Re: problems?

[Konrad Gaertner]

On 6/28/2014 12:20 PM, lal_truckee wrote:
> Is Eternal-September broke? In which case I won't see responses.
>
> But if it's not broke, then the lot of you unilaterally decided to take
> a (so-far) two day hiatus from Usenet.

I haven't had anything to say recently. But I should have a booklog
entry ready later today.


--
Konrad Gaertner - - - - - - - - - - - - email: kgae...@tx.rr.com
http://kgbooklog.livejournal.com/
"I don't mind hidden depths but I insist that there be a surface."
-- James Nicoll

[lal_truckee]

[Kurt Busiek]

The last post I see prior to yours is last night at 7:18pm Pacific Time.

But then, I'm using eternal-september too.

kdb
--
Visit http://www.busiek.com -- for all your Busiek needs!

[Kurt Busiek]

On 2014-06-28 17:51:21 +0000, Kurt Busiek <ku...@busiek.com> said:

> On 2014-06-28 17:20:59 +0000, lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> said:
>
>> Is Eternal-September broke? In which case I won't see responses.
>>
>> But if it's not broke, then the lot of you unilaterally decided to take
>> a (so-far) two day hiatus from Usenet.
>
> The last post I see prior to yours is last night at 7:18pm Pacific Time.
>
> But then, I'm using eternal-september too.

And now a mess of others have appeared, both prior to and after that one.

So it looks like yes, it was an eternal-september issue.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <lomtht$2v2$1...@dont-email.me>,

Well, I see your post, and maybe (who knows?) you'll see mine. I
log in a couple times a day; I note there are a lot fewer posters
than there used to be, which shouldn't surprise anybody.

--
Dorothy J. Heydt
Vallejo, California
djheydt at gmail dot com
Should you wish to email me, you'd better use the gmail edress.
Kithrup's all spammy and hotmail's been hacked.

[Robert Carnegie]

On Saturday, 28 June 2014 21:20:14 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <lomtht$2v2$1...@dont-email.me>,
> lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Is Eternal-September broke? In which case I won't see responses.
> >
> >But if it's not broke, then the lot of you unilaterally decided to take
> >a (so-far) two day hiatus from Usenet.
>
> Well, I see your post, and maybe (who knows?) you'll see mine. I
> log in a couple times a day; I note there are a lot fewer posters
> than there used to be, which shouldn't surprise anybody.

Recently I looked into alt.atheism. Um - it's busy there.

Busy like a highway packed with heavy trucks and SUVs,
drivers not paying a lot of attention to what's around them...

The actual topic of "atheism" appares to be mostly immaterial...
(is that a contradiction? :-)

rec.arts.sf.written is more interesting to read.

As it happens, the topic that someone invited me to join
was whether it's possible for a robot to have a conscious
mind. But they used a phrase like "experiencing an array
of experienced objects". I decided that they meant
"consciousness, but with more words in it."

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <2448539d-7ae3-4322...@googlegroups.com>,

Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>On Saturday, 28 June 2014 21:20:14 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>> In article <lomtht$2v2$1...@dont-email.me>,
>> lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> >Is Eternal-September broke? In which case I won't see responses.
>> >
>> >But if it's not broke, then the lot of you unilaterally decided to take
>> >a (so-far) two day hiatus from Usenet.
>>
>> Well, I see your post, and maybe (who knows?) you'll see mine. I
>> log in a couple times a day; I note there are a lot fewer posters
>> than there used to be, which shouldn't surprise anybody.
>
>Recently I looked into alt.atheism. Um - it's busy there.
>
>Busy like a highway packed with heavy trucks and SUVs,
>drivers not paying a lot of attention to what's around them...
>
>The actual topic of "atheism" appares to be mostly immaterial...
>(is that a contradiction? :-)

Heh. I remember somebody on one of the blogs Hal reads .. could
be Panda's Thumb or Dispatches from the Culture Wars. Anyway,
the guy said, "I've met a lot of guys who call themselves Satanists,
and most of them are just atheists but saying they're atheists
wouldn't shock their parents enough."

>
>rec.arts.sf.written is more interesting to read.

It's got to be.

>As it happens, the topic that someone invited me to join
>was whether it's possible for a robot to have a conscious
>mind. But they used a phrase like "experiencing an array
>of experienced objects". I decided that they meant
>"consciousness, but with more words in it."

ROFL.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Thu, 3 Jul 2014 01:29:35 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt
<djh...@kithrup.com> wrote in
<news:n8445...@kithrup.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:

> In article <2448539d-7ae3-4322...@googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:

[...]

>> Recently I looked into alt.atheism. Um - it's busy
>> there.

[...]

>> As it happens, the topic that someone invited me to join
>> was whether it's possible for a robot to have a
>> conscious mind. But they used a phrase like
>> "experiencing an array of experienced objects". I
>> decided that they meant "consciousness, but with more
>> words in it."

> ROFL.

For a short time b\Back around the time of the Sokol affair
(<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sokal_affair>) I read
alt.postmodern; I suspect that it was even worse.

Brian
--
It was the neap tide, when the baga venture out of their
holes to root for sandtatties. The waves whispered
rhythmically over the packed sand: haggisss, haggisss,
haggisss.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
news:n8445...@kithrup.com:

I believe you've hit the nail on the head. Though a lot of self
proclaimed atheists seem to be trying to get laid, and being an
atheist sounds cooler than being agnostic (which is what they
sually actually are), which sounds like something you'd wear a bib
to keep off your shirt.

>>
>>rec.arts.sf.written is more interesting to read.
>
> It's got to be.

I've read blank sheets of paper that are more interesting (and
informative) than alt.atheism.

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA35F5B3BB3C...@69.16.179.43>,

Heh. I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've qualified,
back when I was young and clever), but I was taken to a Mensa
party once.

I was either the only female there, or one of very few. The room
was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many words, "I have an
IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why can't I get laid?"

And one of them tried to seduce me by having me hold up a hand,
pointing out that it was not completely motionless, and therefore I
did not have the complete self-control of a yogi, and THEREFORE
I could not control my raging sexual desires and ought to go to
bed with him. (Projecting, much?) I forget what I said in
reply, other than "No."

>>>
>>>rec.arts.sf.written is more interesting to read.
>>
>> It's got to be.
>
>I've read blank sheets of paper that are more interesting (and
>informative) than alt.atheism.
>

I believe you.

