Re: Starving people refuse to eat food aid
Walter Bushell
<5ca51016-0335-4a9a...@b36g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
Moriarty <blu...@ivillage.com> wrote:
> On Nov 19, 9:43�am, Kurt Busiek <k...@busiek.com> wrote:
> > On 2009-11-18 14:27:41 -0800, Hatunen <hatu...@cox.net> said:
>
> <snip>
>
> > > I'm confused. Are you counting the tomato as a vegetable?
> >
> > Why not? �It is a vegetable.
> >
> > The people who like to claim tomatoes are fruit are playing a word game
> > that most of them don't actually understand. �They're switching from
> > "fruit" as it's used in food talk to "fruit" as a piece of vegetable
> > biology.
> >
> > What we call "fruit" when we're talking about eating things are
> > generally sweet fruits that tend to be used in desserts. �When we're
> > talking about biology, "fruit" is the ripened overay of a plant.
> >
> > So by botanical standards, the tomato is a fruit, but the people who
> > insist on calling it that because they heard it as a gag somewhere
> > don't go on to insist that cucumbers, pumpkin, peas, corn and green
> > peppers are fruits as well. �But by the standard they're using, they
> > are.
> >
> > Of course, by the standard they're using, saying that tomatoes aren't
> > vegetables but fruit is itself incorrect -- by those standards, all
> > fruits are vegetables, because "fruit" is a term for one part of a
> > vegetable, not something that's magically not-a-vegetable.
> >
> > But by food preparation standards, tomatoes are vegetables, because
> > that's how we use them. �Same for corn and cucumber and such.
>
> Same with mushrooms. Taxonomically, not even in the same Kingdom.
> Gastronomically, they're vegetables.
>
> -Moriarty
Mushroom were thought to be plants when I was in High School, so the
usage stuck.
--
A computer without Microsoft is like a chocolate cake without mustard.
R H Draney
>
>Mushroom were thought to be plants when I was in High School, so the
>usage stuck.
Add that to the list of "eternal truths" they've decided to change since I was
in school, along with "Venus always keeps the same side facing the sun", "milk,
eggs and bread are all good for you", and "walk facing the oncoming
traffic"....r
--
A pessimist sees the glass as half empty.
An optometrist asks whether you see the glass
more full like this?...or like this?
Dimensional Traveler
> Walter Bushell filted:
>> Mushroom were thought to be plants when I was in High School, so the
>> usage stuck.
>
> Add that to the list of "eternal truths" they've decided to change since I was
> in school, along with "Venus always keeps the same side facing the sun", "milk,
> eggs and bread are all good for you", and "walk facing the oncoming
> traffic"....r
>
--
7 Years - 2265 Experiments - 10 tons of explosives - 705 Myths
Myths - Will - Fall!
R H Draney
>
>R H Draney wrote:
>> Walter Bushell filted:
>>> Mushroom were thought to be plants when I was in High School, so the
>>> usage stuck.
>>
>>Add that to the list of "eternal truths" they've decided to change since I was
>>in school, along with "Venus always keeps the same side facing the sun", "milk,
>> eggs and bread are all good for you", and "walk facing the oncoming
>> traffic"....r
>>
>Wait, they're now saying we shouldn't walk facing oncoming traffic?
Latest I've heard is that it depends on whether or not there's a sidewalk....r
Walter Bushell
R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> Walter Bushell filted:
> >
> >Mushroom were thought to be plants when I was in High School, so the
> >usage stuck.
>
> Add that to the list of "eternal truths" they've decided to change since I
> was
> in school, along with "Venus always keeps the same side facing the sun",
> "milk,
> eggs and bread are all good for you", and "walk facing the oncoming
> traffic"....r
Milk and eggs are good for you. Bread not so much.
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
I often think that trying to classify everyday objects scientifically
is a mistake. For instance, I was OK with peanuts not being "nuts".
That's obvious: no tree, grow in the ground etc. Same with cashews:
no shell, seed of the cashew apple. But then I found out that
almonds, pecans and walnuts are not "nuts", and now "nut" seems like
a useless category..
Ted
--
------
columbiaclosings.com
What's not in Columbia anymore..
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
R H Draney wrote:
> Dimensional Traveler filted:
> >
> >R H Draney wrote:
> >> Walter Bushell filted:
> >>> Mushroom were thought to be plants when I was in High School, so the
> >>> usage stuck.
> >>
> >>Add that to the list of "eternal truths" they've decided to change since I was
> >>in school, along with "Venus always keeps the same side facing the sun", "milk,
> >> eggs and bread are all good for you", and "walk facing the oncoming
> >> traffic"....r
> >>
> >Wait, they're now saying we shouldn't walk facing oncoming traffic?
>
> Latest I've heard is that it depends on whether or not there's a sidewalk....r
And what state you're in. You can be arrested if it's "jovial".
Probably shot for mischievous".
David DeLaney
>Milk and eggs are good for you. Bread not so much.
What if I only have milk XOR eggs?
Dave "why did the chicken cross the beams?" DeLaney
--
\/David DeLaney posting from d...@vic.com "It's not the pot that grows the flower
It's not the clock that slows the hour The definition's plain for anyone to see
Love is all it takes to make a family" - R&P. VISUALIZE HAPPYNET VRbeable<BLINK>
http://www.vic.com/~dbd/ - net.legends FAQ & Magic / I WUV you in all CAPS! --K.
Dimensional Traveler
> Dimensional Traveler filted:
>> R H Draney wrote:
>>> Walter Bushell filted:
>>>> Mushroom were thought to be plants when I was in High School, so the
>>>> usage stuck.
>>> Add that to the list of "eternal truths" they've decided to change since I was
>>> in school, along with "Venus always keeps the same side facing the sun", "milk,
>>> eggs and bread are all good for you", and "walk facing the oncoming
>>> traffic"....r
>>>
>> Wait, they're now saying we shouldn't walk facing oncoming traffic?
>
> Latest I've heard is that it depends on whether or not there's a sidewalk....r
>
knew if there is no sidewalk, you're just walking on the shoulder, you
should walk facing on-coming traffic.
erilar
R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
> Dimensional Traveler filted:
> >
> >R H Draney wrote:
> >> Walter Bushell filted:
> >>> Mushroom were thought to be plants when I was in High School, so the
> >>> usage stuck.
> >>
> >>Add that to the list of "eternal truths" they've decided to change since I
> >>was
> >>in school, along with "Venus always keeps the same side facing the sun",
> >>"milk,
> >> eggs and bread are all good for you", and "walk facing the oncoming
> >> traffic"....r
> >>
> >Wait, they're now saying we shouldn't walk facing oncoming traffic?
