A new scoring system at the NDC will be starting immediately after Project August ends. This article outlines the overview of this new system and describes why it\u2019s needed.<\/p>\n
Let\u2019s begin with an example\u2026Project August Headline #9 said: \u201cSomething in the Southern Hemisphere?\u201d<\/p>\n
Can anyone tell me how this headline is at all useful? If we want to accomplish great things with these incredible dreams & dreamers of ours, we need to know WHAT, WHERE, WHEN and sometimes WHY. That\u2019s where we\u2019re headed with this new scoring system.<\/p>\n
For example, go back to the very first sentence of this article, and you\u2019ll be able to pick out (in order) the WHAT, WHERE, and WHEN of that statement. It feels tangible. All three of those big questions are answered.<\/p>\n
There are several reasons why this new system is required, but the biggest reason is usefulness. In order to be useful, we need to know all three of these main questions. Also, for long-term research and data-gathering, we need to know how accurate each separate aspect can be. For example, after 2 years of research, we may find out that WHERE is only 25% reliable historically while the WHAT is much higher (we don\u2019t know this yet, this is just hypothetical at this point).<\/p>\n
Breaking out the critical topic areas is essential to moving towards the next phase in dreamwork at the NDC.<\/p>\n
At first glance this scoring system looks awfully difficult, but I PROMISE it is easy as pie and you\u2019ll love it after getting used to it. You\u2019ll love it because there is so much LESS subjectivity than before.<\/p>\n
But, it will take some practice and some growing pains, so my recommendation is just to casually look through this, just to expose yourself to it.<\/p>\n
DO NOT worry about memorizing anything at this point. In future discussion, I\u2019ll link back to this so that you won\u2019t have to ever memorize any of the following charts.<\/p>\n
PLEASE don\u2019t let this complex-looking description get in the way of accepting this system. And by all means if something doesn\u2019t make sense, please comment below. This will be a learning experience for all of us. This isn\u2019t a perfect system yet, but with your help, we\u2019ll get there!<\/p>\n
The biggest block to acclimating yourself at this point will be the format of the scoring system. In most situations, there will be THREE NUMBERS and each of these numbers will go from ZERO to FIVE.<\/p>\n
There will be NO DECIMALS like what we did in the past (there won\u2019t be any 4.2 or 3.5, for example). There will only be whole integers for this scoring system.<\/strong><\/p>\n There will be three numbers and the:<\/p>\n 1st<\/sup> Number will represent WHAT.<\/p>\n 2nd<\/sup> Number will represent WHERE<\/p>\n 3rd<\/sup> Number will represent WHEN<\/p>\n Format = (WHAT \u2013 WHERE \u2013 WHEN) (e.g. 2-4-4)<\/p>\n The official score will have three numbers separated by a hyphen. Each of the 3 areas shall have a number even if one of those three is a zero (e.g., 5-5-0 means that the event was perfectly predicted and the location was perfectly predicted, but the timing was completely off).<\/p>\n 5-5-5: This is the max score, and can only be attained if every requirement is perfectly met in accordance with the criteria below.<\/p>\n 5-0-5: This would mean that the event description (WHAT) was exactly perfect and it happened exactly when it was predicted, but the location (WHERE) was completely wrong.<\/p>\n 3-3-3: This would mean that the event (WHAT will happen) was pretty close, it happened pretty close to the predicted location (WHERE), and the timing (WHEN) was pretty close.<\/p>\n Uh oh, that sounds pretty nebulous, huh? So now we need specific criteria to really hone in on precise, reliable scores. Incidentally, the WHERE and WHEN will be VERY specific and cut \u2018n dry. The WHAT (first number) perhaps still has a little subjectivity in the scoring. Therefore, we\u2019ll cover how to mitigate the first number errors in a later section.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n 5 \u2013<\/strong> The Subject and Verb of the prediction are both exactly correct, and at least one other descriptor (noun, verb, adjective, adverb, color, height, weight, etc.) is also exactly correct. (note: none may be inferred from the prediction\u2026it must be spelled out ahead of time, e.g., \u201cgoes awry\u201d or \u201chappens badly\u201d are NOT valid descriptors). Literal connections ONLY (no metaphors).<\/strong><\/p>\n 4 \u2013<\/strong> The Subject of the prediction is exactly correct, and the Verb of the prediction is exactly correct. Literal connections ONLY (no metaphors).<\/strong><\/p>\n 3 \u2013<\/strong> At least two descriptors exactly correct but at least one has to be either the noun or verb about the event. At least one Literal connection (the other may be Metaphoric)<\/strong><\/p>\n 2 \u2013<\/strong> At least two descriptors exactly correct (can be any combination of noun, verb, adj, adverb, color, height, weight, etc.). Literal OR Metaphoric <\/strong><\/p>\n 1 \u2013 <\/strong>At least one descriptor exactly correct. Literal OR Metaphoric<\/strong><\/p>\n 0 \u2013 <\/strong>No event descriptions accurate<\/p>\n 5 \u2013 Correct ADDRESS<\/strong>\u2026exact address or clear, specific landmark (within a 1- mile radius) of where the actual event was predicted.<\/p>\n 4 \u2013 Correct CITY<\/strong>\u2026. exact city, state (or equivalent), and country were all correctly predicted.<\/p>\n 3 \u2013 Correct STATE<\/strong>\u2026 exact state or province or sub-country geographical area was correctly predicted.<\/p>\n 2 \u2013 Correct COUNTRY<\/strong>\u2026. exact country or sub-continent geographical area was correctly predicted.<\/p>\n 1 \u2013 Correct CONTINENT<\/strong>\u2026.exact continent was correctly predicted<\/p>\n 0 \u2013 Useless!<\/strong> \u2026.The location was completely different than what was predicted.<\/p>\n 5 \u2013 Correct DAY<\/strong>\u2026.Event manifested on the exactly correct day.<\/p>\n 4 \u2013 Correct WEEK<\/strong>\u2026.Event manifested in the correct week of the correct month and year that was predicted.<\/p>\n 3 \u2013 Correct MONTH<\/strong>\u2026 Event manifested in the correct month of the correct year that was predicted.<\/p>\n 2 \u2013 Correct SEASON<\/strong>\u2026. Event manifested in the correct season of the correct year.<\/p>\n 1 \u2013 Correct YEAR<\/strong>\u2026.Event manifested within 1 year of predicted time<\/p>\n 0 \u2013 Useless!<\/strong> \u2026.The WHEN component was outside + or \u2013 one year<\/p>\n We will know the max possible score available to the DreamSeer BEFORE the event takes place! For example, a prediction such as \u201cSomething in South America\u201d carries a MAX SCORE of 0-1-0. That would be a virtually useless prediction, as we\u2019ve seen in Project August, because there is no subject and verb (no WHAT component), a very nebulous WHERE component, and no time estimation.<\/p>\n Alternatively, \u201cWhale trapped in Canadian waters sometime in Fall 2014\u201d would carry a MAX SCORE of 5-2-2. If this event comes to pass, the resulting score is guaranteed to be<\/strong> equal to or less than 5-2-2, but it might be a lot worse, depending on what actually happens and where it happens and when.<\/p>\n We will use this MAX SCORE to identify certain actions needed for our predictions. For example, a prediction carrying a max score of 5-0-5 obviously needs some WHERE component. Therefore, we\u2019ll call upon certain dreamers (or all dreamers) to intend about WHERE this prediction will take place.<\/p>\n This is called the ITERATIVE approach, and is something we never tried in Proj Aug, but will be one of the biggest lessons learned. Basically, we take our dreams and lay out the big memes first. From the memes, we fill in low-probability headlines and determine MAX SCORES. From the max score, we know what information is lacking, and thus have our dreamers go back into that meme to fill in the blanks.<\/p>\n Ideally, we\u2019d like our MAX SCORES to all be 5-5-5, but sometimes that will not be fully available to us.<\/p>\n The MAX SCORE will also be useful for DreamSeer competitions, where the contestants will know exactly where they are lacking and thus will work to beef up those scores.<\/p>\n \u2026and much more.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n A. \u201cKnife juggling goes awry in Asia between 12-15 Aug 2014\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Max Score = 2-1-4<\/p>\n Notes: \u201cKnife juggling\u201d is considered the subject and there is no verb. Some people will consider \u201cKnife\u201d to be a valid adjective making it a max WHAT score of 3 instead of 2. This subjectiveness may be eliminated by way of consensus (we\u2019ll discuss that in a different venue).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n B. \u201c$15,000 yellow watermelon slingshot breaks on Sept 29, 2014, in Chicago.\u201d<\/strong><\/p>\n Max Score = 5-4-5<\/p>\n Notes: Even though there are lots of adjectives, the things we\u2019re looking for are the subject (i.e., slingshot) and the verb (i.e., breaks). Those two exist but we also have other descriptors available, making it a max of 5.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n After the event manifests, it is given a score in accordance with the criteria spelled out above. Assuming the two predictions were made above, how would the events below score out?<\/p>\n 1. Hypothetical NY Times headline: \u201cKnife falls from building and lands in man\u2019s head in China on Sept 1, 2014<\/strong>\u201d (Ref: prediction A above)<\/p>\n Final Score: 2-1-3<\/p>\n Notes<\/strong>: Remember \u201cgoes awry\u201d is not a valid verb for scoring. Therefore, \u201cgoes awry\u201d is only a descriptor here, which does come true, making it a score of 2. The WHERE is exactly correct, but only the continent was predicted, not the country, so the score remains at the continent level (i.e., 1). If the actual event occurred in the US, the WHERE would have been ZERO. The when was outside of a week and within a month\u2019s time, thus, 3.<\/p>\n 2. Hypothetical L.A. Times headline: \u201cMammoth size slingshot contest hits the streets of Indy on 27 Sept<\/strong>.\u201d<\/p>\n Final Score: 3-3-4<\/p>\n Notes<\/strong>: The verb in the news is \u201cHits the streets\u201d which really means \u201cAppears,\u201d so the predicted verb (\u201cBreaks\u201d) did not happen, and thus the WHAT is only 3. The city was wrong, so the WHERE cannot be 4. The actual city is in the wrong state, but the distance from Indy to Chicago can be generalized to be within one state\u2019s general area, and thus it receives a 3. The WHEN is within one week, and so it gets a score of 4.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n If this all sounds way to hard, then alas\u2026relax and just trust me that this will make sense once we begin using it regularly.<\/p>\n All you really need to do is remember WHAT \u2013 WHERE \u2013 WHEN. It\u2019s that easy.<\/p>\n When we reference these scores, we\u2019ll cover the nuances very much in depth and as long as you remember those big three WHAT \u2013 WHERE \u2013 WHEN, you\u2019ll be just fine!<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Some of our better predictions will actually have correct WHY components. Right now, my plan is to NOT include a number with this why, but instead simply add a plus sign (+) at the end of the score (e.g., 4-3-4 +)<\/p>\n The reason for the WHY is because this really shows an advanced look into the future. It\u2019s one thing to predict WHAT will come but to describe the WHY is incrementally more thorough.<\/p>\n For example, we really have no idea how the China man was hit in the head with a knife. What was the person doing up in the building to where they dropped or threw the knife? We will probably never know this answer, but accurately predicting the why component definitely does show a remarkable understanding about the future (if the explanation is correct, obviously).<\/p>\n <\/p>\n Comments are welcome.<\/p>\n <\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":" A new scoring system at the NDC will be starting […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":0,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"closed","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":[],"categories":[77],"tags":[],"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/nationaldreamcenter.com\/therapy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1551"}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/nationaldreamcenter.com\/therapy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/nationaldreamcenter.com\/therapy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nationaldreamcenter.com\/therapy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nationaldreamcenter.com\/therapy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=1551"}],"version-history":[{"count":0,"href":"https:\/\/nationaldreamcenter.com\/therapy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/1551\/revisions"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/nationaldreamcenter.com\/therapy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=1551"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nationaldreamcenter.com\/therapy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=1551"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/nationaldreamcenter.com\/therapy\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=1551"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}<\/h1>\n
Early Examples<\/h1>\n
Exact Criteria<\/h1>\n
First Number = WHAT<\/h3>\n
<\/h3>\n
Second Number = WHERE<\/h3>\n
<\/h3>\n
Third Number = WHEN<\/h3>\n
<\/h1>\n
Newsflash: Max Score is already known!<\/h1>\n
Examples of MAX SCORES<\/h1>\n
Examples of Final Scores<\/h1>\n
Consolation<\/h1>\n
One Last Thing \u2013 \u201cWHY\u201d<\/h1>\n
In Closing\u2026<\/h1>\n