S-17 Edgic (editing and logic) Gabon

0 Kudo

Started By	Comment
Werwanderflugen		#3901	[-]
Posts: 171 (12/05/08 2:31 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Edgic sure has been strange this season... maybe it's just the fallout from the Marcugeddon, but there seems to be a lot of personal business this year that, frankly, hasn't made it as much of an enjoyable place to frequent. It's become less of a group effort, with various ideas and theories battling it out, and more of a personal quest to be right for the sake of each individual being right. I think, though, that Edgic rules are in place for a reason, and Marcus's departure seems to have opened people's eyes to bending rules here and there to support unorthodox choices-- something that while interesting, should not be the main focus of the edgicer's thought process. The INV works. Keep it. Ep1 visibity should be significant. Keep it. The winner's story should pick up at the merge. Keep it. Near the end, the winner should have some doubt (especially in the penultimate ep). Keep it. For me, at least, Ken is far and way the best choice of our final six. All those guidelines above... he fits to a T. He's never been INV. He has the most significant ep1 of the six left. His story, which other than perhaps Sugar has easily had the most of an "arc," has picked up at the merge. And he's got a load of doubt (my non-watcher roommates who watched with me last night thought there was no chance "that asswipe" could win). I still can't eliminate Matty. He's always had a presence in every episode-- with reaction shots all over the place-- but his lack of a long-term story, doubt, and personal endgame complexity puts him at a distant second. I've eliminated Crystal, but I could maybe see her still in contention. But the others-- while they may seem to have the game logic to go the distance-- have an edit that has not followed in line with the typical winner: and isn't finding the winner based on rules developed in previous seasons the whole point of Edgic in the first place? * Oh, and I have Matty as CPP this ep. I think his post-engagement confessional was far too meaningful to label him as a one-note OTT. I could maybe go for MORP (with his non-entity-ness later on), but not OTT. And Sugar definitely had some N-ness at the beginning, but the family visit was easily PP. So I'm not sure which is the appropriate way to go-- either just P or M. (^ subject to change after rewatch ^)
TheLurkerSpeaks		#3902	[-]
Posts: 1446 (12/05/08 2:34 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	No, cindi, you missed the point entirely. The arguments being made for the INV guideline is that it has been right thus far. That was the weak argument I was invalidating. Most of the Edgic guidelines make sense from a storytelling standpoint. The winner should generally be present over the course of the series, but in the background behind the noisy distractions. The INV guideline is more or less a gimmick because it is based upon a single episode upon criteria that is highly subjective at best. Yes, I understand that neglected players are less likely to win over the course of a series, but that rule already exists in that the winner won't be at the extremes of visibility. But the editors have allowed winner's edits to cool down in certain episodes to the point that they have been arguably INV. If the distinction between INV and UTR was a clear bright line, I could be impressed by the fact no winner has crossed over. Unfortunately, it is more likely that people won't give a player who has an otherwise promising edit an INV that they would give a player whose edit already looks bad under the other rules. The editors don't say to themselves, "Hey, let's make sure we don't show so-and-so this episode." Instead, they choose to show the players whose characters they are trying to build, the players who impact the plot line for the current episode, and those who make moves that will come into play in the story being told down the road. Yes, the winner will generally be in that group of players, mostly because in most cases, the long term story will revolve around them, and they are definitely one of the characters that should be being developed. However, it is not unreasonable to think that once a winner has received some significant development, they may not be featured in an episode where the plot didn't involve them and in which they didn't make any move that would prove significant later. In a sense, that's exactly what happened with Yul in that one episode of S13 after two straight episodes delving heavily into his finding of the immunity idol. I find it difficult to believe that the editors were putting the episode together when suddenly one of them asks, "Wait! Did we remember to include some footage of Yul?" "No problem. He calls Ozzy Poseidon. We're good."
