Aether Posted May 29, 2014 Report Share Posted May 29, 2014 75% sounds 70% too high for me. Do you mean 70 percentage points, or 70%? Because the latter is would be 22,5%, not 5%. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodfalcon Posted May 29, 2014 Report Share Posted May 29, 2014 Do you mean 70 percentage points, or 70%? Because the latter is would be 22,5%, not 5%. I'll leave that open to interpretation until someone actually calculates the ratio. Choose whichever feels best. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaggai Posted May 29, 2014 Report Share Posted May 29, 2014 (edited) Go to Theoryland and search for RAFO. The majority of results are WoT based, but the majority turn out to be wrong, hahaha. RAFO is basically him saying "that is a topic I'm not revealing details on." So when you have a thousand people guessing things, nearly zero of them accurately predict the way the books are going to turn out. 75% sounds 70% too high for me. Trust me. I did search it. I only did/am doing Cosmere stuff, but 75% of the RAFOd yes/no questions whose answers we know were answered "Yes". At some point I plan to finish the project, getting more questions and comparing it to the normal rates. Nevertheless, 75% was the rate. See the second link in my sig. Edited May 29, 2014 by Shaggai 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodfalcon Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 (edited) Trust me. I did search it. I only did/am doing Cosmere stuff, but 75% of the RAFOd yes/no questions whose answers we know were answered "Yes". At some point I plan to finish the project, getting more questions and comparing it to the normal rates. Nevertheless, 75% was the rate. See the second link in my sig. Ah, I see. That's a great thread. I can see where you are coming from, but there is a crazy bias in those posts. people are looking for those that were answered. Not at the total amount of RAFO's. There are loads of RAFO's on Adonalsium and Cosmere stuff that are potentially decades away from being decided as well. In fact, if you are really including every RAFO, you'd go into the recordings of the signings and you'd see the "Yes"'s are hopelessly behind. People asked questions that have been answered LITERALLY IN THE BOOK THEY ARE HOLDING and they get RAFO'd in the same manner as others. Sometimes he says "That's in Words of Radiance" (which still means RAFO) but mostly he just says "You'll have to read and find out." Can't blame some of those people - it's like mom's buying books for their kids and asking questions for them, but the amount of RAFO that gets cut from the database is staggering. Edited May 30, 2014 by Bloodfalcon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaggai Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Ah, I see. That's a great thread. I can see where you are coming from, but there is a crazy bias in those posts. people are looking for those that were answered. Not at the total amount of RAFO's. There are loads of RAFO's on Adonalsium and Cosmere stuff that are potentially decades away from being decided as well. In fact, if you are really including every RAFO, you'd go into the recordings of the signings and you'd see the "Yes"'s are hopelessly behind. People asked questions that have been answered LITERALLY IN THE BOOK THEY ARE HOLDING and they get RAFO'd in the same manner as others. Sometimes he says "That's in Words of Radiance" (which still means RAFO) but mostly he just says "You'll have to read and find out." Can't blame some of those people - it's like mom's buying books for their kids and asking questions for them, but the amount of RAFO that gets cut from the database is staggering. RAFOs that haven't been answered are worthless for the purposes of my analysis. I'm looking at the answers of the ones we have, in order to predict the answers to the ones we don't. You can't assume that the answers to all of the unanswered ones are "no". And since this is, apparently, "the biggest RAFO", the stuff about "people asking questions that get answered in the book they're holding" doesn't apply. 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodfalcon Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 RAFOs that haven't been answered are worthless for the purposes of my analysis. I'm looking at the answers of the ones we have, in order to predict the answers to the ones we don't. You can't assume that the answers to all of the unanswered ones are "no". And since this is, apparently, "the biggest RAFO", the stuff about "people asking questions that get answered in the book they're holding" doesn't apply. Then your comment doesn't make much sense at all. I don't see how your other thread would be relevant seeing as this entire thread is about a RAFO that has not been answered.... You either include those in your analysis, or your past few comments don't apply to this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaggai Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 Then your comment doesn't make much sense at all. I don't see how your other thread would be relevant seeing as this entire thread is about a RAFO that has not been answered.... You either include those in your analysis, or your past few comments don't apply to this thread. I looked at answered RAFOs. 