Vultology Quiz #4: 1 Sample!

[Supah Protist]

Any signal with at least 10 sightings would have a .04 chance of getting the same amount of sightings or more randomly.
The signals with at least 10 sightings are Je-5, Pe-2, Fi-1, and Fi-3.
Additionally, any signal with 2 sightings or less would also have a low chance (.04) of occurring randomly.
There's a lot of those thought and  don't think I need to type them out.

[Bera]

Awesome !!!
I will ask some questions, I couldn't wait for it and now that you posted these common results, I have even more.
1.About Alex being I--- or I-I-
Alex is very different in energy from all the SeFi I-I- samples in the database - I know this might not be the best way to type but I propose to check them :

OMG, there are a lot of SeFi I-I- ! :)) And I might be wrong but it seems they are all more energetic, more snippy, more sassy and that they have more ...decisiveness than Alex. There are maybe 2 samples that have a softer energy than the rest, but they still show a higher intensity/concentration of Te signals than she does (at least in this video)...So is the number of signals enough to type her I-I- or does the intensity and quality of those signals also matter in the typing?
To me she looks like someone who is close to fully developing Te at this point, I did mention she could be I-I- too...but  I couldn't not bring up this issue.
(You answered this before I posted ! I'll leave it though as the question is still relevant in other cases, I think.)
2.Head Shakes
I didn't think she shows Je head shakes and Te head shakes, because of the distinction you made between Te Head Shakes and Sassy Emphasis. So, I thought her head rattles are just Sassy Emphasis, without also being Je Head Shakes.
Maybe it would be a good idea to discuss this a bit more. It would be great if someone also made gifs of the head shakes. If not, I'll look again, maybe I see them this time. :))

@Auburn you picked Je head shakes without Te head shakes... I'm curious if the reason is that they just qualify as Sassy Emphasis instead of Te Head Shakes... but then how come they do qualify as Je Head Shakes?
3. Wide Alert Eyes
If we compare Alex to the gifs in the Codifier and to most SeFi's, I can't help but notice her eyes are less wide and alert than those of all these people !
Also, this particular signal should show as default. I can show many moments when Alex actually has her eyes closed, semi closed, sharpened and to a side and as default they are not that wide...they seem to become bigger just during perk ups, don't they?
So...do we consider all Pe leads have wide alert eyes ? 🙂 Or why do we say she has them?
Look, I'll post a gif where we can see her eyes in default state:

And this is our comparison baseline for alert wide eyes :
 
 

 

Even if we think of other people like Lorde...they really have huge alert eyes, you guys get the idea, the question is - does she really have wide alert eyes and also how low is the line so to speak? :)) I know this is a bit silly to ask but I assumed we just cross this signal if the person has extraordinarily wide eyes that really draw attention to them. But some people just have sharp eyes that aren't particularly wide, especially with Se...
4. Wobbling Lips
I didn't see this one and it would be awesome if someone posted a gif. I'll check again too.
5. Gravity Effect
I think this signal was there, so if it wasn't, it might mean I don't understand it correctly. Her movements are all falling downwards, aren't they? She almost falls downwards herself by the end of the video. :)) I'll see if I can make a gif a bit later.
6. The Scowl
I didn't actually mark the Ni Intense Scowl, because I was a bit indecisive about this one... So, here is her (only) scowl, does it qualify as an Ni scowl or at least more generally as a Pi scowl or not really ? 🙂

It's small but she is young and full of hope. 🙂 And I have to mention she did it while trying to remember a detail about the day, at what time she did something/arrived somewhere.
Do you mean this one - @auburn ?
7. Her Voice
I also considered her voice sprite like but by the end it goes a little bit to the nasal side, doesn't it?? I puzzled if it would have been more correct to select both Fi sprite like  and Te nasal, though that would seem to make no sense. :))) I think it's when she mentions people's support and the women's march that her voice becomes slightly more nasal and monotone.
8 Diagonal Drifts or just Se toggles?
I thought Alex also showed the signal Diagonal Drifts and I see others did too, so I decided to ask about it too.
Here is a gif :

Edit : Oh, I didn't see some of the posts above, sorry, I'll read them and come back !
Edit again - Yes, Auburn !!! I also thought she is developing Te !! And since you said this, I'll cut some of the SeFi I-I- examples above, I'll just leave 5 of them and people can check the others anyway in the database.