[Joe Pfeiffer]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
>
> And one of them tried to seduce me by having me hold up a hand,
> pointing out that it was not completely motionless, and therefore I
> did not have the complete self-control of a yogi, and THEREFORE
> I could not control my raging sexual desires and ought to go to
> bed with him. (Projecting, much?) I forget what I said in
> reply, other than "No."

I'll hazard a guess that laughter was part of it...

[lal_truckee]

On 7/3/14 10:59 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
> And one of them tried to seduce me by having me hold up a hand,
> pointing out that it was not completely motionless, and therefore I
> did not have the complete self-control of a yogi, and THEREFORE
> I could not control my raging sexual desires and ought to go to
> bed with him. (Projecting, much?) I forget what I said in
> reply, other than "No."

Guy gets a "C" for average effort.

Weirder technique than that worked in the sixties (and 70s)
occasionally. (I can vaguely remember...)

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <1b4myym...@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,

That's possible. Or politely repressed shock.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <lp49l5$me5$1...@dont-email.me>,

This was the very early sixties, in fact <thinks> it was my
junior year at Cal, 1961-2.

[J. Clarke]

In article <1b4myym...@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu says...

I think at that point one would be very quietly and politely looking for
an exit.

[Robert Carnegie]

On Thursday, 3 July 2014 18:59:02 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've qualified,
> back when I was young and clever), but I was taken to a Mensa
> party once.
>
> I was either the only female there, or one of very few. The room
> was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many words, "I have an
> IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why can't I get laid?"
>
> And one of them tried to seduce me by having me hold up a hand,
> pointing out that it was not completely motionless, and therefore I
> did not have the complete self-control of a yogi, and THEREFORE
> I could not control my raging sexual desires and ought to go to
> bed with him. (Projecting, much?) I forget what I said in
> reply, other than "No."

Was it too soon for "I know karate"?

I suppose it was too soon for "One does not thank logic."

[Quadibloc]

On Thursday, July 3, 2014 11:59:02 AM UTC-6, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

> Heh. I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've qualified,
> back when I was young and clever), but I was taken to a Mensa
> party once.

> I was either the only female there, or one of very few. The room
> was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many words, "I have an
> IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why can't I get laid?"

> And one of them tried to seduce me by having me hold up a hand,
> pointing out that it was not completely motionless, and therefore I
> did not have the complete self-control of a yogi, and THEREFORE
> I could not control my raging sexual desires and ought to go to
> bed with him. (Projecting, much?) I forget what I said in
> reply, other than "No."

Obviously I should have joined Mensa when I was young. Then I would never have been foolish enough to think that the world needs vat-girls, upon witnessing things like that.

John Savard

[Don Bruder]

In article <n85Dy...@kithrup.com>,

Never mind that alt.atheism has long been one of the "scoring" groups
for various bands of trolls - As in "post your best shot at trolling to
<pick a newsgroup or twelve>, being certain to set a reply-to that
includes alt.atheism, then come back to alt.atheism in a day or so to
see how well you scored" (By counting the number of "Re: whatever the
trolling subject line was" messages that show up)

--
Security provided by Mssrs Smith and/or Wesson. Brought to you by the letter Q

[William Hyde]

On Wednesday, July 2, 2014 9:29:35 PM UTC-4, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <2448539d-7ae3-4322...@googlegroups.com>,
>
> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>
> >On Saturday, 28 June 2014 21:20:14 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>
> >> In article <lomtht$2v2$1...@dont-email.me>,
>
> >> lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> >> >Is Eternal-September broke? In which case I won't see responses.
>
> >> >
>
> >> >But if it's not broke, then the lot of you unilaterally decided to take
>
> >> >a (so-far) two day hiatus from Usenet.
>
> >>
>
> >> Well, I see your post, and maybe (who knows?) you'll see mine. I
>
> >> log in a couple times a day; I note there are a lot fewer posters
>
> >> than there used to be, which shouldn't surprise anybody.
>
> >
>
> >Recently I looked into alt.atheism. Um - it's busy there.
>
> >
>
> >Busy like a highway packed with heavy trucks and SUVs,
>
> >drivers not paying a lot of attention to what's around them...
>
> >
>
> >The actual topic of "atheism" appares to be mostly immaterial...
>
> >(is that a contradiction? :-)
>
>
>
> Heh. I remember somebody on one of the blogs Hal reads .. could
>
> be Panda's Thumb or Dispatches from the Culture Wars. Anyway,
>
> the guy said, "I've met a lot of guys who call themselves Satanists,
>
> and most of them are just atheists but saying they're atheists
>
> wouldn't shock their parents enough."
>
> >
>
> >rec.arts.sf.written is more interesting to read.
>
>
>
> It's got to be.

I first looked at alt.atheism about 1992. It was a boring flame fest even then. The only really interesting bits were, I noticed, cross-posted from talk.religion.misc, which still had some knowledgeable and interesting writers - but not for much longer.

William Hyde

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <e5af2ab4-b1ff-4729...@googlegroups.com>,

Certainly for me it was.

(Not that I learned it later, either.)

>I suppose it was too soon for "One does not thank logic."

Yup. Star Trek was still several years in the future.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <9815834b-722b-4065...@googlegroups.com>,

No, no, no. The world needs a modicum of self-restraint on the
part of males.

I've often wondered what this guy's field was. Obviously neither
biology nor anthropology. Mathematics maybe?

[Brian M. Scott]

On Thu, 3 Jul 2014 17:59:02 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt
<djh...@kithrup.com> wrote in
<news:n85Dy...@kithrup.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:

[...]

> Heh. I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've
> qualified, back when I was young and clever), but I was
> taken to a Mensa party once.

> I was either the only female there, or one of very few.
> The room was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many
> words, "I have an IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why
> can't I get laid?"

I was once taken to a joint get-together of the local Mensa
and Baker Street Irregular chapters. What I chiefly
remember is that the Baker Street Irregulars were on the
whole much more interesting.than the Mensa folks.

[...]

[lal_truckee]

On 7/3/14 12:12 PM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <lp49l5$me5$1...@dont-email.me>,
> lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> On 7/3/14 10:59 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>>
>>> And one of them tried to seduce me by having me hold up a hand,
>>> pointing out that it was not completely motionless, and therefore I
>>> did not have the complete self-control of a yogi, and THEREFORE
>>> I could not control my raging sexual desires and ought to go to
>>> bed with him. (Projecting, much?) I forget what I said in
>>> reply, other than "No."
>>
>> Guy gets a "C" for average effort.
>>
>> Weirder technique than that worked in the sixties (and 70s)
>> occasionally. (I can vaguely remember...)
>
> This was the very early sixties, in fact <thinks> it was my
> junior year at Cal, 1961-2.