Werwanderflugen		#3903	[-]
Posts: 172 (12/05/08 2:52 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	^ TLS, I understand your argument. But I think the whole idea of INV is that it equals no development whatsoever. And one of the main goals of the editors, I would think, would be to tell the story of the winner, keeping in mind that every viewer should understand-- even if they start randomly watching at ep3, or ep8, or whatever-- that season-long story. And I think they would want to include some sort of further development of that story every week. Sure, it may just be "Ozzy's like Poseidon," but (a) we are reminded of the winner's presence, and (b) we further understand his relationship and respect for the man he will eventually narrowly defeat. Even the most meager UTR1 contains some development, which in my opinion validates the rule.
token lunatic		#3904	[-]
Posts: 22427 (12/05/08 3:37 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	craig wrote: We know it's Ken, Matty, or Crystal, but damn they all have big editing flaws. Matty got nothing strategic tonight, and little about his relationship wth other players. All OTTP with his girlfriend. Crystal continues understated postmerge after her OTTN premerge. Ken may have the lead in all the quantitative edgic categories, but all the story arc loose ends point towards his downfall. Very arrogent edit tonight, calling Bob stupid, all about how "I've taken down 5 big guys and will win if I get to the end" with his sister. And that 3rd hinky vote will reopen old wounds and mistrusts with Matty and Sugar. He either should have left the vote 5-2 or thrown in his lot with Kota. Corrine was CPP - closely associated with OTTP Bob. Comment about how her brother gets her sense of humour partially explains her bitchiness. Classic plucky underdog with acerbic Shii Ann twist. Corinne and Bob showed they were smart in answering the IC questions and with that idol scheme. Corinne I think opted to work with Ken because she respected his smarts, and wasn't bitter at getting betrayed by him in her final words. Yes Corinne hates Sugar, but Bob slapped her down pretty good at the beginning for her TC antics. Sugar - Bob certainly justifed that OTTN last time, and tinged her negative this time. Her hair was ugly too, resembling her character. Ken may have outsmarted Bob and Sugar, but without doing a Rafe\Danni gambit with them he may not even make F4. He has Crystal but is terribly exposed with the third vote. (Sugar's heart is with Matty, and her gamer head says all-girl F3.) The theme may be about threats aka deserving players all getting taken out, with an Ethan-like of Vee\Sandra like winner. Oo. you can rejoice that the INV rule survives another year. One day it still might bite edgic in the ass. Sugar will not vote for Kenny if she is in the jury. Period. If Kenny backstabs Crystal she might not vote for him either. Ironically it would be the Onions who would vote for him as he would be deemed the lesser of the three/two evils.
TheIsraeliDevil	Wait a minute...	#3905	[-]
Posts: 2139 (12/05/08 3:41 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	My favorites were Sugar and Crystal since the beginning. And right now I think one of them wins. That was a horrible episode for both Kenny and Matty. Crystal might be my top pick right now.
Oowatanite		#3906	[-]
Posts: 6474 (12/05/08 4:53 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	token lunatic wrote: Sugar will not vote for Kenny if she is in the jury. Period. If Kenny backstabs Crystal she might not vote for him either. Since I expect both Sugar and Crystal to be in the F3 with Kenny, Sugar's and Crystal's voting tendencies should not be a problem.
ncassaro		#3907	[-]
Posts: 373 (12/05/08 5:11 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	9RedWing19 wrote: TheLurkerSpeaks wrote: The editors aren't choosing to make anyone INV either. That's our vague construct, not theirs. ETA: It still invalidates the argument that since it never happened, the rule must be good. Admittedly INV is an Edgic construct, but the editors do chose to neglect contestants in episodes, particularly the early episodes - when that neglect crosses a threshold (which is in the eye of the beholder/Edgic rater), the contestant gets an INV rating. In recent seasons, we have not seen the winner so neglected in any one episode that they received a consensus INV rating. Hence certain Edgic posters, myself included, believe that the winner will not receive an INV rating is a useful guideline. If/when this guideline is shown to be wrong, I will stop using it. Similarly, I believe that the winner will have a "significant" first episode, which is why I cannot see Edgic support for Sugar winning. I disagree that the editors actively choose to neglect contestants... I think they start from the opposite angle. Even if the winner didn't do anything particularly interesting in that episode, the editors will go out of their way to find something, anything, in order to make it a UTR because that's the winner. They only have like 42 minutes to work with considering commercials, so I think that they show first what they HAVE to, and then what they WANT to, and then some people just get left out with INVs. I definitely don't think they'd give an INV on purpose (except in the Tina situation discussed above.) Anyway, I have read most of the old edgic threads because I wanted to have a solid base in it when I started posting here.... This INV guideline argument has come up a lot over the years. I think it's silly. While nothing is 100% predictable, INV is the one thing about edgic that has pretty much always been reliable.