[Juan E. Sandoval]

@bera - yes exactly. well y'know there's something very tryannical about YES/NO checkmarks. in the end I decided to check the head nods and shakes, even though I had made that clarification in the tutrial video -- because i felt she just barely crossed the threshold in a few timestamps. I almost left them out tbh, and I really think I should have because I don't think her Je is conscious either. I made a side-by-side video showing this, yesterday, in preparation for today:

^ We can see how she's far more similar to Kendall Jenner (SeFi l---) and the other l--- types. The SeFi l-l- types have far more explicit and qualitatively different use of Je. So that ought to be the benchmark for Je signal markings.
So yes, I 100% agree that we need to differentiate out baseline sassiness from head shakes and nods proper. But it seems most everyone checked the shakes and nods, which means there's a collective consensus on the older way.
This is likely due to how sassiness has only recently been fully described as a vector and in the absence of an explicit description, it was conflated with Je. We'd had some growth pains like this before, with signal clarity, so maybe by next quiz we'll apply the new standard. 🙂
(More thoughts on the rest --yet to come.)

[EpicEntity]

Spoiler

[collapse]

Not seeing eye-centric totally throw me in for a curve-ball.

[Juan E. Sandoval]

@supahprotist

TeFi/FeTi: 1.74990416061e-27 (very small)

Nice.
So Supah, what would you say about this test from a scientific or statistician's perspective? Would something of this sort qualify for publication? What do you think of the methodology of this test?
All 12 participants were ignorant of anyone else's responses, and yet (apparently) there was a strong consensus without communication. Do you have a sense of how such experiments would be met by academic bodies?

[Supah Protist]

@auburn I think it means that a collective and consistent vocabulary has begun to form. However, this doesn't necessarily mean that what has been identified constitutes a discrete physiological reality. I can share a thought I had recently to illustrate my point. Take colors. Everyone can recognize colors, but color is not a discrete phenomenon, it is continuous.
Also, this test suggests that a high level or precision may have been reached, but this does not also imply that a high level of accuracy is present. In other words, people can get some level of consistent results using this system, but whether or not the system is measuring a discrete phenomenon is undetermined.
As to whether or not it qualifies for publication, I don't think so. I've never published any scientific manuscript, but I'm pretty that submitting manuscript for publication requires a lot of credentials. I'm not the best person to ask and I'm not sure about what the best way to go about trying to get attention from academic institutions about this project would be.
Lastly, I was impressed by the p-value for the TeFi/FeTi dichotomy. An issue I considered was that everyone knows which signals are supposed to go together, but even with this, 12/12 people agreeing on a single binary variable would also be significant.
I'm not a scientist or a statistician, but I'd like to think that I have a helpful understanding of the two disciplines. The scientific perspective is more important and I think that the only way to really do science is to follow the "rules" and to go through the correct channels. Einstein revolutionized physics, but he had a PhD and could submit his stuff to journals. This is definitely a step in the right direction, but still far away from a more formalized "test".

[Cedar]

@bera I felt she had more of TeNi energy. If you watch the Monica Lewinsky videos it so similar to this girl's. I agree with what you say/saw for the most part. Her energy is off for SeFi....or at least it is to me.

[EpicEntity]

publication requires a lot of credentials

The end users have decided for that to be the case; likely without realizing it.
If for whatever reason academia doesn't hold up it's effectiveness the next best thing is all we have.

[LadyNerdsky]

Well, y'all know I'm down with some analysis. I've made a shared Google Doc with some percentages in them that's easier to read than dumping results here.
https://docs.google.com/document/d/16mFpHLWE9wHmwHEMYkAIajFSESh1marmI72hywu-tn0/edit?usp=sharing
I broke down percentage consensus for each signal (present vs absent) of raters versus Auburn. As @supahprotist has noted there's an excellent split on the Fi/Te axis versus Ti/Fe. There was 100% correct rejection of all Ti signals, and 9 out of 10 Fe signals. Digging deeper, however, there isn't consensus on signals present/absent within Fi and Te especially.
I'll copy my observations here from the Google Doc:
Objective physiology signals are mainly more reliable: e.g. snarling, mouth asymmetry, snarling tension, taut cheeks, square cheeks, absence of affect (placid smile, neutral), pinching, stuttering, glitching, slanted edges, scowls, stares, indented eye-sockets, dancing brow, drifts, unblinking, some eye movements (wandering, staring, naive/hypnotic)
Signals with less reliability had  more subjective qualia: unbridled radiation, giddy giggle, sassiness, contempt, sprite-voice, amped perkup, “relaxed vs taut” eye area, “brushstroke vs toggle” eye movements, body “awareness”, vivid realism.
Although Fi was identified, consensus was low within Fi signals on what signals were present/absent to rationalise Fi as the choice. It’s almost identified by chance, and by eliminating Ti as a possibility.
Although Se was identified, consensus was low within Se on what signals were present/absent to rationalise Se as the choice. It’s also almost by chance, and by eliminating Ne as the possibility.
Fi and Te has a high level of “subjective” qualia signals compared to other functions. Confusion around these signals affects accuracy of Seelie/Unseelie (i.e. no agreement on what constitutes sassy, contempt, radiation, sprite voice, and therefore agreement on Seelie/Unseelie).
Signal presence vs absence: comparison made by analysing Auburn’s results against the group. The raters as a group missed “giddy giggle”, “excess contempt”, “relaxed eye area” and “vivid realism” where Auburn marked them as present. The raters as a group saw “plateau velocity” as present where Auburn marked it absent.
______________
The other difficult point that SupahProtist has pointed out is that even if there was 100% consensus on all signals, this doesn't mean that the clusters of signals "prove" that (1) the cognitive functions are the cause of these clusters and (2) that underlying neural mechanisms are unconsciously driving the outward expression of the cognitive functions. Simply because we've named cluster 1 "Se" and cluster 2 "Ne", and the presence of cluster 1 signals predicts the absence of cluster 2 signals, doesn't add much evidence for Se and Ne being the driving cause. There might be another psychological dichotomy at play. Without extra data collected from the subjects about their behaviour, traits and temperament, and without brain studies (like Dario Nardi's work), the links aren't there.
It's like inventing Phrenology 2.0 or creating a version of palmistry without it.  As a parallel, bumps and troughs definitely exist on the skull and the hands. That's un-debatable. Various metrics on the location, depth, frequency of the bumps etc can be defined and data can be collected from subjects. A set of patterns that cluster together emerges. You might make inferences about the personality of people with certain  patterns.  Other people can be trained to take these measurements accurately and precisely. But how do you know that these external physical markers are caused by particular brain functions and cause personality traits? That's a much tougher ask, but academia may treat CT like Phrenology or palmistry without more solid evidence connecting metabolism to vultology, and vultology to behaviourism.

[Juan E. Sandoval]

@ladynerdsky - I'm wowed that you took the time to do that - thanks so much!
I'm still combing through it all, but a few notes-- I did include myself among the 12, so the stats are probably somewhat less generous than they appear. Still, if I'm not mistaken your analysis appears overall positive in terms of identification of whole-functions, even if there is some disagreement on which elements are at play.
This certainly gives me a lot of useful feedback on how to refine things. The attempt of the codifier is indeed to reduce the qualia in most signals down, and treat them as motion vectors, but some of the clarifications (in the tutorials for instance) haven't yet trickled into the member-base, since they're rather new distinctions. So there's more potential upside here with more training. But also more we can do to perfect the model too. 🙂

That’s a much tougher ask, but academia may treat CT like Phrenology or palmistry without more solid evidence connecting metabolism to vultology, and vultology to behaviourism.

