This infuriatingly undefined question is one of the reasons I decided I don't have time to struggle with this game. I like having a reputation as a superforecaster from GJP4, but this game seems designed to teach us humility by forcing us in cases like this to forecast the organizers of this game instead of the apparent question. Instead, now I'm concentrating on the upcoming Hybrid Forecasting Competition. I hope to help design one of the competing versions of this game, but if I turn out to not be on a winning proposal team, then I'll jump at the chance to forecast on some other contractor's version of the game. http://www.iarpa.gov/index.php/research-programs/hfc
I wasn't going to weigh in on this, but having thought about it over the past day or so, I will.
First, @GJDrew, I am actually very glad that @cmeinel posted her comment including the user names of those of us who have followed her and benefited from her research and insight. I am sorry to see her go, but understand her frustration. She did not owe us an explanation, but as she said, it was appropriate to her followers to explain why. So thank you, @cmeinel.
Second, it was not until I saw this thread that I realized that @einsteinjs had dropped out. @Anneinak hinted in her comment that other superforecasters "have followed new pastures." Has there been a spate of drop outs that I somehow missed?
@rjfmgy,
As @cmeinel mentioned above, she is focusing her attention on an upcoming Hybrid Forecasting Competition, and is inviting people to consider joining her team. I know that dozens of top forecasters have taken her up on her offer. When this competition launches, I am expecting that quite a few top forecasters we've all come to appreciate will disappear from GJI.
I do not know who @einsteinjs is, but I was/am a huge admirer. A while ago he/she sent a message through cmeinel that he/she was withdrawing. He/she gave no reason. I do not want to speculate. I sure miss @einsteinjs' postings!!!
Not only was @einsteinjs so often right, he/she helped the rest of us improve as forecasters because he/she always gave reasons supporting his/her forecast. I admired not only his/her great accuracy, but also his/her tremendous generosity: willingness to take the time to share resources and thinking.
@everyone
I am not sure this is right. it is not right to make these comments against GJO without listening to their side of the story too. I believe @ravel in the first reply is right in saying that he is sorry when he learns that the GJO is run with limited resources.
But I also would like to say that cmeinel is withdrawing because she wants to be a Superforecaster and thinks that she can't because of this particularly difficult question. That part I don't like. The other one is that she wants to create something better. Fine. But it should not be discussed here. For respect to the GJO. Likewise for the better platforms that may be out there. That is also fine, but also it should not be discussed here, eespecially hinting at the fact that the better forecaster will be gone etc. We are all here in voluntary basis, no one forced anyone.
I am sorry to say this , but I found it a little unhetical, and uncalled for.
@rfmgy, I dispute your contention that you are a "mediocre" forecaster. The leaderboards are misleading for two reasons. (1) They reward lucky guesses. (2) They fail to account for how many questions have been scored.
According to my calculations from Feb. 23, before the managers hid all but the top 20 on each leaderboard, on the geopoilitical leaderboard, by the figures of merit of at least six questions scored, and by the ratio of accuracy score per question scored, you ranked #99 out of 2526 players scored. That put you in the top 4%, within striking distance of superforecasterdom.
Next, consider the figure of merit of upvotes per question. Hold on to your hat.
Hold on...
Hold on...
Hold on...
YOU WERE NUMBER ONE WITH 98 PER QUESTION SCORED!!!!!
Now consider that it probably takes 50 to 100 scored questions to know for certain how good you are, this is just a start, and a whopping good one, at that.
Finally, it is well documented in the annals of cognitive science that when people say to themselves that they are mediocre, this tends, on average, aggregated across many human lab rats, to lower a person's performance. I'd love to find out how you would do in the future if you were to embrace the likelihood that you have extraordinary potential, as demonstrated by your statistics so far. Darn it, don't prove me wrong.
If I have any say in how the Hybrid Forecasting Competition is run -- and I am trying! -- anyone will be able to join this great experiment in seeing how far ahead we can get with melding human and machine forecasting. We could make history. We could prevent wars and economic disasters. But we will need the best minds to develop the full potential of this research. What if you really are among the best?