You have seniority. My junior years at Cal weren't until 64,65, and 66.
And thinking it over, given all the trouble I had dealing with girls in
high school, 61-62 WAS a whole different ball game.

Back to topic:
Did any SF prior to, say, 1963 remotely suggest what socially happened
later that decade? With the Beats and the anti-HUAC demos in SF there
should have been plenty of premonition for the acute and alert.

[Moriarty]

On Friday, July 4, 2014 3:59:02 AM UTC+10, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:

<snip>

> Heh. I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've qualified,
>
> back when I was young and clever), but I was taken to a Mensa
>
> party once.
>
>
>
> I was either the only female there, or one of very few. The room
>
> was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many words, "I have an
>
> IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why can't I get laid?"

At this point a cruel person would have shot back "Because you can't throw a football. DUH!!"

-Moriarty

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <lp4knf$a21$1...@dont-email.me>,

Well, not in that sense. But Lieber's _The Green Millenium_
presages a lot of mid-to-late-twentieth-century nastiness.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <zlde6eip8w5g$.111vn0bj8xj11$.d...@40tude.net>,

Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>On Thu, 3 Jul 2014 17:59:02 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt
><djh...@kithrup.com> wrote in
><news:n85Dy...@kithrup.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:
>
>[...]
>
>> Heh. I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've
>> qualified, back when I was young and clever), but I was
>> taken to a Mensa party once.
>
>> I was either the only female there, or one of very few.
>> The room was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many
>> words, "I have an IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why
>> can't I get laid?"
>
>I was once taken to a joint get-together of the local Mensa
>and Baker Street Irregular chapters. What I chiefly
>remember is that the Baker Street Irregulars were on the
>whole much more interesting.than the Mensa folks.
>

Yeah. I don't want to generalize too much about people none of
whom I know as individuals, but I have a perhaps erroneous
picture of Mensa members as people who get together solely for
the purpose of bragging about their IQ scores.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <7d3a8ee8-ce22-46d7...@googlegroups.com>,

Well, yeah. On the other hand, an intelligent male who wanted to
lure an *intelligent* female wouldn't get anywhere with a
football either.

[J. Clarke]

In article <n85r6...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...

>
> In article <7d3a8ee8-ce22-46d7...@googlegroups.com>,
> Moriarty <blu...@ivillage.com> wrote:
> >On Friday, July 4, 2014 3:59:02 AM UTC+10, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> >
> ><snip>
> >
> >> Heh. I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've qualified,
> >>
> >> back when I was young and clever), but I was taken to a Mensa
> >>
> >> party once.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> I was either the only female there, or one of very few. The room
> >>
> >> was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many words, "I have an
> >>
> >> IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why can't I get laid?"
> >
> >At this point a cruel person would have shot back "Because you can't
> >throw a football. DUH!!"
>
> Well, yeah. On the other hand, an intelligent male who wanted to
> lure an *intelligent* female wouldn't get anywhere with a
> football either.

Dunno. The #3 SAT scorer in my high school was the head cheerleader.

[hamis...@gmail.com]

On Friday, July 4, 2014 8:44:38 AM UTC+10, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <7d3a8ee8-ce22-46d7...@googlegroups.com>,
> Moriarty <blu...@ivillage.com> wrote:
> >On Friday, July 4, 2014 3:59:02 AM UTC+10, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> ><snip>
>
> >> Heh. I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've qualified,
> >> back when I was young and clever), but I was taken to a Mensa
> >> party once.
>
> >> I was either the only female there, or one of very few. The room
> >> was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many words, "I have an
> >> IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why can't I get laid?"
>
> >At this point a cruel person would have shot back "Because you can't
> >throw a football. DUH!!"
>
> Well, yeah. On the other hand, an intelligent male who wanted to
> lure an *intelligent* female wouldn't get anywhere with a
> football either.
>

Some quite intelligent people actually like sports...

[Gene Wirchenko]

On Thu, 3 Jul 2014 22:43:26 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
wrote:

[snip]

>Yeah. I don't want to generalize too much about people none of
>whom I know as individuals, but I have a perhaps erroneous
>picture of Mensa members as people who get together solely for
>the purpose of bragging about their IQ scores.

I tend to that view, too. If I am going to get together with
people, I would like to have something substantial in common with them
(or at least, potentially so). A number just is not enough.

Sincerely,

Gene Wirchenko

[Greg Goss]

Gene Wirchenko <ge...@telus.net> wrote:
>On Thu, 3 Jul 2014 22:43:26 GMT, djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt)
>wrote:

>>Yeah. I don't want to generalize too much about people none of
>>whom I know as individuals, but I have a perhaps erroneous
>>picture of Mensa members as people who get together solely for
>>the purpose of bragging about their IQ scores.
>
> I tend to that view, too. If I am going to get together with
>people, I would like to have something substantial in common with them
>(or at least, potentially so). A number just is not enough.

There are three people I've been reasonably close to over the years
that are out of sight UPWARDS from where my IQ is reasonably high but
not spectacular. I never asked either brother (my theoretical Algebra
instructor and my first career boss) their IQ, and my late wife
refused to test her IQ.

As a geek, it was hard for me to comprehend someone who would prefer
not knowing. But then much of her reasoning was hard for me to
comprehend. Every husband is told to smile and nod as if the wife is
correct. In my case it was more often than not the right answer for
more than social reasons.
--
We are geeks. Resistance is voltage over current.

[Joe Pfeiffer]

It's an irrelevant number. I don't know mine, either.

[Robert Carnegie]

On Saturday, 5 July 2014 03:32:39 UTC+1, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:

> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> writes:
> > There are three people I've been reasonably close to over the years
> > that are out of sight UPWARDS from where my IQ is reasonably high but
> > not spectacular. I never asked either brother (my theoretical Algebra
> > instructor and my first career boss) their IQ, and my late wife
> > refused to test her IQ.
>

> It's an irrelevant number. I don't know mine, either.

I gather there isn't a fixed definition. It usually has
something to do with comparing your score to your peer group
or cohort, with the average being set as 100.

Also, you get better at the tests with practice; I once
worked through a book of them, getting smarter and smarter.
It's possible that I /was/ smarter; so, a good reason to
do it?

[Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor)]

On 7/5/14 8:16 AM, Robert Carnegie wrote:
> On Saturday, 5 July 2014 03:32:39 UTC+1, Joe Pfeiffer wrote:
>> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> writes:
>>> There are three people I've been reasonably close to over the years
>>> that are out of sight UPWARDS from where my IQ is reasonably high but
>>> not spectacular. I never asked either brother (my theoretical Algebra
>>> instructor and my first career boss) their IQ, and my late wife
>>> refused to test her IQ.
>>
>> It's an irrelevant number. I don't know mine, either.
>
> I gather there isn't a fixed definition. It usually has
> something to do with comparing your score to your peer group
> or cohort, with the average being set as 100.
>

The IQ test I had as a child I was never told the exact score of, but
my father told me it was "considerably more than four standard
deviations" higher than average. This fit with the one number I got from
a much later test administered by a different group that came out to 169.

Given how much trouble I've had in life, I swiftly concluded that being
IQ-smart might be useful for some things but sure as hell wasn't an
answer for everything. I, too, nosed around MENSA once or twice, but
both times came to the conclusion that it was a group of 99% guys mostly
focused on bragging to themselves about how much smarter they were than
everyone.



--
Sea Wasp
/^\
;;;
Website: http://www.grandcentralarena.com Blog:
http://seawasp.livejournal.com

[Greg Goss]

I've never done a bunch of tests in a short time, but in a number of
tests between age 17 and 57 I've always come in between 127 and 133.
"Precision" across a number of different tests is often a good
indicator of "accuracy", so I consider this an accurate measurement.

On the other hand, my current wife will test anywhere from the low
nineties to the low 120s. I find it odd that she cannot be tested
repeatedly with any precision.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <4dfd9284-9e28-43ef...@googlegroups.com>,

Now, that is true. Taking standardized tests is itself a skill.
I was tested left, right, and center when I was about eight, by a
graduate student in psychology who was living next door to us in
Stanford Village* and needed practice. I suppose it's possible
he *needed* practice, for I scored rather high.

But I learned how to take standardized tests, and for the rest of
my academic life I approached them (SATs, etc.) with an attitude
of "Oh, one of these! I can do these, and they're kind of fun."
Which probably raised my scores by several points right there.

_____
*It had been Dibble Military Hospital during WWII. After the war
it was converted into Stanford Village, housing for married
students (a lot of them on the GI Bill). Still later it was
Xerox PARC. I don't know what it is now. Probably the old
hospital buildings were razed and it's a swath of suburbia now.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <lp8thn$s0l$1...@dont-email.me>,

Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) <sea...@sgeinc.invalid.com> wrote:
>
> The IQ test I had as a child I was never told the exact score of, but
>my father told me it was "considerably more than four standard
>deviations" higher than average. This fit with the one number I got from
>a much later test administered by a different group that came out to 169.
>
> Given how much trouble I've had in life, I swiftly concluded that being
>IQ-smart might be useful for some things but sure as hell wasn't an
>answer for everything. I, too, nosed around MENSA once or twice, but
>both times came to the conclusion that it was a group of 99% guys mostly
>focused on bragging to themselves about how much smarter they were than
>everyone.
>

Yeah.

This is probably as good a place as any to remember the tale from
Isaac Asimov's short career in the Army. They gave him whatever
kind of test it was they gave recruits back then, and (predictably)
he got a very high score indeed. This did not suit him for life
in the US Army, but after a while he sort of found a niche, and
speculated that whenever he was transferred to a new place, the
lieutenant would say to the sergeant, "Listen, he scored really
high on one of those cockamamie tests, which means he's no good
for anything practical. Just ignore him and he won't make any
trouble."

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <c1qhms...@mid.individual.net>,

Cats test lower than dogs, probably because the dog wants to
please you, but the cat doesn't give a damn. I won't venture to
suggest that your wife is a cat in a clever plastic disguise, but
it's possible she just doesn't give a damn either.

[J. Clarke]

In article <n88x5...@kithrup.com>, djh...@kithrup.com says...

For a while I was living with a college student who maintained a 2.0
average. It's not that that was her limit, it was that she was in
college to please her parents, not because she wanted to be there, and
felt that anything above a 2.0 meant that she was putting too much
effort into studying and too little effort into things that were
important to her.

[Brian M. Scott]

On Sat, 5 Jul 2014 15:44:06 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt
<djh...@kithrup.com> wrote in
<news:n88x1...@kithrup.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:

[...]

> This is probably as good a place as any to remember the
> tale from Isaac Asimov's short career in the Army. They
> gave him whatever kind of test it was they gave recruits
> back then, and (predictably) he got a very high score
> indeed. This did not suit him for life in the US Army,
> but after a while he sort of found a niche, and
> speculated that whenever he was transferred to a new
> place, the lieutenant would say to the sergeant, "Listen,
> he scored really high on one of those cockamamie tests,
> which means he's no good for anything practical. Just
> ignore him and he won't make any trouble."

I had a rather different experience. When I completed basic
training in 1970, I was assigned to the headquarters company
of the 5th Infantry Division (Mechanized) Support Command at
Fort Carson as a computer programmer. When I reported in,
the personnel NCO said: ‘Oh, you’re Scott. We pulled your
file when it came through because your scores were so high.
Can you type?’I said that I typed well enough to get me
through college but hardly at a professional level. ‘Great.
Our legal clerk is getting out in a few weeks, and we need
to train a replacement. Would you like the job?’ (The unit
wasn’t authorized a real legal clerk but very much needed
someone doing that job.) It sounded like a comparatively
interesting desk job, and I didn’t see any point annoying
folks right off the bat, so I said ‘yes’. It was a very
good decision, as it turned out. The first lieutenant who
was acting as our legal officer was *much* more competent
and much nicer than the one in charge of the Division Data
Centre, and a few months later I was picked to become what
amounted to secretary/receptionist for the colonel who
commanded the Division Support Command, his XO, and his
command sergeant major. I did that job until I got out. So
my scores did indeed end up finding me a niche, but it was
one in which my services were much appreciated.

I was given an individual IQ test at some point when I was a
child, but I never tried to find out my score. I did just
now take a look at the requirement for Mensa and for the
much more restrictive Triple Nine Society. It turns out
that both accept results from a variety of instruments,
including combined SAT scores from the period when I took
the exam; I do remember my SAT scores, and they easily
qualify for both organizations. Both also accept the army’s
AGCT/GT from the period when I took it, and again I qualify
for both.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <1dalih2lb0eei$.j2ayrq7v...@40tude.net>,

Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>

>I had a rather different experience. When I completed basic
>training in 1970, I was assigned to the headquarters company
>of the 5th Infantry Division (Mechanized) Support Command at
>Fort Carson as a computer programmer. When I reported in,
>the personnel NCO said: "Oh, you're Scott. We pulled your
>file when it came through because your scores were so high.
>Can you type?"I said that I typed well enough to get me
>through college but hardly at a professional level. "Great.
>Our legal clerk is getting out in a few weeks, and we need
>to train a replacement. Would you like the job?" (The unit
>wasn't authorized a real legal clerk but very much needed
>someone doing that job.) It sounded like a comparatively
>interesting desk job, and I didn't see any point annoying
>folks right off the bat, so I said "yes". It was a very
>good decision, as it turned out. The first lieutenant who
>was acting as our legal officer was *much* more competent
>and much nicer than the one in charge of the Division Data
>Centre, and a few months later I was picked to become what
>amounted to secretary/receptionist for the colonel who
>commanded the Division Support Command, his XO, and his
>command sergeant major. I did that job until I got out. So
>my scores did indeed end up finding me a niche, but it was
>one in which my services were much appreciated.

Well, really, the only niche that would've suited Asimov would've
been either chemistry or SF, and at that point I don't think the
US Army was doing either.

>I was given an individual IQ test at some point when I was a
>child, but I never tried to find out my score. I did just
>now take a look at the requirement for Mensa and for the
>much more restrictive Triple Nine Society. It turns out
>that both accept results from a variety of instruments,
>including combined SAT scores from the period when I took
>the exam; I do remember my SAT scores, and they easily
>qualify for both organizations. Both also accept the army's
>AGCT/GT from the period when I took it, and again I qualify
>for both.

Well, of course. You *qualify* in the most general of terms.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
news:n85Dy...@kithrup.com:

> In article <XnsA35F5B3BB3C...@69.16.179.43>,
> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
>>news:n8445...@kithrup.com:
>>
>>> In article
>>> <2448539d-7ae3-4322...@googlegroups.com>,

>>> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
>>>>On Saturday, 28 June 2014 21:20:14 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt
>>>>wrote:

>>>>> In article <lomtht$2v2$1...@dont-email.me>,
>>>>> lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>>>>> >Is Eternal-September broke? In which case I won't see
>>>>> >responses.
>>>>> >
>>>>> >But if it's not broke, then the lot of you unilaterally
>>>>> >decided to take a (so-far) two day hiatus from Usenet.
>>>>>
>>>>> Well, I see your post, and maybe (who knows?) you'll see
>>>>> mine.
>>>>> I log in a couple times a day; I note there are a lot fewer
>>>>> posters than there used to be, which shouldn't surprise
>>>>> anybody.
>>>>
>>>>Recently I looked into alt.atheism. Um - it's busy there.
>>>>
>>>>Busy like a highway packed with heavy trucks and SUVs,
>>>>drivers not paying a lot of attention to what's around them...
>>>>
>>>>The actual topic of "atheism" appares to be mostly
>>>>immaterial... (is that a contradiction? :-)
>>>
>>> Heh. I remember somebody on one of the blogs Hal reads ..
>>> could be Panda's Thumb or Dispatches from the Culture Wars.
>>> Anyway, the guy said, "I've met a lot of guys who call
>>> themselves Satanists, and most of them are just atheists but
>>> saying they're atheists wouldn't shock their parents enough."
>>

>>I believe you've hit the nail on the head. Though a lot of self
>>proclaimed atheists seem to be trying to get laid, and being an
>>atheist sounds cooler than being agnostic (which is what they
>>sually actually are), which sounds like something you'd wear a
>>bib to keep off your shirt.
>

> Heh. I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've
> qualified, back when I was young and clever), but I was taken to
> a Mensa party once.

I qualified. Went to a meeting to check them out.

>
> I was either the only female there, or one of very few. The
> room was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many words, "I
> have an IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why can't I get
> laid?"

I don't recall any women there, but I do recall what you describe.
So far as I could tell, the lack of women probably had to do with
the membership acknowledging that they were far more interested in
mating with their own belly button lint than women. Or maybe they
knew they had a better shot with the belly button line.

>
> And one of them tried to seduce me by having me hold up a hand,
> pointing out that it was not completely motionless, and
> therefore I did not have the complete self-control of a yogi,
> and THEREFORE I could not control my raging sexual desires and
> ought to go to bed with him. (Projecting, much?) I forget what
> I said in reply, other than "No."

Is it too much to hope that you crushed his spirit to the point
where ran out in to traffic and died?

>
>>>>
>>>>rec.arts.sf.written is more interesting to read.
>>>
>>> It's got to be.
>>

>>I've read blank sheets of paper that are more interesting (and
>>informative) than alt.atheism.
>>
> I believe you.
>

--
Terry Austin

"Terry Austin: like the polio vaccine, only with more asshole."
-- David Bilek

Jesus forgives sinners, not criminals.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

"J. Clarke" <jclark...@cox.net> wrote in
news:MPG.2e1f75d56...@news.newsguy.com:

> In article <1b4myym...@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
> pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu says...

>>
>> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:
>> >
>> > And one of them tried to seduce me by having me hold up a
>> > hand, pointing out that it was not completely motionless, and
>> > therefore I did not have the complete self-control of a yogi,
>> > and THEREFORE I could not control my raging sexual desires
>> > and ought to go to bed with him. (Projecting, much?) I
>> > forget what I said in reply, other than "No."
>>

>> I'll hazard a guess that laughter was part of it...
>
> I think at that point one would be very quietly and politely
> looking for an exit.
>
I would imagine you get that reaction from women a *lot*.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

lal_truckee <lal_t...@yahoo.com> wrote in
news:lp49l5$me5$1...@dont-email.me:

> On 7/3/14 10:59 AM, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
>>

>> And one of them tried to seduce me by having me hold up a hand,
>> pointing out that it was not completely motionless, and
>> therefore I did not have the complete self-control of a yogi,
>> and THEREFORE I could not control my raging sexual desires and
>> ought to go to bed with him. (Projecting, much?) I forget
>> what I said in reply, other than "No."
>

> Guy gets a "C" for average effort.
>
> Weirder technique than that worked in the sixties (and 70s)
> occasionally. (I can vaguely remember...)

Depending on just where you were, in the 60s, "got a light?" was a
pretty good pickup line.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

Quadibloc <jsa...@ecn.ab.ca> wrote in
news:9815834b-722b-4065...@googlegroups.com:

> On Thursday, July 3, 2014 11:59:02 AM UTC-6, Dorothy J Heydt
> wrote:
>

>> Heh. I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've
>> qualified, back when I was young and clever), but I was taken
>> to a Mensa party once.
>

>> I was either the only female there, or one of very few. The
>> room was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many words, "I
>> have an IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why can't I get
>> laid?"
>

>> And one of them tried to seduce me by having me hold up a hand,
>> pointing out that it was not completely motionless, and
>> therefore I did not have the complete self-control of a yogi,
>> and THEREFORE I could not control my raging sexual desires and
>> ought to go to bed with him. (Projecting, much?) I forget
>> what I said in reply, other than "No."
>

> Obviously I should have joined Mensa when I was young. Then I
> would never have been foolish enough to think that the world
> needs vat-girls, upon witnessing things like that.
>

In all honesty, I think you'd have been right at home in Mensa.
Snuggling up with your belly button lint.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in

news:n85nu...@kithrup.com:

At my senior prom, I was voted "Most likely to become a Playboy
photographer."

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

"Brian M. Scott" <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote in news:zlde6eip8w5g
$.111vn0bj8xj11$.d...@40tude.net:

> On Thu, 3 Jul 2014 17:59:02 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt
> <djh...@kithrup.com> wrote in
> <news:n85Dy...@kithrup.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:
>
> [...]
>
>> Heh. I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've
>> qualified, back when I was young and clever), but I was
>> taken to a Mensa party once.
>
>> I was either the only female there, or one of very few.
>> The room was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many
>> words, "I have an IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why
>> can't I get laid?"
>
> I was once taken to a joint get-together of the local Mensa
> and Baker Street Irregular chapters. What I chiefly
> remember is that the Baker Street Irregulars were on the
> whole much more interesting.than the Mensa folks.
>

And that was just their shoes.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in news:n85r4E.1y17
@kithrup.com:

> In article <zlde6eip8w5g$.111vn0bj8xj11$.d...@40tude.net>,
> Brian M. Scott <b.s...@csuohio.edu> wrote:
>>On Thu, 3 Jul 2014 17:59:02 GMT, Dorothy J Heydt
>><djh...@kithrup.com> wrote in
>><news:n85Dy...@kithrup.com> in rec.arts.sf.written:
>>
>>[...]
>>
>>> Heh. I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've
>>> qualified, back when I was young and clever), but I was
>>> taken to a Mensa party once.
>>
>>> I was either the only female there, or one of very few.
>>> The room was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many
>>> words, "I have an IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why
>>> can't I get laid?"
>>
>>I was once taken to a joint get-together of the local Mensa
>>and Baker Street Irregular chapters. What I chiefly
>>remember is that the Baker Street Irregulars were on the
>>whole much more interesting.than the Mensa folks.
>>
> Yeah. I don't want to generalize too much about people none of
> whom I know as individuals, but I have a perhaps erroneous
> picture of Mensa members as people who get together solely for
> the purpose of bragging about their IQ scores.
>

I've never, once, ever met someone who had a different opinion of
Mensa than me (or you) that wasn't a member, very obviously someone
no rational human being would want to hang out with.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

Joe Pfeiffer <pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote in
news:1bvbrcl...@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net:

Strictly speaking, the only thing an IQ test measures is one's
ability to take IQ tests.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
news:n85r6...@kithrup.com:

> In article
> <7d3a8ee8-ce22-46d7...@googlegroups.com>,
> Moriarty <blu...@ivillage.com> wrote:
>>On Friday, July 4, 2014 3:59:02 AM UTC+10, Dorothy J Heydt
>>wrote:
>>
>><snip>
>>
>>> Heh. I was never a member of Mensa (though I could've
>>> qualified,
>>>
>>> back when I was young and clever), but I was taken to a Mensa
>>>
>>> party once.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I was either the only female there, or one of very few. The
>>> room
>>>
>>> was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many words, "I
>>> have an
>>>
>>> IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why can't I get laid?"
>>
>>At this point a cruel person would have shot back "Because you
>>can't throw a football. DUH!!"
>
> Well, yeah. On the other hand, an intelligent male who wanted
> to lure an *intelligent* female wouldn't get anywhere with a
> football either.
>

It's not hard to imagine that you, as an intelligent woman, would
only be interested in intelligent men.

That is not, however, a univeral truth.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA36195D78E4...@69.16.179.42>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:

Strictly speaking, this is true. However, there is some (not
complete) matching to ability to do well in school. *Some.*

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA36196D09EC...@69.16.179.42>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>

>It's not hard to imagine that you, as an intelligent woman, would
>only be interested in intelligent men.
>
>That is not, however, a univeral truth.

Okay, some intelligent women might be willing an unintelligent
man who would stay home and do the housework. Or because he was
filthy rich. I don't think I would.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA36194A6071...@69.16.179.42>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>I qualified. Went to a meeting to check them out.

[I had said]

>> I was either the only female there, or one of very few. The
>> room was full of young men exclaiming, not in so many words, "I
>> have an IQ of 141 [or whatever number], so why can't I get
>> laid?"
>
>I don't recall any women there, but I do recall what you describe.
>So far as I could tell, the lack of women probably had to do with
>the membership acknowledging that they were far more interested in
>mating with their own belly button lint than women. Or maybe they
>knew they had a better shot with the belly button line.

In my very limited experience, this appeared to be the case.

[I said]

>> And one of them tried to seduce me by having me hold up a hand,
>> pointing out that it was not completely motionless, and
>> therefore I did not have the complete self-control of a yogi,
>> and THEREFORE I could not control my raging sexual desires and
>> ought to go to bed with him. (Projecting, much?) I forget what
>> I said in reply, other than "No."
>
>Is it too much to hope that you crushed his spirit to the point
>where ran out in to traffic and died?

Not when I was watching. Actually (it's been fifty years at
least) I don't remember what he said or did after that.

[Cryptoengineer]

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:XnsA36195A5D4...@69.16.179.42:

The mind is a tool, and the purpose of tools is to make things.
Some people have sharper tools than others.
Some use their tools to make things, some don't.

Generally, those who have made some use of their tools to accomplish
some goal are more interested in talking about that, rather than
just how sharp their tools are.

Mensa seems to attract a disproportionate number of people who have
very sharp tools, but haven't used them to accomplish much, so have
little to pride themselves on beyond 'Look how sharp my tool is!'

"To rust unburnished, not to shine in use!" - Tennyson

pt

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
news:n89EE...@kithrup.com:

For very narrow definitions of "Some," I suppose. Much depends on
the child, the school, and the IQ test (there are many, all of
them deeply flawed with cultural bias).