75% of them were answered "yes". I'm generalizing that statistic to other RAFOs, because as far as I can tell there isn't a legitimate reason why unanswered ones would have to be different. I can't include them in my analysis of the probability of the answers to RAFOs, though, because they don't have the answers. Any RAFO we don't know the answer to has a 75% chance of being answered "yes", but it can't affect the statistics because it isn't answered "yes" or "no". 1 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodfalcon Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 (edited) I looked at answered RAFOs. 75% of them were answered "yes". I'm generalizing that statistic to other RAFOs, because as far as I can tell there isn't a legitimate reason why unanswered ones would have to be different. I can't include them in my analysis of the probability of the answers to RAFOs, though, because they don't have the answers. Any RAFO we don't know the answer to has a 75% chance of being answered "yes", but it can't affect the statistics because it isn't answered "yes" or "no". That's not really how it works. You have to consider the difference it makes to have more legitimate content to consider. When people read Words of Radiance, they can start asking questions about what they have read. There is new evidence to take into account in their line of reasoning. SO people guessing about the Cosmere plot after reading the Mistborn Trilogy are going to be making guesses that they wouldn't consider if they had read through WoR (assume they are reading the books as they are published). Can you see how there will be a drastic change over time of how many undanswered RAFO's are successful? Right now the rate is probably abysmal considering how many people on this site alone have different ideas of the characters' intentions. You can't really force statistics like that with lines like "I'll only consider X type of question to in my analysis, but then I'll expand my reasoning to Y type of questions." It's messy and incorrect. You also have to consider that there is a difference between certain unanswered RAFO's. Naturally there wouldn't be, but Brandon is the one that decides what topics get RAFO'd. If Brandon says he is going to RAFO everything from the topic of "Hoid's life pre-Elantris" for example, there are different rules for RAFOs in that scenario than there are for other topics. Hell, there are certain topics (like the names of the Shards or of the Suges, for a while) that get RAFO'd because he hasn't even written them down yet. Those will be RAFO's that don't even have a correct/incorrect at times, or are bias because he might be more or less likely to consider an option after hearing a fan ask about it. There is nothing more significant when assessing a labelled group than the reason they have that label. Edited May 30, 2014 by Bloodfalcon 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaggai Posted May 30, 2014 Report Share Posted May 30, 2014 (edited) That's not really how it works. You have to consider the difference it makes to have more legitimate content to consider. When people read Words of Radiance, they can start asking questions about what they have read. There is new evidence to take into account in their line of reasoning. SO people guessing about the Cosmere plot after reading the Mistborn Trilogy are going to be making guesses that they wouldn't consider if they had read through WoR (assume they are reading the books as they are published). Can you see how there will be a drastic change over time of how many undanswered RAFO's are successful? Right now the rate is probably abysmal considering how many people on this site alone have different ideas of the characters' intentions. You can't really force statistics like that with lines like "I'll only consider X type of question to in my analysis, but then I'll expand my reasoning to Y type of questions." It's messy and incorrect. You also have to consider that there is a difference between certain unanswered RAFO's. Naturally there wouldn't be, but Brandon is the one that decides what topics get RAFO'd. If Brandon says he is going to RAFO everything from the topic of "Hoid's life pre-Elantris" for example, there are different rules for RAFOs in that scenario than there are for other topics. Hell, there are certain topics (like the names of the Shards or of the Suges, for a while) that get RAFO'd because he hasn't even written them down yet. Those will be RAFO's that don't even have a correct/incorrect at times, or are bias because he might be more or less likely to consider an option after hearing a fan ask about it. There is nothing more significant when assessing a labelled group than the reason they have that label. I'm only taking Yes/No RAFOs with answers, and then applying that to Yes/No RAFOs without answers. Sure, Brandon could