>
> Latest I've heard is that it depends on whether or not there's a
> sidewalk....r
No sidewalks along the road where my dog and I walk. And in the winter
there's no room to even get off to the side of the road once the snow
builds up. We'll keep walking against traffic.
--
Erilar, biblioholic medievalist
Hatunen
wrote:
>Walter Bushell filted:
>>
>>Mushroom were thought to be plants when I was in High School, so the
>>usage stuck.
>
>Add that to the list of "eternal truths" they've decided to change since I was
>in school, along with "Venus always keeps the same side facing the sun",
Don't you mean Mercury?
--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hat...@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Ralph Jones
>On 22 Nov 2009 08:15:28 -0800, R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net>
>wrote:
>
>>Walter Bushell filted:
>>>
>>>Mushroom were thought to be plants when I was in High School, so the
>>>usage stuck.
>>
>>Add that to the list of "eternal truths" they've decided to change since I was
>>in school, along with "Venus always keeps the same side facing the sun",
>
>Don't you mean Mercury?
Yes, that would be Mercury...I don't think I've ever seen that
behavior ascribed to Venus, although they both have very slow spin
rates, with Venus rotating retrograde.
rj
Walter Bushell
d...@gatekeeper.vic.com (David DeLaney) wrote:
> Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
> >Milk and eggs are good for you. Bread not so much.
>
> What if I only have milk XOR eggs?
>
> Dave "why did the chicken cross the beams?" DeLaney
On the basis of inadequate information I would expect eggs would be the
better choice. I am not a MD. YMMV. Any use of my advice is at the
discretion of the user and I assume no responsibility for any results.
Wayne Throop
: On the basis of inadequate information I would expect eggs would be the
: discretion of the user and I assume no responsibility for any results.
Well, allegedly eggs will oversupply you with cholesterol.
Or, some folks allege it, and some emphatically don't.
But then, cow milk doesn't match human nutritional needs all
that well, either (though... not horridly). And in both cases,
they are targeted at growing/developing critters, not
adult/steady-state critters, so they presumably have vaguely
similar issues (milk being much runnier).
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
R H Draney
>
>I often think that trying to classify everyday objects scientifically
>is a mistake. For instance, I was OK with peanuts not being "nuts".
>That's obvious: no tree, grow in the ground etc. Same with cashews:
>no shell, seed of the cashew apple. But then I found out that
>almonds, pecans and walnuts are not "nuts", and now "nut" seems like
>a useless category..
Useless?...on *Usenet*?!...
I get what you mean about categories...I think the thin end of the wedge was
when they told us ladybugs weren't bugs...in fact, *no* bugs were bugs; they
were all insects, and as far as I could figure out for a long time, there was
actually no such thing as a true "bug"....
R H "and then they broke the news about Grape Nuts" Draney
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> Ted Nolan <tednolan> filted:
>> I often think that trying to classify everyday objects scientifically
>> is a mistake. For instance, I was OK with peanuts not being "nuts".
>> That's obvious: no tree, grow in the ground etc. Same with cashews:
>> no shell, seed of the cashew apple. But then I found out that
>> almonds, pecans and walnuts are not "nuts", and now "nut" seems like
>> a useless category..
>
> Useless?...on *Usenet*?!...
>
> I get what you mean about categories...I think the thin end of the wedge was
> when they told us ladybugs weren't bugs...in fact, *no* bugs were bugs; they
> were all insects, and as far as I could figure out for a long time, there was
> actually no such thing as a true "bug"....
Bugs are Hemiptera; the true bugs include assassin bugs, water bugs
(not beetles), harlequin bugs, and many others.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com
R H Draney
>
>R H Draney wrote:
>>
>> I get what you mean about categories...I think the thin end of the wedge was
>> when they told us ladybugs weren't bugs...in fact, *no* bugs were bugs; they
>> were all insects, and as far as I could figure out for a long time, there was
>> actually no such thing as a true "bug"....
>
> Bugs are Hemiptera; the true bugs include assassin bugs, water bugs
>(not beetles), harlequin bugs, and many others.
None of which I can remember seeing or hearing of until I was at least in my
late teens....r
Ted Nolan <tednolan>
>>
>>R H Draney wrote:
>>>
>>> I get what you mean about categories...I think the thin end of the wedge was
>>> when they told us ladybugs weren't bugs...in fact, *no* bugs were bugs; they
>>> were all insects, and as far as I could figure out for a long time, there was
>>> actually no such thing as a true "bug"....
>>
>> Bugs are Hemiptera; the true bugs include assassin bugs, water bugs
>>(not beetles), harlequin bugs, and many others.
>
>None of which I can remember seeing or hearing of until I was at least in my
>late teens....r
>
My taxonomy works like this:
All insects are bugs.
Many bugs are not insects.
So: Ants - bugs
bees - bugs
roaches - bugs
millipedes - bugs
spiders - bugs
shrimp - sea bugs
However, we must always remember:
"Bats aren't bugs!"
Warren Oates
t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:
> I often think that trying to classify everyday objects scientifically
> is a mistake. For instance, I was OK with peanuts not being "nuts".
> That's obvious: no tree, grow in the ground etc. Same with cashews:
> no shell, seed of the cashew apple. But then I found out that
> almonds, pecans and walnuts are not "nuts", and now "nut" seems like
> a useless category..
We need some way to categorize Ed Conrad.
--
Suddenly he realized that he was alone
with a giant halfwit on a dark deserted street.
-- Chester Himes
cryptoguy
> In article <hedl8l01...@drn.newsguy.com>,
> R H Draney <dadoc...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>
> >Ryk E. Spoor filted:
>
> >>R H Draney wrote:
>
> >>> I get what you mean about categories...I think the thin end of the wedge was
> >>> when they told us ladybugs weren't bugs...in fact, *no* bugs were bugs; they
> >>> were all insects, and as far as I could figure out for a long time, there was
> >>> actually no such thing as a true "bug"....
>
> >> Bugs are Hemiptera; the true bugs include assassin bugs, water bugs
> >>(not beetles), harlequin bugs, and many others.
>
> >None of which I can remember seeing or hearing of until I was at least in my
> >late teens....r
>
> My taxonomy works like this:
>
> All insects are bugs.
>
> Many bugs are not insects.
>
> So: Ants - bugs
> bees - bugs
> roaches - bugs
> millipedes - bugs
> spiders - bugs
> shrimp - sea bugs
ITYM 'arthropod', a well established term that seems to match up with
your use of 'bug'.
pt
Walter Bushell
t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:
And lobsters especially are bugs. Why even ichthyologists specializing
in marine invertebrates call lobsters bugs.
Most people use the word "bugs" in a vernacular sense, which does not
align with the technical sense.