TheLurkerSpeaks		#3908	[-]
Posts: 1447 (12/05/08 5:27 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Why is it silly to argue against a guideline that is arbitrary, subjective, and completely unnecessary? Who cares if it is accurate thus far? (And I'd point out that it obviously isn't for every poster since some have given winners INV ratings.) So is the example I brought up earlier of no one having a name ending in "y" winning, and I still wouldn't put any reliance on it.
astroline		#3909	[-]
Posts: 1795 (12/05/08 5:28 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	Well, I guess I was wrong. I will never again support a player with an INV. No more Cassie, no more Tracy, no more Corinne. I've finally learned my lesson. We'll see how that holds up next season huh? I also talked to my mom about the episode (a casual viewer) and she said she actually cried when she saw Sugar and the ashes. How is that not PP? That one scene is going to stay in everyone's minds about Sugar this episode, we're the only ones who will remember the argument at the beginning. And that was all for dramatic effect of course, just reporting because it was too good of a scene to pass up. If they didn't want Sugar to be PP, they would have cut out the scene with her & her sister and given it to Crystal or Susie or Kenny instead. But they didn't. It was an extremely touching scene, we got a lot of insight from Sugar about it. PP to the max. I'd even say PPP if we had such a rating. FINAL RATINGS! Bob - MORP4 (changed from CP4.) Corinne - CPP4 Crystal - MOR2 Kenny - CPM4 (changed from CPN4. I think he'll get a CPN next week though, it looks like.) Matty - MORP3 (changed from OTTP3.) Sugar - OTTPP3 Susie - UTRP1 WINNERS? Corinne / Marcus 1. Kenny 2. Crystal huge gap 3. Matty 4. Sugar 100000000% Eliminated: Susie, Bob
BlakeB717		#3910	[-]
Posts: 1165 (12/05/08 5:29 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	It happened with Todd China, it happened last season with Parvati, and again it is happening with Kenny. CPN doubt in the merger. It seems to be a reoccuring trend that edgic doesn't learn from it's mistakes. Corinne had an INV, and she's gone. Sugar has one, and suddenly she's a contender. Crystal was out of it long ago, but people obsessed with her are adament that she wins. Sometimes accepting the obvious isn't a bad thing. Edgic isn't a "take a risk and if they win I will be forever glorified as a master of edgic" type of thing. You go with what you see. And from what we've seen since Episode 1 till now is that Kenny is our winner. We haven't had a UTR Ep1 from a winner in 3 years. We haven't had a MOR Ep1 from a winner in 2.5 years Kenny will win.
astroline		#3911	[-]
Posts: 1796 (12/05/08 5:33 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	BlakeB717 wrote: And from what we've seen since Episode 1 till now is that Kenny is our winner. Who's "we"? Nobody was even considering Kenny until Marcus was voted out. That's a long way from Episode 1. But I do totally agree with you, Todd & Parvati had the exact same type of editing at this point that it looks like Kenny is getting. That's why, as much as I hate the little rat (hey, he said it, not me!), I put him as my new #1 pick. But if Kenny does win, we'll have 3 winners in a row with the same type of edit. CP with borderline N. Will the audience really WANT another Todd or Parvati? I'm not so sure. That's why I'm still a little hesitant on why they would edit him the exact same way. But then again, Kenny calling himself a "little rat" could fit right in with Parvati's "pee water" and Todd's "bitch" quotes for sure.