A much tougher ask indeed.
I realize that inter-rater reliability is just the first step. The big bridge to cross is the one between the physical and the psychological. But for example, this sample positively correlates to the previously established behavioral datasets of SeFi female types. This is her:

SeFi & Makeup/Beauty Behavioral Correlation

Her channel itself is called "ScarlettHeartsMakeup", and it's focused on beauty, modeling, makeup, as well as other general Pe things like daily life documentation.

SeFi "Crystal Witch" Correlation

And the "crystal witch" SeFi nickname is one that we've given to SeFi's who channel their Ni into things like wicca, tarot and crystals. Although many types can be into this, SeFi's are over-represented in this domain.
Naturally not all SeFi's are into this, but there is an over-representation of SeFi's in certain domains such as these, and these statistical leans are found everywhere in CT and are continually being re-affirmed. This happens over and over with things like us finding vultologically Fe-lead people who are "life coaches" and preachers, teachers, etc. Now, I haven't designed the most rigorous experiments on how to test for these vultological+behavioral aspects yet, but a case could certainly be made. Metabolism is another beast.
But without needing to go into neuroscience yet, we could conceivably test vultology against behaviorism by making predictions -- both in the positive and negative (present/absent) sense. This would, at least as a next step, establish that "for some unknown reason" ...people with [X] vultology correlate strongly with [X] behaviors/habits/lifestyles/traits.
Naturally, even in that case, the argument would persist that correlation does not = causation, ...but if I'm not mistaken this is a reachable next-step to try and affirm, right?

[Sander]

[quote]how was the process itself?[/quote]
I would definitely love a weekly test! And next time, I hope we'll have the Se & Ne tutorials 🙂
[quote]what were your thoughts on the format?[/quote]
Please let someone else pick and prepare the video, to prevent your expert opinion from being influenced by other video's/info.
For example, my first pass on a muted video indicated TeNi |-|-, yet after hearing the S content and anecdotes, that changed into TeSi during my second pass.
(I considered her eyes not wide enough for Se, and her bed also reflects her head- and arm-gestures back up. Other video's on her channel still look J-lead to me, btw; and why else would there be more agreement on the J-axis?)

[Juan E. Sandoval]

I’m not a scientist or a statistician, but I’d like to think that I have a helpful understanding of the two disciplines. The scientific perspective is more important and I think that the only way to really do science is to follow the “rules” and to go through the correct channels. Einstein revolutionized physics, but he had a PhD and could submit his stuff to journals. This is definitely a step in the right direction, but still far away from a more formalized “test”.

Thanks Supah 🙂
Yes, I agree fully. We're far away from that point still, but in the meantime these internal tests help to refine the practice & craft we are nurturing here.
And if the craft leads to practical success for us-- if we succeed in predicting psychology internally via this model-- then I think that's time very well spent & progress well made. Even if it takes CT a while to properly answer to Academia, that's fine since we're just getting started anyway.
Between now and that time, there are people with questions about their inner realities, and I at least will remain committed to learning what I can about humanity and sharing that as I go.

[Juan E. Sandoval]

I would definitely love a weekly test! And next time, I hope we’ll have the Se & Ne tutorials

I'm totally down for another one next weekend. 🙂 How about it guys?