Even some rabbits are known as "Bugs".
Szymon Sokół
> Ted Nolan <tednolan> filted:
>>
>>I often think that trying to classify everyday objects scientifically
>>is a mistake. For instance, I was OK with peanuts not being "nuts".
>>That's obvious: no tree, grow in the ground etc. Same with cashews:
>>no shell, seed of the cashew apple. But then I found out that
>>almonds, pecans and walnuts are not "nuts", and now "nut" seems like
>>a useless category..
>
> Useless?...on *Usenet*?!...
>
> I get what you mean about categories...I think the thin end of the wedge was
> when they told us ladybugs weren't bugs...in fact, *no* bugs were bugs; they
> were all insects, and as far as I could figure out for a long time, there was
> actually no such thing as a true "bug"....
Yeah, that's what software developers would like you to believe - they call
them "features"; but I know a true bug when I see it...
--
Szymon Sokół (SS316-RIPE) -- Network Manager B
Computer Center, AGH - University of Science and Technology, Cracow, Poland O
http://home.agh.edu.pl/szymon/ PGP key id: RSA: 0x2ABE016B, DSS: 0xF9289982 F
Free speech includes the right not to listen, if not interested -- Heinlein H
Don Freeman
> On 22 Nov 2009 21:48:31 -0800, R H Draney wrote:
>
>> Ted Nolan <tednolan> filted:
>>> I often think that trying to classify everyday objects scientifically
>>> is a mistake. For instance, I was OK with peanuts not being "nuts".
>>> That's obvious: no tree, grow in the ground etc. Same with cashews:
>>> no shell, seed of the cashew apple. But then I found out that
>>> almonds, pecans and walnuts are not "nuts", and now "nut" seems like
>>> a useless category..
>> Useless?...on *Usenet*?!...
>>
>> I get what you mean about categories...I think the thin end of the wedge was
>> when they told us ladybugs weren't bugs...in fact, *no* bugs were bugs; they
>> were all insects, and as far as I could figure out for a long time, there was
>> actually no such thing as a true "bug"....
>
> Yeah, that's what software developers would like you to believe - they call
> them "features"; but I know a true bug when I see it...
>
Dude, get it right. It's not just any old feature, it's an
*undocumented* feature.
--
-Don
R H Draney
>
>In article <7mtk2fF...@mid.individual.net>,
> t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:
>
>> I often think that trying to classify everyday objects scientifically
>> is a mistake. For instance, I was OK with peanuts not being "nuts".
>> That's obvious: no tree, grow in the ground etc. Same with cashews:
>> no shell, seed of the cashew apple. But then I found out that
>> almonds, pecans and walnuts are not "nuts", and now "nut" seems like
>> a useless category..
>
>We need some way to categorize Ed Conrad.
Ed Conrad is his own category....r
Ralph Jones
wrote:
[snip]
>
>And lobsters especially are bugs. Why even ichthyologists specializing
>in marine invertebrates call lobsters bugs.
>
>Most people use the word "bugs" in a vernacular sense, which does not
>align with the technical sense.
>
>Even some rabbits are known as "Bugs".
In the film "Tom Horn", Steve McQueen's character, invited to a
wealthy rancher's lawn party, reacts in surprise to his first sight of
a lobster when a barrel of live ones brought in by train is opened.
When the host asks him if anything is wrong, he replies "No...I just
ain't never et a bug that BIG before."
rj
erilar
t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:
> However, we must always remember:
>
> "Bats aren't bugs!"
AND bats EAT bugs!!
Lon
> R H Draney wrote:
>> Walter Bushell filted:
>>> Mushroom were thought to be plants when I was in High School, so the
>>> usage stuck.
>>
>> Add that to the list of "eternal truths" they've decided to change
>> since I was
>> in school, along with "Venus always keeps the same side facing the
>> sun", "milk,
>> eggs and bread are all good for you", and "walk facing the oncoming
>> traffic"....r
>>
> Wait, they're now saying we shouldn't walk facing oncoming traffic?
>
It is much safer to walk facing oncoming pedestrians [unless near a
Walmart on Black Friday], much more polite to walk facing away from
oncoming pedestrians.
Cheryl
But surely pedestrians can come from either direction at the same time!
How do you face towards one group without facing away from the others?
And anyway, isn't there also some rule about the ladies always walking
on the side away from the road? How do you work that into this new rule?
--
Cheryl (Likes the old, simple rules about facing oncoming traffic)
R H Draney
I'm having no luck trying to figure out a way to be "polite" by Lon's
description that doesn't involve walking backwards....r
David DeLaney
> t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan <tednolan>) wrote:
>> However, we must always remember:
>>
>> "Bats aren't bugs!"
>
>AND bats EAT bugs!!
Do bats eat cats?
Dave "...do cats eat bats?" DeLaney
Keith F. Lynch
> Even some rabbits are known as "Bugs".
Only one.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
David Goldfarb
to grab them out of midair.
--
David Goldfarb |
gold...@ocf.berkeley.edu | "End of the universe. Have fun. Bye-bye!"
gold...@csua.berkeley.edu |
Joy Beeson
<tednolan>) wrote:
> "Bats aren't bugs!"
What happened to "you are what you eat"?
--
Joy Beeson
joy beeson at comcast dot net
Keith F. Lynch
>> (not beetles), harlequin bugs, and many others.
> None of which I can remember seeing or hearing of until I was at
> least in my late teens....r
This past year here in Virginia I've noticed a new (to me) very
numerous flying species of true bug. I've read that we've been
invaded by a new kind of stink bug, but these bugs don't seem
to stink.
Joy Beeson
wrote:
> "walk facing the oncoming
> traffic".
Still, regrettably, around. But they no longer complete the sentence:
"so you can get completely out of the right-of-way whenever a vehicle
is on your side of the road."
Walking on the left is good advice when you walk on the sort of road
where you intend to yield right-of-way to everything that comes along
-- provide that it's *possible* to get out of the road. I cringe when
I see a mobility scooter with a curb to its left. Worse to see
someone pushing a baby carriage in such a situation. And, of course,
the child is always strapped firmly to the carriage for "safety", so
the parent can't grab the child and jump.
If you won't or can't get out of the road, and cede all responsibility
for your safety to oncoming drivers, walk on the right to give them
an extra half-second to react.
Walter Bushell
Joy Beeson <jbe...@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
> On 23 Nov 2009 10:43:29 GMT, t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
> <tednolan>) wrote:
>
> > "Bats aren't bugs!"
>
> What happened to "you are what you eat"?
I think it is the weirdest thing
As weird as it could be,
That whatever Mrs. Tea eats,
Turns into Mrs. Tea. -- Who wrote that?
David DeLaney
>R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>> None of which I can remember seeing or hearing of until I was at
>> least in my late teens....r
>
>This past year here in Virginia I've noticed a new (to me) very
>numerous flying species of true bug. I've read that we've been
>invaded by a new kind of stink bug, but these bugs don't seem to stink.
Perhaps the odor is supersonic?
Dave "infragreen" DeLaney
R H Draney
>
>In article <slrnhgmiu...@gatekeeper.vic.com>,
>David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
>>Dave "...do cats eat bats?" DeLaney
>
>According to my mom, her cat has eaten several. He takes great leaps
>to grab them out of midair.
Owls eat bats...I've even watched one capture a meal in midair....r
R H Draney
>
>In article <3fomg55ltu19bv368...@4ax.com>,
> Joy Beeson <jbe...@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 23 Nov 2009 10:43:29 GMT, t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
>> <tednolan>) wrote:
>>
>> > "Bats aren't bugs!"
>>
>> What happened to "you are what you eat"?
>
>I think it is the weirdest thing
>As weird as it could be,
>That whatever Mrs. Tea eats,
>Turns into Mrs. Tea. -- Who wrote that?
Sounds a bit like Ogden Nash...or Piet Hein....r
R H Draney
>
>Keith F. Lynch <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>>> None of which I can remember seeing or hearing of until I was at
>>> least in my late teens....r
>>
>>This past year here in Virginia I've noticed a new (to me) very
>>numerous flying species of true bug. I've read that we've been
>>invaded by a new kind of stink bug, but these bugs don't seem to stink.
>
>Perhaps the odor is supersonic?
>
>Dave "infragreen" DeLaney
We had "stink bugs" when I was a kid, but I don't remember any of them that
actually *did* stink...eventually I worked out that the name came from their
habit of stopping dead still when threatened and lowering their heads to the
ground, leaving their rear ends sticking up in the air like someone about to let
loose a massive fart....
(Those were beetles, and therefore insects, too...the only non-insect "bug" I
knew in those days was the "pill bug", which I learned early was known in other
places as a "sow bug" or "roly-poly")....r
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
> In article <3fomg55ltu19bv368ufkeaf66hvgif2...@4ax.com>,
> Joy Beeson <jbee...@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>
> > On 23 Nov 2009 10:43:29 GMT, t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
> > <tednolan>) wrote:
>
> > > "Bats aren't bugs!"
>
> > What happened to "you are what you eat"?
>
> I think it is the weirdest thing
> As weird as it could be,
> That whatever Mrs. Tea eats,
> Turns into Mrs. Tea.
Some of it doesn't.
> -- Who wrote that?
You did. But Walter de la Mare's version is for instance at
<http://www.cswnet.com/~erin/child.htm#Misst> , although I think it
may be under copyright so let's hope that is fair use. Sixteen lines,
or ought to be, they've run two together.
And I just found this. Isn't it beautiful?
When Letty had scarce passed her third glad year,
And her young artless words began to flow,
One day we gave the child a colour'd sphere
Of the wide earth, that she might mark and know,
By tint and outline, all its sea and land.
She patted all the world; old empires peep'd
Between her baby fingers; her soft hand
Was welcome at all frontiers. How she leap'd
And laugh'd and prattled in her world-wide bliss;
But when we turn'd her sweet unlearned eye
On our own isle, she raised a joyous cry -
"Oh! yes, I see it, Letty's home is there!"
And while she hid all England with a kiss,
Bright over Europe fell her golden hair.
Charles Tennyson Turner
ra...@vt.edu
> David Goldfarb filted:
> >David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
> >>Dave "...do cats eat bats?" DeLaney
> >
> >According to my mom, her cat has eaten several. He takes great leaps
> >to grab them out of midair.
> Owls eat bats...I've even watched one capture a meal in midair....r
I would think pretty much anything that would eat a mouse or
vole would eat a bat. So, cats, owls, hawks, coyotes, etc. would
all likely eat a bat if they can catch one.
Bill "I bet those wings would be nice and crispy deep fried" Ranck
Blacksburg, Va.
Howard Brazee
>But surely pedestrians can come from either direction at the same time!
>How do you face towards one group without facing away from the others?
Reminds me of the riddle of how many people were passed on a road -
where the answer assumes 100% of the people passed were going the
other way.
Riddle answers shouldn't make such assumptions.
--
"In no part of the constitution is more wisdom to be found,
than in the clause which confides the question of war or peace
to the legislature, and not to the executive department."
- James Madison
cryptoguy
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:31:59 -0330, Cheryl <cperk...@mun.ca> wrote:
> >But surely pedestrians can come from either direction at the same time!
> >How do you face towards one group without facing away from the others?
>
> Reminds me of the riddle of how many people were passed on a road -
> where the answer assumes 100% of the people passed were going the
> other way.
>
> Riddle answers shouldn't make such assumptions.
As I was going to St. Ives....
pt
Kurt Busiek
I like Albert the Alligator's version of that, from POGO.
He got fed up with the trick, so he started asking people, "As I was
goin' to St. Ives..." and wound up with "...how many wuz goin' to
Altoona?"
kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com -- for all your Busiek needs!
Dorothy J Heydt
Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>In article <3fomg55ltu19bv368...@4ax.com>,
> Joy Beeson <jbe...@invalid.net.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On 23 Nov 2009 10:43:29 GMT, t...@loft.tnolan.com (Ted Nolan
>> <tednolan>) wrote:
>>
>> > "Bats aren't bugs!"
>>
>> What happened to "you are what you eat"?
>
>I think it is the weirdest thing
>As weird as it could be,
>That whatever Mrs. Tea eats,
>Turns into Mrs. Tea. -- Who wrote that?
Ahem.
Miss T.
Walter De La Mare
It's a very odd thing--
As odd as can be--
That watever Miss T. eats
Turns into Miss T.;
Porridge and apples,
Mince, muffins and mutton,
Jam, junket, jumbles--
Not a rap, not a button
It matters; the moment
They're out of her plate,
Though shared by Miss Butcher
And sour Mr. Bate;
Tiny and cheerful,And neat as can be,
Whatever Miss T. eats
Turns into Miss T.
--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at hotmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the hotmail edress.
Kithrup is getting too damn much spam, even with the sysop's filters.
Keith F. Lynch
> Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>> I think it is the weirdest thing
>> As weird as it could be,
>> That whatever Mrs. Tea eats,
>> Turns into Mrs. Tea. -- Who wrote that?
> Ahem.
> Miss T.
> Walter De La Mare
Maybe she got married since that poem was written.
Keith F. Lynch
> Reminds me of the riddle of how many people were passed on a road -
> where the answer assumes 100% of the people passed were going the
> other way.
