Note that this page will be updated through 2025.

This page contains a summary of all events. You can see the statistics for the individual events here:

• Probability of Doom

Attendees

• 1 events.
• 19.00 people per event on average (σ=nan).
• 3.00 newcomers per event (σ=nan).
• Maximum number of attendees was 19 and minimum was 19 people.

Recurring is any person coming for the second, third etc. time whereas New is anyone coming for the first time to a Rationality Freiburg event.

Attendance

People per events attended

How many people attended how many events.

Referrals

Feedback

• Responses: 15 people (78.95% of attendees)

1. Practical use: For my life, what we did today will have …

• Responses: 15 people (78.95% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • a lot of practical use (1): 1 person
  • quite a bit of practical use (2): 6 people
  • some practical use (3): 3 people
  • little practical use (4): 1 person
  • very little practical use (5): 4 people
• Average answer: 3.07 (σ=1.39)

2. The atmosphere / vibe was …

• Responses: 15 people (78.95% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • fantastic (1): 8 people
  • good (2): 6 people
  • okay (3): 0 people
  • bad (4): 0 people
  • horrible (5): 1 person
• Average answer: 1.67 (σ=1.05)

3. The amount of content / exercises covered was …

• Responses: 15 people (78.95% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • way too much (1): 0 people
  • too much (2): 0 people
  • just right (3): 12 people
  • too little (4): 3 people
  • way too little (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 3.20 (σ=0.41)

4. The difficulty level of the content / discussion was …

• Responses: 15 people (78.95% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • much too easy (1): 0 people
  • too easy (2): 5 people
  • just right (3): 10 people
  • too difficult (4): 0 people
  • much too difficult (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 2.67 (σ=0.49)

5. Structure: On the whole the event needed …

• Responses: 14 people (73.68% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • much more structure (1): 0 people
  • more structure (2): 0 people
  • (was just right) (3): 14 people
  • less structure (4): 0 people
  • much less structure (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 3.00 (σ=0.00)

6. The moderation should have been …

• Responses: 15 people (78.95% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • much more relaxed (1): 0 people
  • more relaxed (2): 0 people
  • (was just right) (3): 12 people
  • more assertive (4): 3 people
  • much more assertive (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 3.20 (σ=0.41)

7. Host preparation: The content / exercises were …

• Responses: 15 people (78.95% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • very well prepared (1): 6 people
  • well prepared (2): 8 people
  • okay prepared (3): 1 person
  • not well prepared (4): 0 people
  • not well prepared at all (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 1.67 (σ=0.62)

8. Changing your mind: The event made me …

• Responses: 15 people (78.95% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • question many things (1): 0 people
  • question some things (2): 12 people
  • question few things (3): 3 people
  • question very few things (4): 0 people
  • not question anything (5): 0 people
• Average answer: 2.20 (σ=0.41)

9. Do you think you will come to one (or more) of the next three events?

• Responses: 15 people (78.95% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • probably no: 2 people
  • probably yes: 13 people

10. If you answered “probably no” in the previous question or are very uncertain, why is that?

• Responses: 2 people (10.53% of attendees)
• Answers:
  • Friday evening is a bad timeslot for me.: 2 people
  • I can’t fit another activity into my life.: 0 people
  • I did not like (some of) the people here.: 0 people
  • I did not like today’s venue.: 0 people
  • I live too far away.: 0 people
  • I’m not very interested in your usual topics.: 0 people
  • The level of English is too advanced for me.: 0 people

11. What did you like the most today?

• Responses: 10 people (52.63% of attendees)

Note: Anything contained in square brackets [] is an edit by the organizers.

nice people

It was a great idea to ask people to write down their “when to act” thresholds and estimates beforehand since then the numbers shown during the presentation were suddenly much more meaningful.

listening to the various perceptions of others

Actually changing some minds

Discussion & seeing other’s probabilities

Interesting topic, good discussion

The lively discussion

Die Gruppendiskussion am Ende

people

Pondering about a topic that I usually would not take time to investigate.

12. What did you like the least?

• Responses: 9 people (47.37% of attendees)

Note: Anything contained in square brackets [] is an edit by the organizers.

a little more time for group discussion would have been nice (also at least one swapping of people in the smaller group)

Micro-optimization: Instead of suggesting updating the estimates for every slide it might have been better to have 4 checkpoints during the presentation where participants were explicitly asked “now revise your estimates, if you want to, you have 2 minutes”. It would also have given more space on the page to write.

I would’ve liked a bit more time to discuss in small groups

Forgot some things

Snacks

The Room was too cold!

The lack of deep explanation /arguments for each prediction

location is far lol

I was expecting fact based probability calculations. Just trying to come up with numbers without any facts didn’t make much sense