[Cedar]

I also think you will get a cleaner view of the behaviors/mannerisms if it is done in a two person conversation or interview. We all perform different things, even if we don't realize it. Scarlet seemed to be performing hyper-femininity by being a false-bashful/shy/timid, moving her face in traditionally feminine ways, etc. that you see many younger women performing. I say this without judgment, but as an observation. I think this is lessened when it is not just one person speaking into a camera.
Also, there needs to be an awareness that we are pushed into or rewarded for certain things in life, such as being girly or studious when we are younger. Backing up her being an Se lead because she has a vlog on make-up, clothes, modelling, etc. doesn't mean a lot at such a young age. I was into that when I was young, but haven't worn make-up in over 5 years. I think it is easy to unintentionally have confirmation bias.

[EpicEntity]

That's say Alex is something other than SeFi. So Auburn makes use of the statistics offered to him and adjust the codifier to fit the assumed result. In the long run, as CT continues to expand it's intelligence, is there any chance that the codifier system would catch what it did wrong and reorganize itself to a point where it would never make same kind of result again? Just hypothetically speaking!
 

[Bera]

You guys said so many interesting things !

@Auburn - thank you for the explanation ! I think it's clearer after you compared her with Kendall Jenner and with Kati Morton ! And Kati Morton is one of the softest and least snippiest SeFi I-I- samples ! 🙂
I think because of Gravity Effect, SeFi's generally make "heavier" moves than NeFi's, for example, and this can confuse people too...I'm not sure if this assumption is correct, but I think in the case of SeFi's Gravity Effect can make our Te look more developed than it actually is. Because movements falling down adds the impression of more heaviness to the Te Plateau Velocity ! Heavy objects fall faster ! If this makes any sense at all. :)) So, there would be some choppy hand moves that then also fall downward completely, due to gravity and these 2 combined can make our moves look a bit more decisive than they really are. I think this might be something to consider in general in our case. That there is full velocity right away & going downwards and these 2 together can create a certain effect that we wouldn't see in NeFi's and that could be interpreted as conscious Te though it might be just Se and Te together.
@tane I also analyzed a lot if she is TeNi or SeFi. Not to mention I also checked NiTe's.
I think she is SeFi because :
- She seems to have baseline P lead fluid posture, although there are times when she becomes rigid - probably because of her developing Te. Her neck tends to lean to a side or another far too often for a J lead, her spine changes position frequently too. And on top of that, her eyes toggle while she is doing this and her head follows them - when she looks down, her head leans down, when she looks back to the camera, it returns to the previous position.

- she has Puer energy and lacks King energy !
Look, I checked her YouTube channel a bit and I love it, I subscribed to it yesterday !!! She actually posts interesting and useful content and I have to say I admire how well she is integrating Te.
Now, of course I looked for the oldest videos and here is one she made 8 years ago, where she also talks to a person - her bestie. I think at that time she was swaying more than she does now and that we can see more Pe signals, though she already was leaning towards Te development :
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oCknibKFP0I&t=213s
Do you see how much she is swaying here? It's way MORE, not less ! Also, her head is almost constantly tilted to a side and the side always changes. :)) And there could be the objection - but she is very young here but look at Shia LaBeouf when very young !
See here - https://cognitivetype.com/forums/topic/soft-readings-ii/
I have to say though her head nods are pretty impressive, she has some decisiveness in them. It also looks like she can do convincing short Te hand chops but when she starts explaining and projecting, in my opinion her hand movements are casual and forcing themselves to do more angular motions, aren't they?
And... you will not believe this ! This is her now !! <3

I'm not sure if she is I-I- now, but I can see a clear change in the quality of her Te moves over time ! Now they are clearer and have more impact !! The projecting goes pretty smoothly, I am impressed because I know how hard it is to show Te as a tertiary function, haha. :)) By the end - when talking about the bird feeder - her hand moves hit really well and she also becomes fairly rigid. I didn't analyze all the signals, but my first impression is she shows more Te now than she did in the video we analyzed and much more than in the video she made 8 years ago...no?
What do you guys think??
Also, yes, I am totally down for weekly tests !

[Juan E. Sandoval]

Scarlet seemed to be performing hyper-femininity by being a false-bashful/shy/timid, moving her face in traditionally feminine ways, etc. that you see many younger women performing.