I wouldn't call it passing unless we were going the *same* way.
Keith F. Lynch
> We had "stink bugs" when I was a kid, but I don't remember any of
> them that actually *did* stink...eventually I worked out that the
> name came from their habit of stopping dead still when threatened
> and lowering their heads to the ground, leaving their rear ends
> sticking up in the air like someone about to let loose a massive
> fart....
I've never heard of that.
> Those were beetles, and therefore insects, too...
Around here there are black beetles that most certainly do smell
very bad.
Keith F. Lynch
> R H Draney <dado...@spamcop.net> wrote:
>> "walk facing the oncoming traffic".
> Still, regrettably, around. But they no longer complete the
> sentence: "so you can get completely out of the right-of-way
> whenever a vehicle is on your side of the road."
Exactly. If that's not possible, as it often isn't, there's no point.
And if there's a car every few seconds, then even if you can step off
the road, after spending an hour walking less than a quarter mile, you
probably won't.
When there is no sidewalk on either side, I'll walk on the shoulder.
If there's also no shoulder on either side, I'll walk on the side
where there are better sight lines, or where approaching traffic is
coming uphill. If it's at night, I'm more likely to walk with than
against traffic since otherwise I'd have headlights shining in my
eyes and wouldn't be able to see where I was putting my feet.
Lon
Didnt exactly come out as a model of clarity did it. Possibly if you
walk facing away from oncoming pedestrians, it would help to note that
I'm an old geezer and tend to walk a bit slower than the pedestrians who
pass me in the fast lane.
Lon
> David Goldfarb filted:
>> In article <slrnhgmiu...@gatekeeper.vic.com>,
>> David DeLaney <d...@vic.com> wrote:
>>> Dave "...do cats eat bats?" DeLaney
>> According to my mom, her cat has eaten several. He takes great leaps
>> to grab them out of midair.
>
> Owls eat bats...I've even watched one capture a meal in midair....r
As do raccoons.
Ever idly wonder which is smarter, three animal control officers or one
raccoon? Wish I had a video camera.
Wayne Throop
: "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net>
: Maybe she got married since that poem was written.
Or has the poem been set to music?
If so, maybe I can get somebody to play Miss T. for me.
"Well I guess he had it coming."
"We all have it coming, kid."
--- Schofield Kid and William Munny
Wayne Throop thr...@sheol.org http://sheol.org/throopw
Keith F. Lynch
> Yes, that would be Mercury...I don't think I've ever seen that
> behavior ascribed to Venus, although they both have very slow spin
> rates, with Venus rotating retrograde.
Venus' slow rotation rate wasn't measured until radar signals were
bounced off it in the 1960s. (It wasn't until very recently that the
reason for the slow rotation rate was recognized: Eons of thermal
tidal drag, due to the Sun's gravity applying a torque to the
thermally expanded afternoon atmosphere.) Radar is also how Mercury's
rotation rate was measured at about the same time.
It was speculated that Venus might be tidally locked. See
http://www.1911encyclopedia.org/Venus_%28Astronomy%29
You'd think they'd have realized that if it was tidally locked the
atmosphere would have frozen out on the night side.
Keith F. Lynch
> No sidewalks along the road where my dog and I walk. And in the
> winter there's no room to even get off to the side of the road once
> the snow builds up. We'll keep walking against traffic.
What's the point in seeing oncoming traffic if you're not able to get
out of its way?
Keith F. Lynch
> Milk and eggs are good for you. Bread not so much.
You must be a follower of Atkins. Everyone else says the opposite.
Bread is high in fiber and complex carbohydrates. Milk and eggs are
high in saturated fat and cholesterol.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
> erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
>> No sidewalks along the road where my dog and I walk. And in the
>> winter there's no room to even get off to the side of the road once
>> the snow builds up. We'll keep walking against traffic.
>
> What's the point in seeing oncoming traffic if you're not able to get
> out of its way?
She says nothing about not being able to get out of its way. The lack
of a reasonable place to get off the side of the road FOR WALKING does
not preclude a place to dive in desperation to evade an oncoming
vehicle. I can't WALK in 4-foot plowed snowdrift, but I can sure as hell
dive into or over it if someone's driving a car at me.
--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Live Journal: http://seawasp.livejournal.com
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
"I met a man with seven wives." It does work for me. If you met
someone, they were coming the other way. Or stationary. Maybe they
were going to St. Ives and they stopped for a rest, but in that case
they were not going at that moment. And you get a lot of arithmetic
to do and then you find out it's a trick question.
I don't for a moment imagine that you don't get it.
Now... I think there's a Terry Pratchett story where someone meets
the sphinx and criticises the "on four legs in the morning, on two
legs at noon, on three legs in the evening" one, and tries to work out
a semantically acceptable one. I suppose that has to be the one with
_Pyramids_, most likely?
And Roger Zelazny's Merlin - not the famous one (then again...) -
faces off with one, too. "What's green and red and goes round and
round?"
Ralph Jones
wrote:
I had the pleasure of working in a secure facility guarded by
19-year-olds with M-16s when a deer made his way inside the fence. The
lieutenant in charge of the guard detail told them to catch the deer
and take him outside.
The deer, of course, took great pleasure in leading a pack of guys
running up and down the parking lot, various items of equipment
flapping on their hips, as he led them a merry chase...
rj
Mike Ash
Lon <lon.s...@comcast.net> wrote:
> Ever idly wonder which is smarter, three animal control officers or one
> raccoon? Wish I had a video camera.
This logic is precisely why I do not go fishing any longer.
--
Mike Ash
Radio Free Earth
Broadcasting from our climate-controlled studios deep inside the Moon
Juho Julkunen
(how...@brazee.net) says...
> On Mon, 23 Nov 2009 21:31:59 -0330, Cheryl <cper...@mun.ca> wrote:
>
> >But surely pedestrians can come from either direction at the same time!
> >How do you face towards one group without facing away from the others?
>
> Reminds me of the riddle of how many people were passed on a road -
> where the answer assumes 100% of the people passed were going the
> other way.
>
> Riddle answers shouldn't make such assumptions.
In Finnish the riddle is entirely fair, as the people passed are
explicitly stated to be going the other way.
--
Juho Julkunen
R H Draney
>
>Dorothy J Heydt <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote:
>> Walter Bushell <pr...@panix.com> wrote:
>>> I think it is the weirdest thing
>>> As weird as it could be,
>>> That whatever Mrs. Tea eats,
>>> Turns into Mrs. Tea. -- Who wrote that?
>
>> Ahem.
>> Miss T.
>> Walter De La Mare
>
>Maybe she got married since that poem was written.