BlakeB717		#3912	[-]
Posts: 1166 (12/05/08 5:36 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	I mean "we" by the audience. Edgic-wise Kenny has been a great pick since the start, but we ignored him because Marcus looked even better. I understand not liking another CPN-ish winner, but, Kenny had a pretty P start. And as P-lacking as it's been, from Jeff's comments and from people I know, Ken is just a likeable character. The videogamer who becomes a man and owns strategically? Pretty good! Also, they have to edit around the obvious. Kenny voted for Matty; they had to show that. It was a scummy move; it had to be shown like that. There is no way to edit him voting Matty as a good move or as nice, because, it just wasn't.
ncassaro		#3913	[-]
Posts: 374 (12/05/08 5:36 PM) Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	TheLurkerSpeaks wrote: Why is it silly to argue against a guideline that is arbitrary, subjective, and completely unnecessary? Who cares if it is accurate thus far? (And I'd point out that it obviously isn't for every poster since some have given winners INV ratings.) So is the example I brought up earlier of no one having a name ending in "y" winning, and I still wouldn't put any reliance on it. Well, we're all in this thread to use editing patterns and logic (edgic) to eliminate losers and pick winners. Editing patterns wise, INV people are losers. Logically, you're not going to have the person who wins the show, the person whom that season's story is about, invisible for an entire episode. So the "y" example has nothing to do with either one of those things. If we weren't going to try to pick out patterns from past seasons and try to explain why editors do the things they do, we wouldn't be here!
tmtomhJanet		#3914	[-]
Posts: 269 (12/05/08 5:41 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	I'm leaning more and more to the Sugar makes the finals argument. When I was watching last night, the whole squabble between Corrine and Sugar about Corinne talking about people behind their backs just seemed out of place. There was no context before or after to show why that argument happened right then. Between that and showing Corinne's post-boot Sugar comments, it seems obvious this conflict is meant to be remembered. I think Sugar gets there but loses because Corinne and all the other onions hate her. I guess I may as well try to do ratings this week. Pretend I used visibility numbers from the official chart. Bob - CPP, came up with desperation plan, chewed out Sugar for her treatment of Randy, we were meant to feel good about his wins this time. Planty of good SPV about him being a threat. Corrine - CPN, went down fighting and it would have worked if Kenny told Crystal to vote for Matty too, N for fight with Sugar and "these people are so stupid they might just fall for this" statement. Didn't we all know she was doomed the second we heard that? Ken - CPN, had a plan to get rid of idol and a major competitor, negative for being duped and being so arrogant with sis Matty - OTTP, all about missing Jamie, 1 sentence about being worried about things blowing up doesn't cancel that overall impression Crystal - MOR (maybe even UTR), conspired with Kenny and gave complex thoughts about maybe booting Matty but was otherwise invisible Sugar - MORP - chewed out by Bob, fighting with Corrine, OTTP scene with sister about her dad. No strategy or insight but definitely there. Susie - UTR1, completely unimportant to the story and I don't even remember her confessional or TCQ
OnlyTheHunter		#3915	[-]
Posts: 1885 (12/05/08 5:45 PM) Edgician Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	astro said Will the audience really WANT another Todd or Parvati? I'm not so sure. Unfortunately the audience, nor the editors, get to choose. Final TC had Ozzy going offon Parvati. She won. Final TC had Todd explaining how dishonest he had to be. He won. It was necessary to make Parvati responsibile to the viewer for removing Ozzy, and to make Todd a schemer. It explained their wins. If anyone won this year in front of an angry jury, the anger has to be explored throughout the season to explain the ending. It's all about Final TC. The audience will understand the journey. You can't try to force the ending to be hearts and roses. Sometimes it's about how we see their thorns. For the INV stuff, look at the evolution. Ami got an INV in episode 1 on Vanuatu, I think, where other than Chris' "outbalance" speech, her "not used to losing to a man" confessional was the most memorable line of the episode. In Palau Kim got one despite speaking to tribemates, since it wasn't a confessional. Now if there's a random wink, some here don't want to use it. And it still works. Because the point is that the winner won't be so neglected on the journey to be left completely out at any point. Michael
astroline		#3916	[-]
Posts: 1797 (12/05/08 5:46 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	BlakeB717 wrote: I mean "we" by the audience. Edgic-wise Kenny has been a great pick since the start, but we ignored him because Marcus looked even better. I understand not liking another CPN-ish winner, but, Kenny had a pretty P start. And as P-lacking as it's been, from Jeff's comments and from people I know, Ken is just a likeable character. The videogamer who becomes a man and owns strategically? Pretty good! Also, they have to edit around the obvious. Kenny voted for Matty; they had to show that. It was a scummy move; it had to be shown like that. There is no way to edit him voting Matty as a good move or as nice, because, it just wasn't. It's not that I don't "like" CPN winners. I loved Parvati and I really liked Todd too. But their edits also have substance. Kenny really doesn't even have a storyline, we just assume he does. The editing really hasn't given him one. Sugar's storyline has been much more prominent and obvious (too obvious, actually) and even Matty has had a huge journey of personal reflection as well. Crystal has dealt with the ups and downs of all aspects of Survivor, she's truly had some triumphs and some huge losses and we've seen her in the moment reacting to all of it. The only person left with less of an official storyline than Kenny is Susie, and obviously that's not saying much. Even as I'm saying this, I'll keep Kenny as my #1, because Crystal's sudden visibility drop post-merge concerns me too much.
astroline		#3917	[-]
Posts: 1798 (12/05/08 5:52 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	OnlyTheHunter wrote: astro said Will the audience really WANT another Todd or Parvati? I'm not so sure. Unfortunately the audience, nor the editors, get to choose. Final TC had Ozzy going offon Parvati. She won. Final TC had Todd explaining how dishonest he had to be. He won. It was necessary to make Parvati responsibile to the viewer for removing Ozzy, and to make Todd a schemer. It explained their wins. If anyone won this year in front of an angry jury, the anger has to be explored throughout the season to explain the ending. It's all about Final TC. The audience will understand the journey. For the INV stuff, look at the evolution. Ami got an INV in episode 1 on Vanuatu, I think, where other than Chris' "outbalance" speech, her "not used to losing to a man" confessional was the most memorable line of the episode. In Palau Kim got one despite speaking to tribemates, since it wasn't a confessional. Now if there's a random wink, some here don't want to use it. And it still works. Because the point is that the winner won't be so neglected on the journey to be left completely out at any point. Michael OTH, I totally agree. I'm just saying, with Blake's definition of Kenny as the awkward video gamer who strategically owns everyone, wouldn't that be such a good oppurtunity for an OTTP/CPP hero winner storyline? We haven't had one of those in forever and if that's truly the storyline they're aiming for, that'd be the way to do it. Not with this CPM shit he's getting now, at least. Even with the negative moves he's making, they could totally edit him as a hero and the audience would eat it up and still eventually understand why the jury would be bitter towards him. Especially since the audience will hate jurors like Corinne & Randy anyway. And that's very, very, very true. My all-time favorite Kim Mullen is the victim of some very inaccurate ratings, especially that premiere episode. When I watched Palau with my best friends, when they saw Kim and the others talking about the vote walking back to camp and they heard Kim say, "If any of you go against your word, I swear I'll hold it against you for life.", they both said, "Wow, what a bitch." Not exactly the impression an INV makes. Kim should have been UTRN1 in the premiere for sure. Same with Ami. Your good old Alexis (sorry, haha) had essentially the same type of confessional in Micronesia, she gets a MOR2 for it instead. Good points, OTH. Funny how my #1 pick Corinne getting voted out is leading to me actually enjoying Edgic again.
OnlyTheHunter		#3918	[-]
Posts: 1886 (12/05/08 6:03 PM) Edgician Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	The problem with Kim Mullen is that I didn't know her name, when I went to rate, I thought it might have been Jenn. That's not the same as defining quotes from Ami or Alexis, the two who defined the position that ended up coming up short in comparison to the winner. Funny, consider that you, and I, as fans, keep commenting how much we are enjoying this season, particularly lately. Haven't we just seen a pagonging? And yet, the interest level is high. That's a good season with good editing. For CL, Probst ended with, "The big theme of the night, paranoia. The question is, how do you make the paranoia work for you, and not against you?" Michael
colleenlover		#3919	[-]
Posts: 8854 (12/05/08 6:11 PM) Registered User Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	we always have to look at this in terms of understanding the pyschology of a bunch of storytellers and that the story they are essentially telling us is a mystery. The ratings aren't doctrine but semi terms we've used as the means of smoke and mirrors the storytellers will use. Would I discount an invisible? No way. But I would delve into how it is used and when -and get into the mindset if there is a trick being played -like with Tina or Jenn Lyon. If there is an invisible, than I think there will be another wink somewhere to compliment it -so in the end, an editing team can go back and point out how clever they had been. It's all about looking for the tricks. Astro, I'm surprised -I think Kenny has just as much of a fleshed out story as Parvati and Todd beginning right from the first moment of the game. The PP for Sugar I don't think is necessary because I don't think the edit is OTTP as opposed to just consistantly CP.
