There's a saying, "the proof is in the pudding": It means that the truth about something can only be determined by putting it into action or by testing it out. That saying is actually a lazy version of the saying “the proof of the pudding is in the eating” (my family is half Scottish so a pudding to me is a cake: as I type this I'm picturing a yummy-looking sticky toffee pudding, but you can picture something equally delicious if you like!) That phrase means that a sticky toffee pudding may look beautiful and yummy but you can only tell if it really is delicious by tasting it: something could look sweet and delectable, yet taste like a peanut butter and ketchup sandwich. This is kind of how we approach the proofs for KittyCats™ traits: No, we don't taste the cats (well, WendiKitteh licks the Porcelain ones, but that's a different article series altogether). When you have a kitten, you don't know for sure what it's hiding unless you can “test it out”. Sometimes this means breeding out its hidden trait, breeding parents or offspring, tracing it's pedigree back far enough to find out what hidden traits its parents and grandparents hid, etc. When we update the Saga Charts, we try to find these proofs in the pedigrees sent to us by the community: is a cat really hiding Tranquility eyes, or is it hiding a peanut butter and ketchup sandwich?
On that note, I want to introduce the series of articles we'd like to present about proofs: What makes a solid proof? How do you know if a proof you have is correct? How do you know you have all the right information? We are very lucky that we get so much information from the wonderful KittyCatS™ community members! You might even notice that sometimes it takes some time to get the information updated on the charts. We thought we'd start with an introduction that described the process – how a proof sent by a community member gets updated on the Saga Charts.
Finding Solid Proofs
When we receive and analyse a proof, we need to make sure the following questions are answered "YES":- Are the documents complete?
- Is the information correct?
- Is the proof conclusive?
1. Are the documents complete? We need to make sure we have all the information we need in a format that allows us to examine the proof and later archive it for future reference. We look for the following things:
- Are textures sent to SagaKitty's inventory “Full Perm”? Textures must be copy/mod/transfer so they can be archived into notecards (we archive proofs into one notecard with all the urls/textures/etc). Also, sometimes the person getting the proof documents from SagaKitty passes them to someone else to be analysed. If anything isn't full-perm, we contact the sender and request full-perm documents.
- Are all URLs permanent? If someone sends a URL to a screen shot of a pedigree, it should be a permanent URL because we often need to go back to a proof for later reference. If the URL doesn't work anymore, we've lost our proof! We also save the images for valid proofs from the web to Google Drive, just in case!
- Has all the information been included; is anything missing? If the proof uses information about the parents' hidden traits (or starter's hiddens, or a breeding partner's hiddens, etc), has proof of those hidden traits been included? If the information is about a certain set of cats or certain traits, was the correct pedigree included? If any of the information is incomplete or missing, we contact the sender and request the missing information.
![[tiny kitty]](http://www.terminallearning.com/SLstuff/sagaDocs/images/catsit_darkCyan.png)
FYI: Kitten Boxes2. Is the information correct? Sometimes people send incorrect information; it happens :) For example, maybe someone sent a note that said “Here's proof that this cat is hiding Sassy tail.” but we see that the cat is showing the more recessive Puff tail, so there's no way that cat is hiding Sassy tail. In that case, we'll send a nice note back to the sender explaining the error and, if possible, a request for different information that might help with a proof for the trait in question. Don't worry if you send something that's incorrect; keep sending us stuff! :)
3. Is the proof conclusive? This is probably THE most important part of how the Saga Team evaluates proofs, and this is what has always distinguished Saga's charts from other resources available. We consider the following: Is the proof solid, concrete, and does it actually prove anything? Is it based on assumptions or guesses? We do not make assumptions and we do not accept guesses.
Making AssumptionsSometimes people send information based on their own extensive knowledge of their cats, however we don't know your cats at all. If you know that your cat hides Light Dream whiskers, we need to see visible proof of this. Just because your cat had all Light Dream whisker babies doesn't help: I once repeatedly bred two sibling cats showing Odyssey Carnival eyes and all they ever gave me was Odyssey Carnival babies, even though I knew the little buggers were hiding the Fancie Pink Diamond eye from their Pink Champagne Ocicat dad. That kind of result is rare and against the odds (there was a 25% chance on each breeding that those siblings would produce a Fancie Pink Diamond eye but clearly luck was not in my favour) but things like that do happen.
The Saga Charts have lasted this long (since 2011, which is a long time in KittyCatS™ and SL years!) and have been the most reliable source of KittyCatS™ trait information because people trust that the information in them is correct. Oh yes, there have definitely been mistakes made in the past, and that's why the process for analysing proofs has gotten more meticulous and more formally defined.
What is The Process?
What happens when you send a proof? How does it go from your inventory to an entry on the charts? Here's how!1. Proof Received: Documents are received by SagaKitty (or by one of the team members, as some folks send proofs directly to team members they know personally – in this case, if the proof is valid and conclusive, a copy of the information is stored with the SagaKitty account in case anyone requests information about a proof).
2. First Analysis: Here the documents are checked for completeness and correctness: is all the information there, is anything missing? Are textures full-perm and URLs working? If required, more information is requested from the sender. Otherwise, we make sure the proof is correct and if so, we pass it on to step 3. If the proof is incorrect, it's filed away in case it's needed for future reference.
3. Second Analysis: The documents are analysed to see if the proof is solid or inconclusive. A decision is reached and the proof moves on to step 4.
4. Double-Check: A person not involved in the analysis in step 3 checks the proof. If they agree with the decision, the proof is sent on to step 5. If not, analysis and discussion takes place until a decision is made that the team members agree with. If the decision is that the proof is valid, it moves to step 5. Otherwise, it's filed away in case it's needed for future reference. Sometimes we just need more information, in which case, we request it from the sender and start all over again.
5. File and Update Charts: Finally! If the proof has reached this step, it's conclusive and can be filed in the archives with all of the other proofs. Then the charts are updated!
For those of you in a business analysis or systems analysis field, you might enjoy this flowchart I lazily made:
Exception: New “Most Recessive” Traits.Hopefully this has helped you understand what happens when we receive proof information and how it gets onto the Saga Charts (or why it doesn't). Next week we'll start doing some actual examples of proof analysis: we'll start with a simple one we see all the time: drawing a new trait from a starter. Thanks for reading, and may all your dream kitties come true!