To Mr T?...I pity the fool....r
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
> :: Ahem. Miss T. Walter De La Mare
>
> : "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net>
> : Maybe she got married since that poem was written.
>
> Or has the poem been set to music?
> If so, maybe I can get somebody to play Miss T. for me.
Yes it has, Google - oh.
> "Well I guess he had it coming."
> "We all have it coming, kid."
> --- Schofield Kid and William Munny
Huh. Some of us more than others.
It kind of fits a tune that _Mad_ magazine in the old days swiped for
their parody (...maybe not really a parody except that far), titled
"I've Got to Stop Smoking" - and performed by a cartoon of a child. I
wonder if that's enough to identify.
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
> erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
> > No sidewalks along the road where my dog and I walk. And in the
> > winter there's no room to even get off to the side of the road once
> > the snow builds up. We'll keep walking against traffic.
>
> What's the point in seeing oncoming traffic if you're not able to get
> out of its way?
Maybe you can stare it down. Or fold in your elbows. At least use
less road space while a vehicle passes than when you're proceeding.
If it really is coming right at you, jump into the snowdrift anyhow.
I use a similar practice when bicycling, although I'm the traffic and
heading the same direction as other traffic - use the centre of my
lane of the road until a car approaches from behind, when - if it's a
suitable place for overtaking, passing - I ease off pedalling and
coast towards the edge of the road for the few seconds it takes. For
this I also have, and strongly recommend, a rear-view mirror with a
slight convex curve - on a bike, I find a flat mirror shakes and
wobblers too much, but a convex-mirror image is more stable. But if
too much convex, then stuff in the mirror is a weird shape as well,
which isn't good.
Howard Brazee
talk-o...@moderators.isc.or�g <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>And Roger Zelazny's Merlin - not the famous one (then again...) -
>faces off with one, too. "What's green and red and goes round and
>round?"
Or Poul Anderson's Holger Carlsen "What is green, has wheels, and
grows around the house?"
Howard Brazee
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> Reminds me of the riddle of how many people were passed on a road -
>> where the answer assumes 100% of the people passed were going the
>> other way.
>
>I wouldn't call it passing unless we were going the *same* way.
Interesting.
Howard Brazee
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>I wouldn't call it passing unless we were going the *same* way.
It does slow down travel if I can never pass the signs that say "do
not pass".
Kurt Busiek
> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:48:40 +0000 (UTC), "Keith F. Lynch"
> <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>
>>> Reminds me of the riddle of how many people were passed on a road -
>>> where the answer assumes 100% of the people passed were going the
>>> other way.
>>
>> I wouldn't call it passing unless we were going the *same* way.
>
> Interesting.
Particularly since the riddle, at least in its normal form, says "met,"
not "passed."
Hatunen
<k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
>> No sidewalks along the road where my dog and I walk. And in the
>> winter there's no room to even get off to the side of the road once
>> the snow builds up. We'll keep walking against traffic.
>
>What's the point in seeing oncoming traffic if you're not able to get
>out of its way?
It gives you a chance to yeall, "Oh shit!"
--
************* DAVE HATUNEN (hat...@cox.net) *************
* Tucson Arizona, out where the cacti grow *
* My typos & mispellings are intentional copyright traps *
Kurt Busiek
> On 2009-11-25 08:55:38 -0800, Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> said:
>
>> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:48:40 +0000 (UTC), "Keith F. Lynch"
>> <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>>
>>>> Reminds me of the riddle of how many people were passed on a road -
>>>> where the answer assumes 100% of the people passed were going the
>>>> other way.
>>>
>>> I wouldn't call it passing unless we were going the *same* way.
>>
>> Interesting.
>
> Particularly since the riddle, at least in its normal form, says "met,"
> not "passed."
And come to think of it, the riddle doesn't assume that "100% of the
people passed (or met) were going the other way."
It describes a single party -- the man with seven wives and so on --
who are met, and then depends on the listener assuming that they're
going the same way. The riddle itself doesn't specify, thus setting up
the punchline.
So even if someone objects, saying, "Hey, he could have met them by
catching up to them, a large party like that dragging 49 sacks full of
cats, they had to be moving slowly," the answer is, "Could have,
schmould have. They weren't. I'm the one who met 'em, I oughtta know."
Lots of riddles depend on the listener thinking he has all the
information he needs, but missing (or being misled on) some salient
point.
Dorothy J Heydt
Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:57:57 -0800 (PST), Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc
>talk-o...@moderators.isc.or�g <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
>>And Roger Zelazny's Merlin - not the famous one (then again...) -
>>faces off with one, too. "What's green and red and goes round and
>>round?"
>
>Or Poul Anderson's Holger Carlsen "What is green, has wheels, and
>grows around the house?"
That one, of course, is a variation of the one retold in _The
Joys of Yiddish_:
"What's green, hangs on the wall, and whistles?"
"I dunno, what?"
"A herring."
"But a herring isn't green!"
"So paint it green."
"And a herring doesn't hang on the wall!"
"So hang it on the wall."
"And A HERRING DOESN'T WHISTLE!!!"
"Oh. I just put that in to make it difficult."
Dorothy J Heydt
"Well, I'm not sure ... unless ... is it possible ...
"Are George and Geraldine ... goldfish?"
(Reconstructed from memory; the names probably weren't George and
Geraldine.)
Moriarty
> On 2009-11-25 09:03:38 -0800, Kurt Busiek <k...@busiek.com> said:
>
> > On 2009-11-25 08:55:38 -0800, Howard Brazee <how...@brazee.net> said:
>
> >> On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:48:40 +0000 (UTC), "Keith F. Lynch"
> >> <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>
> >>>> Reminds me of the riddle of how many people were passed on a road -
> >>>> where the answer assumes 100% of the people passed were going the
> >>>> other way.
>
> >>> I wouldn't call it passing unless we were going the *same* way.
>
> >> Interesting.
>
> > Particularly since the riddle, at least in its normal form, says "met,"
> > not "passed."
>
> And come to think of it, the riddle doesn't assume that "100% of the
> people passed (or met) were going the other way."
>
> It describes a single party -- the man with seven wives and so on --
> who are met, and then depends on the listener assuming that they're
> going the same way. The riddle itself doesn't specify, thus setting up
> the punchline.
To be even more pedantic, it doesn't even specify that the seven wives
were actually there with the man.
-Moriarty
Kurt Busiek
True enough.
Lon
The worse news would have happened if they got close enough to catch the
deer.
Lon "someone help me turn this thing loose, quick!" Stowell
William December Starr
<rja.ca...@excite.com> said:
> "Keith F. Lynch" <k...@KeithLynch.net> wrote:
>> erilar <dra...@chibardun.net.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> No sidewalks along the road where my dog and I walk. �And in the
>>> winter there's no room to even get off to the side of the road once
>>> the snow builds up. We'll keep walking against traffic.
>>
>> What's the point in seeing oncoming traffic if you're not able to
>> get out of its way?
>
> Maybe you can stare it down. Or fold in your elbows. At least
> use less road space while a vehicle passes than when you're
> proceeding. If it really is coming right at you, jump into the
> snowdrift anyhow.
Or pull out your Big Gun and shoot at it three times as it gets
closer and closer. The third bullet will make it explode in place,
and neither the fireball nor any of the debris will touch you (or
your dog).
It must be true, because I saw it in a movie.
-- wds
William December Starr
<rja.ca...@excite.com> said:
>> As I was going to St. Ives....
>
> "I met a man with seven wives." It does work for me. If you met
> someone, they were coming the other way. Or stationary. Maybe
> they were going to St. Ives and they stopped for a rest, but in
> that case they were not going at that moment.
Or the storyteller overtook them while they were going to St. Ives.
-- wds
William December Starr
Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com> said:
> And come to think of it, the riddle doesn't assume that "100% of
> the people passed (or met) were going the other way."
>
> It describes a single party -- the man with seven wives and so on
> -- who are met, and then depends on the listener assuming that
> they're going the same way. The riddle itself doesn't specify,
> thus setting up the punchline.
>
> So even if someone objects, saying, "Hey, he could have met them
> by catching up to them, a large party like that dragging 49 sacks
> full of cats, they had to be moving slowly," the answer is, "Could
> have, schmould have. They weren't. I'm the one who met 'em, I
> oughtta know."
>
> Lots of riddles depend on the listener thinking he has all the
> information he needs, but missing (or being misled on) some
> salient point.
Lots of riddles also depend on the listener not being of the
disposition to, or in a position to, punch out the wiseass telling
them.
-- wds
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
> In article <0bb16fef-7884-4bc8-905a-6616b32b8...@r5g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
Quite reasonable for a sufficiently large bullet / velocity. Your dog
will be interested to hear that the recoil is a bitch.
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
> In article <6b740548-5004-474d-85a8-f39105c92...@m26g2000yqb.googlegroups.com>,
> <rja.carne...@excite.com> said:
>
> >> As I was going to St. Ives....
>
> > "I met a man with seven wives." It does work for me. If you met
> > someone, they were coming the other way. Or stationary. Maybe
> > they were going to St. Ives and they stopped for a rest, but in
> > that case they were not going at that moment.
>
> Or the storyteller overtook them while they were going to St. Ives.
Nope, if you meet someone you didn't come up behind them. If you rob
someone, yes. "When I was going to St. Ives, I mugged a man with
seven wives"... But no, they'd set the cats on you.
Mainly it's a riddle in arithmetic form, but the trick is that the
arithmetic is a distraction.
How come the guy has seven wives? Maybe they're wives but not his
wives? And it's some sort of cat club, evidently. A darn funny one.
Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)
It's easier to lay down the LAW.
Kurt Busiek
The question at the end is "How many were going to St. Ives," not "How
many might have been going to St. Ives."
kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com — for all your Busiek needs!
Kurt Busiek
People who get violent because they don't like a riddle have thier own
problems; the fault's not in the riddle.
kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com — for all your Busiek needs!
Ralph Jones
wrote:
Indeed. Bambi can do some surprising things with his sharp little
feet.
rj
William December Starr
<rja.ca...@excite.com> said:
> wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>> <rja.carne...@excite.com> said:
>>
>>>> As I was going to St. Ives....
>>>
>>> "I met a man with seven wives." �It does work for me. �If you met
>>> someone, they were coming the other way. �Or stationary. �Maybe
>>> they were going to St. Ives and they stopped for a rest, but in
>>> that case they were not going at that moment.
>>
> > Or the storyteller overtook them while they were going to St. Ives.
>
> Nope, if you meet someone you didn't come up behind them.
You come up behind some people heading in the same direction you
are, pull even, say "Howyadoon?", talk for a while and move on.
You've met them.
-- wds
William December Starr
Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com> said:
> The question at the end is "How many were going to St. Ives," not
> "How many might have been going to St. Ives."
True. The only correct answer, of course, is "Insufficient data."
-- wds (or possibly "Insufficient data, asshole.")
William December Starr
Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com> said:
Not in the riddle, but sometimes in the riddler. Consider the
legend of the sphinx. (Okay, admittedly the traveler apparently had
the option of saying "You know what? Fuck Thebes," and turning
around and leaving, but it was still pretty assholic behavior on the
monster's part. And what did the Thebian Chamber of Commerce think
of this negative effect on the city's tourism industry? Not to
mention the issue of whether the place only had a single entrance.)
More relevantly to people who don't have to live in Greek legends
("Roll a d20. On a 1 through 18, you're screwed"), behavior of the
sort "I'm going to ask you what appears to be a straightforward math
question but actually ha ha, gotcha!" can indeed under many
circumstances be fully deserving of the application of a bit of
dynamic behavior alteration.
-- wds
Kurt Busiek
> In article <hem86j$2ki$2...@solani.org>,
> Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com> said:
>
>> wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) said:
>>
>>> Lots of riddles also depend on the listener not being of the
>>> disposition to, or in a position to, punch out the wiseass
>>> telling them.
>>
>> People who get violent because they don't like a riddle have thier
>> own problems; the fault's not in the riddle.
>
> ...
>
> More relevantly to people who don't have to live in Greek legends
> ("Roll a d20. On a 1 through 18, you're screwed"), behavior of the
> sort "I'm going to ask you what appears to be a straightforward math
> question but actually ha ha, gotcha!" can indeed under many
> circumstances be fully deserving of the application of a bit of
> dynamic behavior alteration.
No, really, being suckered by a trick question isn't an excuse for violence.
One wonders what you'd do if call out on strikes when you thought the
last one was a ball. Beat the umpire with the bat and then say he
deserved it? The guy asking the riddles may be a wiseass, the guy
who'd hit someone over being fooled by one is an asshole.
kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com -- for all your Busiek needs!
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
No, you caught up with them.
Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk-origins@moderators.isc.org
Not if they're the examiner. Right now I can't think of any specific
maths or science question that trips the less able scholar who doesn't
read the question carefully enough into solving the wrong problem or
using the wrong method - and that's the one the separates the bet from
the good and the good from the adequate - but I think most of us have
seen it.
As for pranks like that on kids or buddies, they're the logic
equivalent of puns, maybe.
