Merged New telepathy test: which number did I write ?

Status
Not open for further replies.
Michel H said:
Well, fagin answered:
"xx
Which I think is 20."

This seems to indicate that his/her answer to this test, his number is "20". But this test is so designed that the answer must be 1, 2, 3 or 4. So, I ask for some explanation.
I request an elevated quality in (your answers to) this test. You demand a lot of rigor from me, but are you ready to provide the same? I ask myself this question.
Click to expand...

Real rigor from you would consist of a real scientific test. Guessing numbers on the net is just silly.
 
If I was telepathic then I would be making a fortune on the internet poker sites.
 
Michel H said:
Well, fagin answered:
"xx
Which I think is 20."

This seems to indicate that his/her answer to this test, his number is "20". But this test is so designed that the answer must be 1, 2, 3 or 4. So, I ask for some explanation.
I request an elevated quality in (your answers to) this test. You demand a lot of rigor from me, but are you ready to provide the same? I ask myself this question.
Click to expand...

Roman numerals. XX = 20.
 
Michel H said:
Don't confuse "valid answers" with "correct answers". A valid answer in this test (to which I would personally give a positive credibility rating) is, for exemple.

I really think you wrote and circled a xx on your paper. You repeated the number. And I believe in telepathy.

Full answer (with "xx" replaced by the actual number) sent to Agatha.

The MD5 hash of a complicated sentence containing my chosen number is:
178c5289e774fff7534a75ffcd8d31a1.
I should reveal this sentence, together with the number, later in this test thread.

But, in this answer, the (actual) number given is not necessarily correct.

An invalid answer would be, for exemple:

3, 3 again

This answer is not valid because the number is here explicitly given ("3" has not been replaced by "xx")
Click to expand...

Yep, great scientific test! You've now explained to everyone how to get a high credibility score. In fact, from this post forward, would everyone please make their guess (before sending in the actual number by PM as proscribed) in EXACTLY THE FOLLOWING WORDS....

"I believe you circled xx. I really really believe in telepathy and am feeling this really strong vibe, man."

Say nothing else. It's how one gains credibility ratings of 8 or 9.

Michel, the "credibility" weighting is ********. By limiting it to four choices... 1, 2, 3 or 4... you have any easy dismissal of non-serious answers... e.g. anyone who guesses 35, or eleventy, or blue, or kumquats. All submissions that have 1 or 2 or 3 or 4 are valid. Your subjective opinion of what is credible and what is not does not matter.

Oh, and surely you know that X is the "Roman" numeral for ten and that XX is therefore 20.
 
Mysteries of the universe: Why is anyone bothering with this thread?

IXP
 
IXP said:
Mysteries of the universe: Why is anyone bothering with this thread?IXP
Click to expand...
Car crash curiosity; or how far can he get with his pants round his ankles?

You know, that kind of thing :)
 
TheSapient said:
After reading these threads, I still don't understand why this test uses just four numbers and a quality assessment of the responses. Surely it would be easier, and more convincing, to write down a number from a very large set (e.g. from 1-100000000000). Post the hash, and let people post whatever number comes to them.

If you do have to use the test as it is, why not find willing participants, explain the test to them, and then start the test. Simply posting a thread just seems to confuse the issue with so many people talking and joking about it. There isn't even a criteria for which answers will be accepted as legitimate.
Click to expand...

Better yet, just ask the "psychics" to predict next week's lottery numbers.
 
Agatha said:
Michel has taken note of some of our previous criticisms, and this blinding of the responses is the result. His assessment of the responses for 'credibility' is something unscientific but he seems to be wedded to it, and when it was pointed out that he may (consciously or unconsciously) downgrading incorrect answers and upgrading correct ones, this protocol was designed.

It will not prove telepathy, and it's not intended to be scientific. In the event that Michel's number is correctly identified by more people than expected by chance, perhaps Michel will consider trying again with a greater spread of numbers.

My thought is that sometimes it's better to lead someone out of an irrational mindset step by tiny step rather than try to push them too fast.

I've had three PMs so far, please do send me any more responses.

Michel, how many responses do you hope to get before you start assessing the replies?
Click to expand...

I understand what you are saying. Even so, increasing the number of potential answers greatly improves the procedure without requiring any other changes from Michel. If, say, 25% of participants still manage to predict the right number, he could still include or eliminate them with his "credibility test".
 
Hi all,

Sorry I am so late to the party, RL got in the way of visiting the forum last week. I see Agatha is kindly acting as the blinder. I think it is best if there is only one blinder so I will just PM her my actual guess.

I think you wrote xx in your circle.

Femke
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top Bottom