In this thread about history and game skill resolution, the question asked is can there be a wrong interpretation and does that equate to lesser skill. Well i've read other posts who say "Yes" and give a penalty.
But what is crucially being overlooked as HOW people interpret History or Facts is based on other aspects of the character and not inherent in the skill itself. Its just annoying that they come to the same final conclusion even when I've given that answer early on and went out of my way to give concise examples.
You can test my knowledge of history by Q&A and with a definite standard of X facts. Although drawing up conclusions is based on my experience and my other knowledges.
If I have a good judge of people, then that understanding carries on to how I interpret Historical facts about someone's actions. The same way we go to various experts and get different interpretations with the same data.
Ex. A pool of 13th Century data (all sorts from equipment, to papers). An Economic Background can tell you the quality of Life, a Medical Background can give you average health, a Military background can give you Logistics and Organization, an Engineer can tell you how they made their goods, and as you compare and contrast different fields to their conclusions you come up with a whole Other bunch of interpretations of facts.
There are Right and Wrong interpretation, right in as much as there is indirect/direct experimentation and simulation as a way to prove a hypothesis beyond reasonable doubt and wrong as it falls outside what is reasonable.
Stuff unprovable like intentions, motives, and reasons are usually free to be interpreted as you wish. Although behavioral game theory is finding ways to read motives and analyze behavior psychology has a hard time proving.
What does a Flip gotta do to get some attention?