But some schools, and some teachers in some schools, use tests
that are similar in nature of IQ tests, yes. Those tests also
measure, primarily, the ability to take that kind of test.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in

news:n89EI...@kithrup.com:

> In article <XnsA36196D09EC...@69.16.179.42>,
> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>It's not hard to imagine that you, as an intelligent woman, would
>>only be interested in intelligent men.
>>
>>That is not, however, a univeral truth.
>
> Okay, some intelligent women might be willing an unintelligent
> man who would stay home and do the housework. Or because he was
> filthy rich.

Or because he has a huge dick. Or, to quote a Bujold book, because he
can "do pushups with his tongue."

Or maybe they like a submissive partner, or maybe they just like dumb
men who can make them laugh.

I could write a book on the many cases in which your supposition
failes. Other people _have_.

> I don't think I would.
>

I'm fairly certain of it. But since you appear to have found what you
*are* interested in, well, it's hardly a problem, now is it?

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in

news:n89En...@kithrup.com:

If you can't remember it, either fondly or with trauma (in your
case, probably the latter), then I can only surmise you weren't
cruel enough.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

Cryptoengineer <treif...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:XnsA361BAA779...@216.196.121.131:

Presumes facts not in evidence (on both halves of the claim). I
suspect you also could not provide an objective definition of "make
things," or even "purpose," for this context, that could be
generally agreed upon.

In other words, many people would disagree with you. Your bias does
not define universal truth.

It's no surprise, in your case, that you don't understand this, of
course.

> Some people have sharper tools than others.
> Some use their tools to make things, some don't.
>
> Generally, those who have made some use of their tools to
> accomplish some goal are more interested in talking about that,
> rather than just how sharp their tools are.
>
> Mensa seems to attract a disproportionate number of people who
> have very sharp tools, but haven't used them to accomplish much,
> so have little to pride themselves on beyond 'Look how sharp my
> tool is!'

Again, presumes facts not in evidence, namely, that qualifying for
membership in Mensa in some way measures the sharpness of one's
mind, which it does not. The only thing qualifying for Mensa
measures is one's ability to qualify for mensa.

One has an easier time qualifying for Mensa membership by rote
memorization of facts than anythign else, including understanding
those facts and being able to integrate them in to a comprehensive
world view.

Or, to paraphrase Dorothy, "If you're so goddamn smart, why cna't
you get laid? Or get anyone to like you at all? Including the
family dog?" Well, paraphrase, and expand upon, I guess.

[Christopher J. Henrich]

In article <XnsA361BAA779...@216.196.121.131>,

Cryptoengineer <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Mensa seems to attract a disproportionate number of people who have
> very sharp tools, but haven't used them to accomplish much, so have
> little to pride themselves on beyond 'Look how sharp my tool is!'

The world doesn't care about "sharp."

The world cares about "big and hairy."

--
Chris Henrich <http://www.mathinteract.com>
"Now that I have cleared up my initial confusion, I feel I am confused on a
much higher plane, and about more significant issues."
-- Earliest known sighting: Kelley, "The Workshop Way of Learning", 1951

[Greg Goss]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote:

>>Strictly speaking, the only thing an IQ test measures is one's
>>ability to take IQ tests.
>>
>Strictly speaking, this is true. However, there is some (not
>complete) matching to ability to do well in school. *Some.*

"Too smart" means that you glide through high school, then hit a brick
wall in university. I think perhaps more really smart people have
problems at U than "somewhat smart" people.

I'm smarter in measured IQ than both of my brothers and did far better
in high school, but both of them did much better than I did at U.
They'd learned work habits to get through high school, while I just
listened and filed facts away.

My much younger sister may be smarter than me AND with good schoolwork
habits. I don't have a good grasp on her IQ, since she was only 14
when I moved out, and I always had a mental model of her at 11. (It's
a bit jarring when the sister you think of as 11 has a daughter at 13.
This was hit home to me when I sent my sister a link to a slightly
racy joke with a note "you may not want to click through this if the
kids are in the room" and she replied "Sarah is usually the one who
forwards stuff like this to me."

Gaaaa. How can my "little" sister have a teen kid?

[Lawrence Watt-Evans]

On 2014-07-05 17:42:39 -0400, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy said:

> I've never, once, ever met someone who had a different opinion of
> Mensa than me (or you) that wasn't a member, very obviously someone
> no rational human being would want to hang out with.

I have -- a guy who desperately WANTED to be a member but hadn't
qualified. Sad case.



--
I'm serializing a new Ethshar novel!
The twenty-second chapter is online at:
http://www.ethshar.com/ishtascompanion22.html

[Rod Speed]

Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote

> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote

>>> Strictly speaking, the only thing an IQ test
>>> measures is one's ability to take IQ tests.

>> Strictly speaking, this is true. However, there is some (not
>> complete) matching to ability to do well in school. *Some.*

> "Too smart" means that you glide through
> high school, then hit a brick wall in university.

I don't buy that. There are certainly some who do well in school
who don't do very well in university because of the quite different
approach those two institutions take to education, but there isnt
any evidence that that has anything to do with how smart you are.

There are plenty of examples of very exceptional kids that cruise
thru school effortlessly and do the same thru university too.

> I think perhaps more really smart people have
> problems at U than "somewhat smart" people.

There is some truth in that and Einstein is an example of
that, but he didn't do that well in either school or university.

> I'm smarter in measured IQ than both of my brothers and did far better
> in high school, but both of them did much better than I did at U.

But how well you do in both is determined by a hell of a
lot more than just IQ, in fact its much more determined
by how interested or motivated you are than by IQ.

> They'd learned work habits to get through high
> school, while I just listened and filed facts away.

The work habits that work in school don't necessarily
work that well in university and the reverse is true too.

> My much younger sister may be smarter
> than me AND with good schoolwork habits.

Yes, those are two quite different attributes.

[David DeLaney]

On 2014-07-05, Joe Pfeiffer <pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> writes:

>> There are three people I've been reasonably close to over the years
>> that are out of sight UPWARDS from where my IQ is reasonably high but
>> not spectacular. I never asked either brother (my theoretical Algebra
>> instructor and my first career boss) their IQ, and my late wife
>> refused to test her IQ.
>>
>> As a geek, it was hard for me to comprehend someone who would prefer
>> not knowing. But then much of her reasoning was hard for me to
>> comprehend. Every husband is told to smile and nod as if the wife is
>> correct. In my case it was more often than not the right answer for
>> more than social reasons.