Sigh, meanwhile my email to [email protected] asking to get my user name deleted bounced. I don't want to become a zombie user like einsteinjs with my scores declining in full view of other players. @GJDrew, could you please remove cmeinel entirely? I keep on getting tempted to cheer on other players. I'm sure @Anneinak can take over that job, right, Anne? Now don't you get mad at me for volunteering you!
Hello,
I don't remember having reading your comments. Im sure that mine would have been better if i had read one of yours.
So im not pleased if you quit this game.
But im in my first year at this game. I take this game like if it is golf. I play against my self. Of course i can see that others have betters results than me but i also see that when i have bad results i have almost just me to blame. Between perfect question (and answer) and the overall benefits to me, i assure you that the benefits is greater. One of the benefits is the crowd (consensus graph, rational, hyperlink source) and the other, the overall organization of this game (the platform, pertinent stats, variety of questions that you can choose or not).
Hope you find the perfect organization but i am also sad if someone want to take the "crowd" out of this game.
This infuriatingly undefined question is one of the reasons I decided I don't have time to struggle with this game. I like having a reputation as a superforecaster from GJP4, but this game seems designed to teach us humility by forcing us in cases like this to forecast the organizers of this game instead of the apparent question. Instead, now I'm concentrating on the upcoming Hybrid Forecasting Competition. I hope to help design one of the competing versions of this game, but if I turn out to not be on a winning proposal team, then I'll jump at the chance to forecast on some other contractor's version of the game. http://www.iarpa.gov/index.php/research-programs/hfc
Anyone who wants to follow me offline as I seek the Holy Grail of a more powerful aid to us forecasters, you can reach me at carolyn.meinel@cmeinel.com. Meanwhile I'll do my best to get OFF this game instead of being listed as inactive. So hasta vista to my followers who aren't already interacting with me outside this game: @Xsess @Dwight-Smith @thmnewman @Gil-Edgar @tmahoney @lsgold7 @Counterintelligence @Enthu @Hochstetler @Delorean @g @howard @facetious @The_Gnome @BG1 @DrStrangelove @Flyn1200 @PianoPicasso @AndersAsa @writeitdown @HW15 @tkimble @Doudtful @firemansghost @mparrault @lindsey @Dima-K @crntaylor @azivkovic @Mos @MattWard @AlexisTocqueville @luckyomari @Ermonic @Pstauble @Edwinian @Clairvoyance @ACurmudgeon @ @ts2m @M3T1tus @dada @GeneH @S1 @ConnorM @peterhansen90 @Bklyn_j @dniewood @deggen @Etsudo @praedico @Spyglass @Manfred @VoxVox @FuturoMAGE @subject1138 @MAA414 @richtyge @gkamstra @RCScheffers @Random @Spandrelbarca @Rene @gstaneff @fifty-sixty @spotter @dbealick @davidk @terobrandstaka @RobK @walt @Rectitude @malcmur @dominich @Konrad @balbec @Ioana @Raisinville @rjfmgy @Rote @TopQuark @ESR @Xu @sharms10k @Paul15 @NickLutz @Ritam @seveDB @Jean-Pierre @Bill @Agent0090 @RolandKofler @Aches @JoeG @madre @Paul_Theron @September @DariusX @AgentCarter @JeanP @tumbleweed @Reynard @SmallTown-Gal
@everyone: For some reason I am inspired to associate the following article with this thread.
http://thesmartset.com/dead-philosopher-walking/
"... he forces them to follow the logic of their own actions to the end ...."
I wasn't going to weigh in on this, but having thought about it over the past day or so, I will.
First, @GJDrew, I am actually very glad that @cmeinel posted her comment including the user names of those of us who have followed her and benefited from her research and insight. I am sorry to see her go, but understand her frustration. She did not owe us an explanation, but as she said, it was appropriate to her followers to explain why. So thank you, @cmeinel.
Second, it was not until I saw this thread that I realized that @einsteinjs had dropped out. @Anneinak hinted in her comment that other superforecasters "have followed new pastures." Has there been a spate of drop outs that I somehow missed?
@rjfmgy,
As @cmeinel mentioned above, she is focusing her attention on an upcoming Hybrid Forecasting Competition, and is inviting people to consider joining her team. I know that dozens of top forecasters have taken her up on her offer. When this competition launches, I am expecting that quite a few top forecasters we've all come to appreciate will disappear from GJI.