Green Coffee		#3920	[-]
Posts: 114 (12/05/08 6:37 PM) Registered user Reply Quote More Recent Posts Message Connection Block Invite	TheLurkerSpeaks wrote: The editors aren't choosing to make anyone INV either. That's our vague construct, not theirs. ETA: It still invalidates the argument that since it never happened, the rule must be good. What!? So the editors just roll dice and some players are randomly left out of episodes if their numbers come up? If a player receives nothing in an episode, that's an editing decision, even in the sense that they weren't important enough to be included and others were. They may not be deliberately saying "lets leave this person out of the episode" but at the end when they watch the final product, the goal is to tell a story of the winner. The winner's edit should therefore logically be among the most carefully crafted and tended to of all 16-20 players. Surely they intentionally do some "cooldown" episodes in which winners get less attention. However, if you are telling the story of the winner and you have 15ish episodes to do it in, why would the eventual champion ever be completely ignored for 1/15th of the story? That's nearly 7% of the season - no small chunk. Your counterargument to the INV rule is entirely unscientific (and many, including myself, consider Edgic to be science + art). Take theories like gravity as what I hope to be an analogous example. Throughout history, we have constantly observed that objects are attracted to large bodies of mass. If you walk out your front door, you will be firmly affixed to the ground. However, should we put faith in this whole gravity thing JUST because it has been observed consistently without being disproven for eons? I mean, tomorrow I could wake up and find the laws of gravity to be wrong! Thus, the theory of gravity cannot be trusted and we should not assume that it will work when predicting what will happen tomorrow. This is essentially what you are arguing, from what I am reading. If we cannot base future inferences on previous data, what the hell are we supposed to be going off of here? NO ONE could ever be eliminated for ANY reason if we do not take a somewhat scientific approach to applying our theories. What's stopping anyone from arguing that a player could go INV for the first 14 episodes and OTTNN5 in the finale and win? It's never happened before, BUT IT COULD. It's illogical but if past data cannot be trusted, who is anyone to tell me my theory is wrong? Alternatively, if one argues that Edgic is not supposed to be scientific AT ALL, there's no point to doing ratings of any sort because the entire process is 100% subjective. The guidelines become irrelevant because the theories they represent are not falsifiable. Finally, I agree that editors do not "know" the term INV. They don't know OTT or CP either. However, these are meant to be operational definitions for various types of editorial intent. They are meant to represent editing decisions in a somewhat organized way. While you argue that INV is arbitrary, it is not entirely. A player could not get 10 confessionals and be defined as INV. There are criteria. The issue is that different people use INV differently, sometimes for questionable reasons like helping a favorite stay viable. This IS a problem and I think a fully fleshed out visibility formula could theoretically provide a clear cutoff (but most seem resistant to changing it - I think giving "points" for SPV, story focus, and screentime would help resolve this, although quantifying screentime would be a bitch). Nonetheless, a variable definition that could use improvement does not make the entire construct flawed. Everyone agrees that happiness exists, but no psychological measure assesses it perfectly. All in all, I see no scientific argument for dropping INV as an indicator of non-winners and think it should realistically mean death to a player's edit (I assume even INV players after Tina got story focus or SPV like the Vecepia example). It could always be improved if the community wanted to do it, but until that happens, we will just have to live with the operational definitions that exist, just like CP, OTT, UTR, etc. (which, by the way, I find to be applied more subjectively than INV is).

<< Previous Topic Next Topic >>

Yuku free message boards

S-17 Edgic (editing and logic) Gabon

Quick Reply