<http://www.write101.com/brainteasers.htm> presents some not
excessively technical questions that mainly involve either using a
familiar format where the expected question is not the question asked,
or one detail that changes the nature of the question or answer(you
met all these people, therefore they were coming the other way - let's
let that stand - therefore none of them were going to St. Ives), other
distracting detail that masks the important factors - that happens
often in real life, it happens when politicians debate - or just
programming the mind beforehand to respond with the wrong answer. The
first on the page I've seen worked harder by posing three or four
questions whose correct answers rhyme with "toast", which may put you
ahead of the game now.
Keith F. Lynch
> Right now I can't think of any specific maths or science question
> that trips the less able scholar who doesn't read the question
> carefully enough into solving the wrong problem or using the wrong
> method - and that's the one the separates the bet from the good and
> the good from the adequate - but I think most of us have seen it.
Not a direct response, but I'm reminded of
http://snopes.com/college/exam/choice.asp
Also, a friend of mine was once hired by Educational Testing Service
to analyze their computer science exam. He discovered that there was
one questions which correlated negatively with one's total score, i.e.
people who did well on the test tended to do worse on that one question.
--
Keith F. Lynch - http://keithlynch.net/
Please see http://keithlynch.net/email.html before emailing me.
Keith F. Lynch
> And what did the Thebian Chamber of Commerce think of this negative
> effect on the city's tourism industry? Not to mention the issue of
> whether the place only had a single entrance.
Ancients weren't big on tourism. Especially not mythical ancients.
Nowhere in _Lord of the Rings_ is particularly tourist-friendly either.
Anyone, there's plenty of that in real life: Hotel manages who treat
customers as the enemy. Airlines and customs departments that treat
travelers as criminal suspects. I understand that these days anyone
who visits the US gets fingerprinted.
> More relevantly to people who don't have to live in Greek legends
> ("Roll a d20. On a 1 through 18, you're screwed"), behavior of the
> sort "I'm going to ask you what appears to be a straightforward
> math question but actually ha ha, gotcha!" can indeed under many
> circumstances be fully deserving of the application of a bit of
> dynamic behavior alteration.
I don't agree that violence is ever appropriate except in defense
against violence.
David Scheidt
:Also, a friend of mine was once hired by Educational Testing Service
:to analyze their computer science exam. He discovered that there was
:one questions which correlated negatively with one's total score, i.e.
:people who did well on the test tended to do worse on that one question.
That's a common result. A bad question that gets read one way by one
group of people, who get the right answer, and read another by a
different group, who get the wrong answer, which is right when the
problem is interperted their way.
--
sig 111
Keith F. Lynch
As I recall, the question was unambiguous. The wrong answer came
from ignoring a side effect which would make no difference to any
actual program, but did make a difference to the answer. People
who carefully worked through what the code did got the right answer.
People who saw what the final result would have to be without
carefully working through it got the wrong answer. The latter
was more typical of experienced programmers.
John F. Eldredge
> William December Starr <wds...@panix.com> wrote:
>> And what did the Thebian Chamber of Commerce think of this negative
>> effect on the city's tourism industry? Not to mention the issue of
>> whether the place only had a single entrance.
>
> Ancients weren't big on tourism. Especially not mythical ancients.
> Nowhere in _Lord of the Rings_ is particularly tourist-friendly either.
On the other hand, ancient city fathers did get concerned if events led
to a significant decrease in the amount of trade coming to a city, since
a decrease in commerce affected not only the merchants' income but also
the taxes collected on the commerce.
--
John F. Eldredge -- jo...@jfeldredge.com
"Reserve your right to think, for even to think wrongly is better
than not to think at all." -- Hypatia of Alexandria
R H Draney
>
>Anyone, there's plenty of that in real life: Hotel manages who treat
>customers as the enemy. Airlines and customs departments that treat
>travelers as criminal suspects. I understand that these days anyone
>who visits the US gets fingerprinted.
If your fingers haven't done anything wrong, they have nothing to worry
about....r
--
A pessimist sees the glass as half empty.
An optometrist asks whether you see the glass
more full like this?...or like this?
Dimensional Traveler
> Keith F. Lynch filted:
>> Anyone, there's plenty of that in real life: Hotel manages who treat
>> customers as the enemy. Airlines and customs departments that treat
>> travelers as criminal suspects. I understand that these days anyone
>> who visits the US gets fingerprinted.
>
> If your fingers haven't done anything wrong, they have nothing to worry
> about....r
>
actions that are "wrong" and don't always tell "us" what they are.
--
"Dude. They've gone fractal."
R H Draney
And this is different from every other damn place in the entire universe how
exactly?...r
Butch Malahide
> > <rja.carne...@excite.com> said:
>
> > > wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
> > >> <rja.carne...@excite.com> said:
>
> > >>>> As I was going to St. Ives....
>
> > >>> "I met a man with seven wives." It does work for me. If you met
> > >>> someone, they were coming the other way. Or stationary. Maybe
> > >>> they were going to St. Ives and they stopped for a rest, but in
> > >>> that case they were not going at that moment.
>
> > > > Or the storyteller overtook them while they were going to St. Ives.
>
> > > Nope, if you meet someone you didn't come up behind them.
>
> > You come up behind some people heading in the same direction you
> > are, pull even, say "Howyadoon?", talk for a while and move on.
> > You've met them.
>
> No, you caught up with them.
And if you and the guy with all the wives are making the trip to St.
Ives from different places, on two different roads that merge
somewhere before St. Ives, and if you both arrive at the point of
confluence at the same time?
R H Draney
>
>On Nov 27, 5:44=A0pm, Robert Carnegie: Fnord: cc talk->> > In article <fe574119-9173-4d34-a593-8b84a8c3d...@o10g2000yqa.googlegrou=
>ps.com>,
>> > <rja.carne...@excite.com> said:
>>
>> > > wdst...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote:
>> > >> <rja.carne...@excite.com> said:
>>
>> > >>>> As I was going to St. Ives....
>>
>> > >>> "I met a man with seven wives." It does work for me. If you met
>> > >>> someone, they were coming the other way. Or stationary. Maybe
>> > >>> they were going to St. Ives and they stopped for a rest, but in
>> > >>> that case they were not going at that moment.
>>
>> > > > Or the storyteller overtook them while they were going to St. Ives.
>>
>> > > Nope, if you meet someone you didn't come up behind them.
>>
>> > You come up behind some people heading in the same direction you
>> > are, pull even, say "Howyadoon?", talk for a while and move on.
>> > You've met them.
>>
>> No, you caught up with them.
>
>And if you and the guy with all the wives are making the trip to St.
>Ives from different places, on two different roads that merge
>somewhere before St. Ives, and if you both arrive at the point of
>confluence at the same time?
Then whoever's on the left has the right-of-way....r