choose to RAFO different stuff. But we don't have that information, so it has no statistical weight. The mistake you're making is that you're assuming my claims have to be true overall. You're assuming that if there's a 75% chance that this is yes, that 75% of all RAFOs ever must be yes. But they don't have to be. Probability is a function of the observer. You take probability based on the information you have, no matter how much or little. It's why the success rate for switching in the Monty Hall problem is 2/3. See this article for an explanation of the math behind it: http://lesswrong.com/lw/2b0/bayes_theorem_illustrated_my_way/ Edited May 30, 2014 by Shaggai Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheTuninator Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 Now that I think on it, this sounds like it would be a potential Mistborn Trilogy 3 sort of deal. Hoid hates Odium, Braize is Odium's home, Mistborn 3 is future space travel with Hoid as a main character..... Whabam. Hoid on Braize in one of the biggest Cosmere-relevant moments ever. The biggest RAFO. I'm really enjoying the mental image of Mistborn and Surgebinders hot-dropping on Braize under Hoid's command. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodfalcon Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 (edited) I'm only taking Yes/No RAFOs with answers, and then applying that to Yes/No RAFOs without answers. Sure, Brandon could choose to RAFO different stuff. But we don't have that information, so it has no statistical weight. The mistake you're making is that you're assuming my claims have to be true overall. You're assuming that if there's a 75% chance that this is yes, that 75% of all RAFOs ever must be yes. But they don't have to be. Probability is a function of the observer. You take probability based on the information you have, no matter how much or little. It's why the success rate for switching in the Monty Hall problem is 2/3. See this article for an explanation of the math behind it: http://lesswrong.com/lw/2b0/bayes_theorem_illustrated_my_way/ I'm sitting here watching you shape and mold what you are considering in your analysis in this thread. If you are trying to say that 75% of cherry-picked examples are correct, I'm all with you. Otherwise, 75% is.... way too high. Edited May 31, 2014 by Bloodfalcon Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaggai Posted May 31, 2014 Report Share Posted May 31, 2014 I'm sitting here watching you shape and mold what you are considering in your analysis in this thread. If you are trying to say that 75% of cherry-picked examples are correct, I'm all with you. Otherwise, 75% is.... way too high. "Yes" was the answer to 75% of all answered Yes/No RAFOs that, on Theoryland, were tagged with or contained one or more of the following keywords: Cosmere Stormlight Mistborn Warbreaker Roshar Scadrial Nalthis Is that still too cherry-picked for you? Because all of those conditions, except "answered", apply to this one. This is what I've been saying all along. I haven't been shaping or molding what I consider my analysis. I've just been explaining it differently, because you keep on not getting it. Do you have any concrete reason, other than common sense/intuition, why 75% is way too high? Because I haven't seen one so far, and a lot of true things aren't intuitive. 2 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodfalcon Posted June 1, 2014 Report Share Posted June 1, 2014 Yeah. Too cherry picked to be responding on this thread because it doesn't fit. Keep those legit statistics to your own groundbreaking RAFO analysis thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Shaggai Posted June 1, 2014 Report Share Posted June 1, 2014 Yeah. Too cherry picked to be responding on this thread because it doesn't fit. Keep those legit statistics to your own groundbreaking RAFO analysis thread. Let me repeat myself: Can you give me one good, concrete reason why "being answered" makes them not applicable to this? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bloodfalcon Posted June 1, 2014 Report Share Posted June 1, 2014 Let me repeat myself: Can you give me one good, concrete reason why "being answered" makes them not applicable to this? Yes, and I did. There is a bias created by the author and what he considers proper material to have talked about. There you go. You ignored that before, but it's the truth. He's come out on several topics and said that he will RAFO any question related to ______ or ________. You're conducting an analysis in the dark if you think it doesn't matter, and it's one of the reasons I've dismissed your 75% figure as well as your theory and your thread. Not that the thread is even that bad..... honestly, it's a good collection only because you haven't tried spouting any of this extra stuff.... but I haven't browsed this site in a week or so, so who knows. Anyway, this thread is pretty dead now as far as the main topic is concerned, so I'm done here and you can continue on your board if you like. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts