or democrats threatening to leave the country when Trump was elected
3 Likes
Well, actually there is a workaround to it. In fact, you already mentioned it yourself in one of your prior comments. It’s not a perfect workaround, mind you, but it is a workaround – pedantically speaking! 
And I’m not just being pedantic, because I use it all the time myself. (In fact, I don’t use any userscripts – absolutely nothing wrong with them, and I understand any frustration in suddenly having one’s workflow disrupted by a change like this – I personally think the WK team should have done a much more careful update process.)
Anyway, the workaround is to simply intentionally botch the next review you get for the ‘incorrectly marked as correct’ item. Again, not a perfect workaround, granted. But it does work just fine/adequately, at least in my opinion.
Suppose you forget to botch your next review? What’s the worst case scenario? You get it right? And suppose you continue to get it right? And even burn it? Well, then, did you really need to worry about it in the first place? Seems like you learned it fine after all.
The ‘worst’ part of this workaround is that it ‘needlessly’ adds an extra SRS cycle (at Guru 1 about 1 week, Guru 2 two weeks, etc.). But in the grand scheme of things, you’re going to be reviewing thousands upon thousands of items, and one (or even several dozen, worst case) extra review for an item isn’t really going to make much of a difference.
(But I do get it that there is psychological significance to the situation. I’m not denying that. I’m just saying that, in the grand scheme of things, maybe ‘holding on’ to that psychological significance isn’t very practically useful; might be better to just ‘let it go’, in a sense, and not let it bother you very much. Just a thought / different point of view. Coming from someone who does often get hung up on this kind of annoyance myself, and finds it hard to ‘let go’.)
2 Likes
Before I reply to an off-topic point, I should first ensure I don’t get thrown off of the forum:
MY EYES! THEY’RE BLEEDING! Where are the summary pages?! The ENTER key isn’t working on lessons?!! GOOD LORD!! I LITERALLY CANNOT LIVE WITHOUT MY SCRIPTS TO REORDER LESSONS AND UNDO TYPOS! THIS CURSED UPDATE WILL BE THE END OF HUMANITY! IT’S BEEN HOURS WITHOUT A FIX!!
All good? Okay, onto the point I wanted to make:
I’d strongly advise thinking a bit different about getting incorrect answers.
Over the course of memorizing 9,000+ items, you’ll get marked incorrect for many reasons, sometimes for outright mistakes and recall failures, sometimes for silly things like typos and unrecognized synonyms, and sometimes for subtle things where you think you understand something but really don’t (transitivity, etc.).
Regardless of why something gets marked incorrect, it just means you’ll review that item once or twice more than you would have anyway. If your goal is to memorize the content, “unnnecessary” reviews might make the process take slightly longer, but extra review iterations never hurt your recall, and, surprisingly often, “extra” reviews help to cement things into your memory, actually making the overall process faster (because you might not miss the review in 2 or 4 months time once it’s in a later stage).
It’s worth realizing that you are literally paying for a system that lets you review the stuff you find difficult more frequently than the stuff you find easy (what’s difficult/easy varies from person to person).
The only way the system knows what you find difficult is if you answer incorrectly.
Seriously: the stuff you know progresses pretty quickly with or without typos, and the hard stuff needs as many reviews as possible. FWIW, I quite often answered an item I “knew” (guessed right) incorrectly on purpose, just to ensure I’d get one or two more reviews of that item before it progressed to later stages.
In all seriousness: don’t let incorrect answers affect your morale. They are a vital part of the process and even unnecessary misses won’t slow you down that much (what’s another review or two of a single item?). If you’re constantly making typos or whatever, then that needs to be addressed, but a few typos or missed synonyms here and there just aren’t noticeable in the long run (I made and still make plenty).
22 Likes
Truly incredible pant-shitting from the OP. The site isn’t unusable in its basic form. I’d love for OP to share whatever galaxy brain scripts they use to show us how they’re doing so much better, and how this update to the site is a crime.
3 Likes
I think a “workaround” that only works randomly 50% of the time (when the reading comes second) is “not a workaround at all”, but, sure—“is a workaround only 50% of the time, randomly”. I’m not going to type that every time, but yes, I’m aware of it.
I literally wrote like 500 words above—with examples in English and Japanese—about why, for example, knowing 熱い and 暑い are both “あつい・hot” or 動かす vs. 動く are both “to move” is not sufficient to me if I have them reversed in my head. Or thinking that a word that means “basics” can mean the bottom of a house because the English word “foundation” means both those things means you “learned” 基本. Maybe it’s sufficient to you—and I’ll let it slide up to maybe Guru II—but I don’t consider it sufficient “learning” at a mastery level. So if you disagree, disagree—but don’t just assert that I really “learned it fine after all” when I’ve defined “learned” differently from you.
Exactly. That’s why the inability to manually mark things it allowed incorrect is the bigger deal. Sure, I’d like the full freedom, but manually saying “oops, I don’t know that, I just thought I did in a way that the software accepts” is what verges into “unusable”.
I mean, that’s why I’m creating an Anki deck today of “words I pushed into Enlightened that it turns out I’m not quite 100% on”. I didn’t need any secondary tools (except Skritter for writing practice, and that is purely ancillary and optional) before today.
The only reason the double-check in the other direction (marking correct) matters to me at all is that today, of all days, happened to be the one when I first started having items available to Burn and it sucks to typo one, or—my favorite!—think a filigreed kanji I just learned just (like, imagine it was 毎 vs. 海) came up and quickly answer it wrong before realizing it’s a kanji I knew a decade before WaniKani existed. If I weren’t excited about being able to Burn today I wouldn’t care much about getting silly typos incorrect.
1 Like
tbh about the OP, they got to Level 60 and burned half of all items.
It’s comments that get out of hands, though OP also made bad wording.
2 Likes
The only time that really bothered me, personally, was when I surprised myself by burning something I wasn’t completely confident about. That happened maybe a dozen or so times all told?
Going back and marking something incorrect that was already accepted is a reasonable workflow, but I also don’t think it’s critical functionality: you’re guaranteed at least 8 reviews of every new lesson item over six months or so no matter what.
My go to was typing “ke” for meanings or readings that I wasn’t completely sure of, before my hesitant real answer could possibly be marked correct. There are only a very few words subjects that match "け”.
You must have a gift for remembering verb pairs. There are patterns, but even the most common (like す for transitives) get violated sometimes.
(If you have a trick, let me know. But if I think 下がる means 下げる or vice-versa, I haven’t “learned” it, even if I accidentally type something the software accepts as my answer.)
1 Like
No trick. Just lots and lots and lots of repetition. (To be fair, I’d been speaking the language poorly for decades before learning to read much, though.)
The specific primary meanings they’ve chosen usually work well to recognize transitivity, but sometimes the English word choices aren’t optimal. If you know it’s part of a pair, it pays to make sure you memorize a decent synonym.
1 Like
I already made a similar reply to another comment, but I’ll say it again.
Everybody has their own way to learn that works right for them. You may be cool with change, but that will not be the case for everyone. When people get comfortable, they will probably have an issue with changes that they don’t understand or agree with, especially because it is a product that they are paying for.
I’m not talking about scripts or whatever, because I don’t use them or know what they are. I’m more talking about the removal of functionality that was present with summary pages.
The fact that everybody who uses wanikani pays for a subscription means that everyone who has an issue is entitled to voicing their opinion- just as you have voiced your opinion about this post.
All I’m trying to say is that these people are valid in their frustration. You are also valid in your frustration about their frustration. Just be kind and understanding.
5 Likes
This is off topic.
No, I mean like, literally, the next time the item comes up for review, not during the same review session. Like I said, the biggest problem is that you’ll have to do an extra SRS cycle, so for example, you may have to wait 2 weeks, a month, a couple of months, for that next review, depending on the SRS level. But again, in the grand scheme of things, that’s not really going to make much of a difference. In the end, it’ll just be one extra review. A few seconds of your life.
I don’t think you understand what I meant, nor where I am coming from. I’m literally talking about intentionally botching reviews when you don’t think you’ve ‘learned them enough’, whatever ‘learned enough’ means to you, not to me.
E.g. If you’re constantly getting 熱い and 暑い mixed up, as I also did, then instead of just answering ‘hot’, use a longer-but-more-accurate synonym, such as ‘hot thing’ vs. ‘hot weather’. And if you accidentally answer ‘hot’ one time, and you’ve already answered the reading correctly, then next time it comes up for review, intentionally botch it. I usually type ‘a’ and press Enter, which is never the correct English answer, and is rarely the correct kana あ (if あ happens to be the correct kana, then answer something else, again to intentionally get it wrong).
I was talking about the worst case scenario: You wanted to intentionally botch it, but forgot to. And that gets you all the way to Burning the item. Well, maybe that item wasn’t really so troublesome after all.