I do not know who @einsteinjs is, but I was/am a huge admirer. A while ago he/she sent a message through cmeinel that he/she was withdrawing. He/she gave no reason. I do not want to speculate. I sure miss @einsteinjs' postings!!!
@Anneinak, Thanks for your comment. I suppose when the Hybrid Forecasting Competition launches, GJO will be left to mediocre scorers like me ;).
I will also miss @einsteinjs.
@rjfmgy,
Not only was @einsteinjs so often right, he/she helped the rest of us improve as forecasters because he/she always gave reasons supporting his/her forecast. I admired not only his/her great accuracy, but also his/her tremendous generosity: willingness to take the time to share resources and thinking.
@everyone
I am not sure this is right. it is not right to make these comments against GJO without listening to their side of the story too. I believe @ravel in the first reply is right in saying that he is sorry when he learns that the GJO is run with limited resources.
But I also would like to say that cmeinel is withdrawing because she wants to be a Superforecaster and thinks that she can't because of this particularly difficult question. That part I don't like. The other one is that she wants to create something better. Fine. But it should not be discussed here. For respect to the GJO. Likewise for the better platforms that may be out there. That is also fine, but also it should not be discussed here, eespecially hinting at the fact that the better forecaster will be gone etc. We are all here in voluntary basis, no one forced anyone.
I am sorry to say this , but I found it a little unhetical, and uncalled for.
@rfmgy, I dispute your contention that you are a "mediocre" forecaster. The leaderboards are misleading for two reasons. (1) They reward lucky guesses. (2) They fail to account for how many questions have been scored.
According to my calculations from Feb. 23, before the managers hid all but the top 20 on each leaderboard, on the geopoilitical leaderboard, by the figures of merit of at least six questions scored, and by the ratio of accuracy score per question scored, you ranked #99 out of 2526 players scored. That put you in the top 4%, within striking distance of superforecasterdom.
Next, consider the figure of merit of upvotes per question. Hold on to your hat.
Hold on...
Hold on...
Hold on...
YOU WERE NUMBER ONE WITH 98 PER QUESTION SCORED!!!!!
Now consider that it probably takes 50 to 100 scored questions to know for certain how good you are, this is just a start, and a whopping good one, at that.
Finally, it is well documented in the annals of cognitive science that when people say to themselves that they are mediocre, this tends, on average, aggregated across many human lab rats, to lower a person's performance. I'd love to find out how you would do in the future if you were to embrace the likelihood that you have extraordinary potential, as demonstrated by your statistics so far. Darn it, don't prove me wrong.
If I have any say in how the Hybrid Forecasting Competition is run -- and I am trying! -- anyone will be able to join this great experiment in seeing how far ahead we can get with melding human and machine forecasting. We could make history. We could prevent wars and economic disasters. But we will need the best minds to develop the full potential of this research. What if you really are among the best?
Sigh, meanwhile my email to [email protected] asking to get my user name deleted bounced. I don't want to become a zombie user like einsteinjs with my scores declining in full view of other players. @GJDrew, could you please remove cmeinel entirely? I keep on getting tempted to cheer on other players. I'm sure @Anneinak can take over that job, right, Anne? Now don't you get mad at me for volunteering you!
@cmeinel,
Nobody can fill your shoes, but I'll try.
FYI, @rjfmgy didn't get alerted to your reply because of the typo.
Hello,
I don't remember having reading your comments. Im sure that mine would have been better if i had read one of yours.
So im not pleased if you quit this game.
But im in my first year at this game. I take this game like if it is golf. I play against my self. Of course i can see that others have betters results than me but i also see that when i have bad results i have almost just me to blame. Between perfect question (and answer) and the overall benefits to me, i assure you that the benefits is greater. One of the benefits is the crowd (consensus graph, rational, hyperlink source) and the other, the overall organization of this game (the platform, pertinent stats, variety of questions that you can choose or not).
Hope you find the perfect organization but i am also sad if someone want to take the "crowd" out of this game.
Comment deleted on Apr 16, 2016 08:18PM UTC