@tane - I had a similar intuition at first, many years back, that maybe they were 'faking' femininity. But I actually think now that it's the other way around. Some people who are not high-Fi tend to try and imitate high-Fi seelie women's natural unbridled radiation, in order to come across a certain (desired?) way - while some are just naturally like that.
It's the same reason why some Ne-lead women try to make their makeup "sharp" or cat-like, like Se eyes are incline to be naturally due to muscular pull. It's because:

• a) The culture has unconsciously picked up on a certain vultological correlation between sharp eyes and sensual energy.
• b) The culture values that trait.
• c) Those who don't have that attribute naturally try to imitate those that do.

Our memes don't come from thin air, and "femininity" or feminine gestures are not a cultural construction at base. I mean, culture is layered atop of a real phenomenon.
It's also the same reason why people try to imitate Je when doing public speaking. It's because Je's king energy is the most evocative of security and command, so they say "stand up straight", "don't say ummm", "project your voice", etc. These are things a Je-lead probably does naturally, but those who aren't Je-lead need to try and "reach" that energy by practicing their own Je out.
It's really quite fascinating when one tries to invert the narrative this way, and realize that culture is trying to imitate functions. A lot of bizarre information starts to show up.

[Juan E. Sandoval]

@tane - But you bring up a curious point (regarding age) and that is.. that we don't entirely know if there is a necessary baseline adjustment of energetics needed across a person's lifetime.
For example, it could be that type is real in the way we're defining here, but all young people will have more Pe by default and all old people will have more Pi by default. So to type properly, we have to factor in/out that baseline maybe. Perhaps something sorta like this:

I don't know if this is true btw. But it's an interesting idea.
It would actually not surprise me, as it falls straight in line with how Pe energy is called Puer (latin for child) and Pi energy is called Senex (latin for old man). But this is something we'd need more rigorous statistics to identify, and a closer look at children, which we haven't read many of.

[Sander]

@bera I checked that plant video indeed, but she could have grown her Te since the quiz video, of course (oops).
Your Se+Te explanation was also very helpful, thanks!

[Bera]

@sander - yes, this is what I think...that she grew it a bit in the meantime, but I'm not sure it's developed now either, it just looks like she is using it more or at a higher...snippyness rate? 🙂
I'm glad the part about Se-Te helped, I'm not sure it's correct, it's just my impression.
And @tane -about the hyper femininity performance, I can't really know what she does, but this is something I am partly familiar with and I can say for myself that I never tried to show more of the signals of my first 2 functions, but I do try to show more Te on purpose !!
I think I show pretty much the same or similar signals to Scarlett (with less Te) and with the difference that both my Fi and Se signals look more feminine AND more childish than hers, if that makes sense...? So, I sway more and I show more seelieness imo. And I really am like this ! I would have never done it on purpose, because there are a lot of disadvantages in it. I must pay effort to appear decisive and anyway I reach just a low level of decisiveness even in this case ! But to me even these small victories matter, to me managing to ask someone to give me my money back in a serious tone is an improvement ! I couldn't do this 2 years ago, I needed to learn to do it ! So the seelie feminine part is not fake, but Te modulation is ...well...I wouldn't call it fake, let's say it's calculated. But from the outside it doesn't look like this at all because people tend to perceive my seelieness as...a bit unusual. So they'd rather assume that the seelieness is part of a constructed image. But actually I am in the process of constructing the image of a confident and powerful woman, not that of a feminine one. :)))

[EpicEntity]

@bera
What would it look like if you could be seelie feminine regardless of what others see? Would that be the easiest eruption of power and confidence? Especially if they start to see such confidences arise from their even more and more epic failures to fit you into their expectations?

