Results 1 to 30 of 2749

Thread: Chess - Game Thread [Concluded]

Hybrid View

Previous Post Previous Post   Next Post Next Post
  1. #1

    Default Re: Chess - Game Thread [In Play]

    @Askthepizzaguy

    Do you have any advice on how to format ISOs to build case, and how to ISO with format in mind?

    I'm struggling a lot to make something more useful than just a final claim alone, without resorting either to exhaustive description or to layering quote chains by 5+ levels.
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



  2. #2
    Know the dark side Member Askthepizzaguy's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2007
    Location
    Norway
    Posts
    25,830

    Default Re: Chess - Game Thread [In Play]

    Quote Originally Posted by Montmorency View Post
    @Askthepizzaguy

    Do you have any advice on how to format ISOs to build case, and how to ISO with format in mind?

    I'm struggling a lot to make something more useful than just a final claim alone, without resorting either to exhaustive description or to layering quote chains by 5+ levels.
    Your question includes the phrase "to build (a) case", so I'll expand beyond just formatting.

    I've noticed that people don't click links or even reference posts which are walls of analysis with links. referencing with links and post numbers is less effective. This is fine for your own note taking and planning out your thoughts, but it's for your own open notebook work. No one else will touch it.

    So, when presenting your findings, and since the org doesn't automatically include quotes inside of a quoted post, if it is relevant copy and paste it and throw quote tags around it and say who said it. The main quoted post will include a link, so no need to get links. If people want links they can click through. Include the original quote properly so people can easily click through if they're not sure of your context.

    Cut out bits that do not refer to what you're talking about, indicate if it's in the middle of text by (snip). Otherwise, if it's just a small section, you can simply quote that one section. Otherwise, leave context as much as is reasonable.

    Do things in chronological order as much as possible. Sometimes quoting other major events or tallies that happened around that time frame can help people place when this happened.

    Make any point you intend to make in as few sentences as possible, unless it's an important point or requires more explanation to be understood.

    The important part is not convincing, but showing what you were thinking, so that thought is also in the reader's mind whether they agree with the assumptions or not. All you're doing is having them consider your POV.

    Stuff that is less valuable or alignment indicative can be skipped. If you have a good point make it in fewer quotations (my weakness).

    Include things you see which contradict your own point, so you remember that even when you were trying to scum-read this person, you saw them do X which was townie looking, or even when you were trying to town-read this person, you couldn't shake the feeling that Y was scummy. Sometimes you have to see things from both perspectives, and if you can't ignore a scummy thing while town reading someone it could be important, or it might not be. But don't forget it.

    Example, when I was originally town reading Slaan, I struggled super hard to town read his JAQ wall. I was concluding and trying to find evidence for, and ultimately, I could barely talk myself into that one. I basically had to resort to "this could just be how he is".

    Sometimes it's less of a forced read. Like, I had an odd gut feeling about a dp post, but even at the time, I was not forcing myself to be of two minds about it. It got my attention, so I looked at it in detail, but it wasn't what I thought it was upon analysis and thought that it only looked like something bad in passing.

    ISOing someone is tricky on the org. I employed liberal use of ignore mode (for the non-moderator players) on dead townies and strong town reads alike, often as many people as possible, leaving not ignored dead scums and the host's vote counts, and the person in question I wanted to ISO. Call it a poor man's multi-iso.

    You can also just control+F name, but the issue is, you'll be reading every single instance of that name and you could miss abbreviated versions of the name. So, like for Cuth for example, search Cuth instead of Cuthillius and you'll also get the abbreviated version.

    When looking for just the next instance of this person's post only while not doing an isolated post search (of limited utility on the org...) instead control+F and look for their current total number of posts, join date, under title, or location, something more unique than just their name which will appear to the side of their posts. For example for you, I'd search Sep 2010.

    And the meta on Xiahou is relevant because it hasn't changed in a decade, including several games since then, and one very recent one.

    It means this is who he is, and it isn't changing. If anything it only more firmly establishes that he's set in his ways. Like Logic, he's not changing.
    #Winstontoostrong
    #Montytoostronger

    Member thankful for this post:



  3. #3

    Default Re: Chess - Game Thread [In Play]

    Quote Originally Posted by Askthepizzaguy View Post
    And the meta on Xiahou is relevant because it hasn't changed in a decade, including several games since then, and one very recent one.

    It means this is who he is, and it isn't changing. If anything it only more firmly establishes that he's set in his ways. Like Logic, he's not changing.
    The problem is you're both arguing and assuming that it hasn't changed. You see? Ultimately he could have a more generalized approach because he isn't engaged with either the culture or the specific games to a large degree. Why is that less plausible than, 'He should be agenda-setting as mafia because he did that once 10 years ago'?
    Vitiate Man.

    History repeats the old conceits
    The glib replies, the same defeats


    Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 



Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  
Single Sign On provided by vBSSO