 (02/08/10 02:49 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	reserved
gretchensucks		#7	[-]
Posts: 1227 (02/08/10 06:44 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	And we're off...
FallenTorch.fantasygamescen...		#8	[-]
Posts: 261 (02/08/10 07:27 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Hopefully we'll have a bit more of a balanced season than the last couple.
unduli clone		#9	[-]
Posts: 8537 (02/08/10 08:05 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	^ I think we will, since most all of these are big characters in the first place - they can't really make a Russell or Coach airtime vacuum since everyone's a known entity. If the editing is anything like ASS I will be in heaven.
BlakeB717		#10	[-]
Posts: 2954 (02/08/10 08:08 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Wonderful World Remove this ad Tips for Edgic Success! As always, I strongly encourage everyone to keep an edgic excel chart with them where they can easily place their ratings and hopefully upload and post them here when you have solidified your choices! It's always nice to look at where people's heads have been at and see different trends that people are seeing. It can also help avoid "You love Erinn!" "Bitch I gave her an OTTN and she's never been on my contenders list!" "WTF". If you don't have the time or energy to make a chart or need help using excel, feel free to PM me and I'll send you a template for this season when I have time to make one. Also, I hope everyone posts explainations of each of their ratings in their posts, rather than a long list of edgic formulae. Erinn- INV1 Coach- UTRP1 Debbie- CP5... that doesn't help all that much. I know that most of you do, but I encourage you to give a little explaination of each rating you post, not just "JT- UTRN2.. he was such an ass, you could tell the editors wanted us to really dislike him!", instead try and do "Sydney- CPM5... she gave insights about her own position in the tribe, she was given tons of positive SPV but later people's opinions changed and she got negative SPV, and she was clearly shown all episode and it coincides with Warrior's chart!" Please, please, PLEASE re-read the explainations of ratings on the front edgic page!! I'm in my SEVENTH season of edgic now and before (and even during) every season I re-read the rules for each rating and the guidelines we are expected to follow! Edgic has rules, each rating has criteria--hopefully we can avoid new "inventions" of what ratings mean. Refreshing your mind will help you decide on what rating is best. You don't have to follow the crowd either: if you think a player falls under a certain rating, do it--don't look at what everyone is posting! Make up your own mind first on each rating, THEN look and see what everyone else is giving as ratings, and make any changes that you feel you need to make (we all make mistakes, but your first instincts are usually right, and you can modify them if you feel anyone else is making a better case, but don't forget to make a case if you feel that your ratings are right! Fight for it! It keeps Edgic lively) I also encourage everyone to look back at our pre-ASS seasons of Edgic, especially KQ's (our founder's) posts. Edgic, lately, has become mainly labelling rather than analyzing... let's try and get more analytical this season and less label-y. Finally, try and make posts pretty! Here are some tips for getting your posts read and replied to: -It's always nice to read a post with paragraphs (big blocks of writing get very boring and your eyes naturally skim through it; even place spaces where it's not even the end of a thought, keep blocks of writing down to a few sentences only) -Bold the names of tribes, players, the host and posters in edgic--it'll allow people to see who you are talking about or referring to in your post -Making ratings with pretty pictures and colors or simply having a visually appealing ratings post will probably increase the likelihood of people reading it: act like you're a head honcho! The nicer the ratings post, the more likely people will think you're some experienced, important person and really read what you have to say! Just my little post before the season starts that I hope you keep in mind. My PM is always open for business, I don't bite, I'm just fiesty =)
fat little fingers		#11	[-]
Posts: 6398 (02/09/10 12:01 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Good tips, Blake. My tips would be 1) pare your ideas down to one or two per post. Six big ideas will only get the majority to glaze over and not read. Let someone respond. Bring up your other brilliant points later. 2) Even if you don't know how to form a paragraph, just develop a nervous tic and double space your lines occasionally. You will become very popular and sexually attractive to the opposite or same sex, whichever you prefer. Warning: Type posts that resemble large blocks of cheese and no one will want to be your friend. Mainly because they didn't want to read that monster and so have absolutely no idea what your brilliant thoughts are! Follow these simple steps and you will rule Edgic! (Or at least get listened and responded to...)
BlakeB717		#12	[-]
Posts: 2960 (02/09/10 12:12 AM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Also a reminder to everyone at the addition of the recap rule added to the guidelines for the INV rating... if they are given focus in the 'Last time on, Survivor' segment then they aren't INV. I'm not sure if the "Next Time on... Survivor" thing should count too? shrug
Phoenix1269		#13	[-]
Posts: 805 (02/09/10 08:30 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	BlakeB717 wrote: I'm not sure if the "Next Time on... Survivor" thing should count too? shrug i would consider it.... i guess it depends on whether or not the next time segments feature clips that are not actually shown on the next show (ie unique information)
Phoenix1269	Watchdogs	#14	[-]
Posts: 806 (02/09/10 08:39 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	We do have some last minute issues to address regarding watchdogs... guatamala fanfic has resigned his official ratings watchdog role due to other commitments this season. Craig was majorly absent last season and rarely voted which makes it more difficult for the tie breakers (Tone watchdog) so i have removed him from my calculations We haven't heard from OTH in a while... so not sure if he is available this season for Tone Watchdog Chapera Rocks and Tropical Rain have both volunteered ... do either of you have a preference for which role? Does anyone have an opinion? Any other volunteers (looks like we might have a third opening - to be confirmed Watchdog Roles (REVISED) Ratings: Blake chapera rocks Tone: tropical rain unduli clone Visibility: Warrior canthinkofaname Lord High Overseer, The Grand Pooh-bah & Official Tiebreaker FLF -- ETA: roles have been updated now. Thank you to unduli, chapera and tropical rain for volunteering... Last Edited By: Phoenix1269 02/10/10 08:20 PM. Edited 2 times.
unduli clone		#15	[-]
Posts: 8548 (02/09/10 08:48 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	I could volunteer for tone watchdog, if needed. I did it back in Fiji for part of the season, but I was one of the big pushers for Stacey's NN so that's part of my track record. (:
chapera rocks		#16	[-]
Posts: 12933 (02/09/10 09:40 AM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts	I would do ratings watchdog, but I really don't care either way.
bryanpasa		#17	[-]
Posts: 3479 (02/09/10 10:01 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	I'll try being more active in Edgic ^_^ I hope this season is more edgic-based.
oh ehm gee		#18	[-]
Posts: 4501 (02/09/10 11:01 AM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	I'd like to throw my hat in for the first time (full-season). Of course, choosing this season, especially when I (and a lot of other people) accidentally got spoiled the entire bootlist is going to be interesting. I'll probably do ratings and spoiler tag the contender list. Those who wish to remain unspoiled should avoid Sucks proper and probably CTS this season. Those who already are spoiled should try not to base their winner picks/commentary on that, because the only thing worse than trying to "win" at edgic (by which I mean having the winner pick as early as possible and using this as a measure of your own self-worth) is doing so by cheating.
gretchensucks		#19	[-]
Posts: 1233 (02/09/10 12:08 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	A dose of common sense never hurts either.
Hippochinfat		#20	[-]
Posts: 675 (02/09/10 03:54 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts	Wonderful World Remove this ad Does anyone know if I would be eligible to get the link to the voting site for this season? I feel like I have a good understanding after lurking S18 and doing S19 but I don't know if you have to be around for quite a while or whatever to get the link.

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

S-20 Edgic (editing and logic)

S-20 Edgic (editing and logic)