[Bera]

Hey, you are right if we are talking about personal style.
But if we are talking about career, then I maintain my opinion that better integrating unseelieness and Te would greatly improve it. And this is true of many jobs, not just mine. It is our natural growth process to go from employee to a managerial position or self employed/small business owner/partnership. You need some level of Je use for this purpose and the alternative is to always depend on others that are in a position of power. Personal charm can help us influence our bosses or co-workers  and keep them on what we consider is the right track... but wouldn't it be more practical to fight our own flaws than to concentrate all our efforts on supporting stronger people ?? Because on the long run I think you can earn a respectable place and a good income solely by good quality  reviser work and charm. But only by collaboration with a high Je, less agreeable person...because someone needs to fight and tell people what to do, right ? And maybe it's  safer  to develop these skills yourself than to always depend on alliances with stronger people,  who might use their stronger position not just to defend you but also against you??
So, I think it's very useful to learn to defend yourself and others and to be assertive and to not mind too much if you are being disagreeable. I wouldn't say it's a must, but we gotta see that no one will ever protect you or fight for your interests better than yourself.
Sorry, I diverged, but I really thought this is an important point, because I keep hearing be yourself but be yourself actually should be interpreted be your best self, not just be your most comfortable self. 🙂

[EpicEntity]

Darn, I'm mostly responsible for another divergence.
Yeah I guess some (-)F + Je does come naturally in those hostile situations. I had to develop that with a constant refinding of reasons for doing the task at hand. So I am almost hypocritical.
It's funny how being told to be myself has been done by some of the most hypocritical or some of the most fortunate. It took me awhile to realize how tricky it can and has been to get there. If everybody else abandons me I still have me in my own arms.
Steve Jobs and Elon Musk do a really good job at not using standard public speech in there announcement ceremonies; just sticking to there meek ways. Then they completely destroy staff and any bullcrap that gets in the way. I'm probably crazy and gulty thinking I can do that right off the back, but I will have to learn my hard lessons.
PS: @auburn - Are we starting the next Quiz Friday or Saturday??

[Juan E. Sandoval]

PS: @auburn – Are we starting the next Quiz Friday or Saturday??

Yesyes, next Friday. lol
I'll finish the last vid by then. Busy times.

[Juan E. Sandoval]

And lastly, here is a comparison of individual member scores against both myself and the consensus at large:

Individual Scores compared against Consensus:

Name	Misses	Total	Score	Type
Consensus	0	110	100.00%	SeFi
Alice	-8	102	92.73%	SeFi
Septimus	-9	101	91.82%	SeFi
Bera	-10	100	90.91%	SeFi
Auburn	-11	99	90.00%	SeFi
Ash	-18	92	83.64%	SeFi
Keso	-20	90	81.82%	SeFi
Epic	-23	87	79.09%	TeNi
Staas	-26	84	76.36%	NeFi
Sekundaer	-26	84	76.36%	NeFi
Bella	-26	84	76.36%	FiNe?
Sander	-33	77	70.00%	TeSi
Hackphobia	-34	76	69.09%	SiTe?

Here is a graph showing the numbers:


@alice , @septimus-chalier , @bera and Auburn all had agreement at or above 90% on a 110 point scale, with Alice having the closest score to the consensus at 92.73%.

Individual Scores compared against Auburn:

Name	Misses	Total	Score	Type
Auburn	0	110	100.00%	SeFi
Consensus	-11	99	90.00%	SeFi
Septimus	-16	94	85.45%	SeFi
Alice	-19	91	82.73%	SeFi
Bera	-21	89	80.91%	SeFi
Ash	-21	89	80.91%	SeFi
Staas	-21	89	80.91%	NeFi
Keso	-23	87	79.09%	SeFi
Bella	-25	85	77.27%	FiNe?
Sekundaer	-27	83	75.45%	NeFi
Epic	-33	77	70.00%	TeNi
Sander	-38	72	65.45%	TeSi
Hackphobia	-39	71	64.55%	SiTe?

Septimus, Alice, Bera, @elisaday (Ash) and @staas all had scores at or above 80%, with the consensus scoring the highest at 90%.

[Author]

Posts