Hey, even if you end up Burning the item, you can always Unburn it (called “Resurrect” in the UI) and start it again from scratch. In fact, I’ve taken this kind of ‘intentionally botching’ things to the next level, where I have been intentionally Unburning items for months now, starting all the way back at level 1 and doing what I call a ‘Rolling Reset’.
You said there was no workaround at all. I’m just saying, “Well, actually, yes there is. It’s not perfect, but it does actually work.” You can intentionally botch items as much as you want. That’s even how Anki works, by default, and I’m just explaining that you can simulate the same thing on WK. Worst case scenario, you burn the item a few weeks or months later than you normally would; but you’ll eventually burn it, and to whatever level of mastery you choose. In terms of actual time spent, however, it’ll only be a few minutes max of your life. Just sayin’.
Forgot to mention about “動かす vs. 動く”, i.e. ‘transitive’ / ‘intransitive’ pairs. I handle these by always using the longer answer for the item, if there is any confusion in my mind about a pair. E.g. instead of ‘to move’, I’ll only answer ‘to move something’ or ‘to be moved’ (or whatever the alternative is for the intransitive; if an alt doesn’t exist, I’ll add one). That way if I answer “to be moved” for 動かす, it will certainly be marked wrong.
2 Likes
But that’s my point—if I type “To X”, and it accepts it when it’s “To X something”, how do I repeat it? If I already got the reading right? I had an answer yesterday: mark it wrong. Now I don’t.
I agree the many many cases of “to X” and “to X something” ‘work well to recognize transitivity’, but for testing, only in one direction (if you mistakenly add the “something” when it’s intransitive).
Thinking about it, Wanikani only accepts user synonyms, but not user block list or warning list. Nor any scripts. Anyway, just don’t answer with hot, but type “hot thing”, “hot weather”.
Nonetheless, “cold weather” is not a synonym for 寒い. (But it isn’t blocked.)
Anyway, my opinion regarding the subject is, don’t think of Wanikani as a perfect, nor even good enough, system. Anything is prone to systematic errors.
Though, another problem is if English itself doesn’t work it in my head, I’d get confused too. In my eyes, it’s just sometimes difficult to rely on English wording.
2 Likes
It’s not the seconds of typing I care about—I couldn’t give a fig whether I have to type the definition exactly 8 times to burn it in a perfect run or 22. But I had a bunch of verbs that kept going Master, Guru I, Guru II, Master, Guru I, Guru II, Master, over and over until I got Double-Check and started marking it wrong whenever it let a “to do” slide when it was really “to do something”.
By forcing those to go down and stay down until I actually got them, rather than a 50% chance of getting them, I learned them. Maybe it’s because I’m old and my brain’s less plastic, but I need more frequent practice than I got from the Master ↓ Guru I ↑ Guru II ↑ Master ↓ Guru I… cycle for unusual transitivities, or kanji-swapping pairs, or unexpected non-rendakus or compound kun’yomis to stick when I was just randomly getting them right and getting a further spacing 50% of the time by pure luck.
And you can still do this, just manually (i.e. without needing a script to handle it within the same review session), during the next review. (Also, I edited my previous post with info about how to handle verb pairs. Maybe that example will make it more obvious what I’m suggesting.)
Oh, believe you me, if I’d known Double-Check was going to get disabled, i would have started learning and using those terms. But most aren’t as obvious as “hot body” and “hot weather”. Like, a lot of mediopassive pairs or transitivitiy pairs are just “to X” and “to be X” or “to X something”. Again, I could’ve tried to search for synonyms that to me felt distinctive, but because Double-Check was there, I didn’t spend the time up-front.
The thing that really doomed me, I think? “Legacy Script Support” in preferences. I don’t know what it did, i never turned it on. But the simple fact that that was there made me think that a script like Double-Check was something I could incorporate into my workflow.
I’m so, so tired of every app I use over time lowering itself to the common denominator of “works okay on a 5-year-old iPhone SE”.
I never sweated getting scored incorrectly, right or wrong.
During reviews of verbs, I usually think of using them in a sentence as I type my answer. With English words like raise/rise it’s easy to ensure you’ve got the transitivity correct. I can’t think of a good counter example atm, but whenever I saw a primary meaning for a transitivity pair that I didn’t know and the English was confusing, I made a user synonym to help me distinguish.
Since I have muscle memory of typing fe now to expose the answer I’ll see if the primary reading was “to X something” even though I just typed “to X” (thinking it was intransitive). I’d make a mental note that I had the transitivity wrong, but didn’t worry about getting it marked correct, regardless.
1 Like