... If she could explain things so that you could follow, she probably wasn't
more than one jump above you (which still covers a not-insignificant range,
no matter where you are). Two or more jumps tends to have the answers
themselves be incomprehensible, though with even a little time the person can
usually condense them down to what you can handle - but with that much gap
you usually don't stand a chance of following how THEY got there in the first
place. (Jacob Barnett is at LEAST one jump above me, for example, and I quite
suspect he may be two or more - and if it's "more" I effectively have no way
to find out how much more.)

> It's an irrelevant number. I don't know mine, either.

I don't too. I do know it was measured once long ago - but there's about 45
years in between now, and I'm _way_ not the same person any more (though I
_think_ I could still follow how I thought then).

Dave, ObOtherSF: _Star, Bright_, Clifton
--
\/David DeLaney posting thru EarthLink - "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.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <c1rski...@mid.individual.net>,

My son turns forty next week.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA361A2051E2...@69.16.179.42>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>Or, to paraphrase Dorothy, "If you're so goddamn smart, why cna't
>you get laid? Or get anyone to like you at all? Including the
>family dog?" Well, paraphrase, and expand upon, I guess.

Make that, paraphrase and expand on Dorothy quoting somebody
else. I never made a remark like that to enybody's face.
Perhaps it's just as well. Why rub into someone's already
sensitive consciousness the fact that he is unlikely to get
to reproduce any time soon?

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <lpakev$5aa$1...@dont-email.me>,

Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote:
>On 2014-07-05 17:42:39 -0400, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy said:
>
>> I've never, once, ever met someone who had a different opinion of
>> Mensa than me (or you) that wasn't a member, very obviously someone
>> no rational human being would want to hang out with.
>
>I have -- a guy who desperately WANTED to be a member but hadn't
>qualified. Sad case.
>

Oh, dear, yes, very sad.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA361A11F615...@69.16.179.42>,

Undoubtedly I was not. And that was (and is) fine by me.

[Greg Goss]

David DeLaney <davidd...@earthlink.net> wrote:

>> It's an irrelevant number. I don't know mine, either.
>
>I don't too. I do know it was measured once long ago - but there's about 45
>years in between now, and I'm _way_ not the same person any more (though I
>_think_ I could still follow how I thought then).

I'm surprised at how stable mine has been. 127 the first time I
measured it in 1973 or so (age 16) (using a book from the library),
and 133 the next time about 1977. All the numbers I've got since have
between those two.

I don't FEEL as smart as I was in my teens. Stuff that I absorbed
effortlessly back then is semi-opaque to me (or at least stuff I
consider equivalent) now.

And my measured 130 is quite a bit lower than people around me seem to
interpret my brains. Several people in this group have mentioned
indications (though they aren't citing numbers) that indicate
significantly higher scores than mine.

[Robert Carnegie]

On Saturday, 5 July 2014 16:39:48 UTC+1, Dorothy J Heydt wrote:
> In article <4dfd9284-9e28-43ef...@googlegroups.com>,
> Robert Carnegie <rja.ca...@excite.com> wrote:
> >[IQ]
> >Also, you get better at the tests with practice; I once
> >worked through a book of them, getting smarter and smarter.
> >It's possible that I /was/ smarter; so, a good reason to
> >do it?
>
> Now, that is true. Taking standardized tests is itself a skill.
> I was tested left, right, and center when I was about eight, by a
> graduate student in psychology who was living next door to us in
> Stanford Village* and needed practice. I suppose it's possible
> he *needed* practice, for I scored rather high.
>
> But I learned how to take standardized tests, and for the rest of
> my academic life I approached them (SATs, etc.) with an attitude
> of "Oh, one of these! I can do these, and they're kind of fun."
> Which probably raised my scores by several points right there.

There is that, although I wonder whether a cheerful attitude
makes so much of a difference in testing, even for children.
(Like how TV sports commentators tell us what they divine about
a player's mental state, and how it influences their game,
since their physical performance we can see perfectly well
ourselves.) A tough test is still kind of an ordeal.
But I suppose that's different to going in /expecting/
an ordeal. Still, basically tests are fun if you're smart.
Well, until the screen pops up that says "How do you feel?"
(Your mother put that one in. She worries. Am I wrongly
presuming an obvious screen-SF reference?)

But what I meant is that with practice you get quicker at
things like this:

A B 1 C D 2 E F ?

PICARD is to ENTERPRISE as SISKO is to ?

And puzzles involving shapes.

[Rod Speed]

"Greg Goss" <go...@gossg.org> wrote in message
news:c1seh3...@mid.individual.net...

> David DeLaney <davidd...@earthlink.net> wrote:
>
>>> It's an irrelevant number. I don't know mine, either.
>>
>>I don't too. I do know it was measured once long ago - but there's about
>>45
>>years in between now, and I'm _way_ not the same person any more (though I
>>_think_ I could still follow how I thought then).
>
> I'm surprised at how stable mine has been. 127 the first time I
> measured it in 1973 or so (age 16) (using a book from the library),
> and 133 the next time about 1977. All the numbers I've got since have
> between those two.

> I don't FEEL as smart as I was in my teens.

That's due to the effect you get with
teenagers, that they know everything.

> Stuff that I absorbed effortlessly back then is semi-opaque
> to me (or at least stuff I consider equivalent) now.

That's just the Alzheimers, nothing to worry about.

[Steve Coltrin]

begin fnord
djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) writes:

> This is probably as good a place as any to remember the tale from
> Isaac Asimov's short career in the Army. They gave him whatever
> kind of test it was they gave recruits back then, and (predictably)
> he got a very high score indeed.

Reminds me of when Timothy Leary was being inducted into the California
penal system, and was given their standardized psychological test which
would go a long way towards determining the security level of the
prison he would be sent to...

A test that had been written by Timothy Leary.

--
Steve Coltrin spco...@omcl.org Google Groups killfiled here
"A group known as the League of Human Dignity helped arrange for Deuel
to be driven to a local livestock scale, where he could be weighed."
- Associated Press

[lal_truckee]

On 7/6/14 9:45 AM, Steve Coltrin wrote:
> Reminds me of when Timothy Leary was being inducted into the California
> penal system

...he's outside looking in.

[Ahasuerus]

On Saturday, July 5, 2014 9:11:21 AM UTC-4, Sea Wasp (Ryk E. Spoor) wrote:
[snip-snip]
> The IQ test I had as a child I was never told the exact score of,
> but my father told me it was "considerably more than four standard
> deviations" higher than average. This fit with the one number I got
> from a much later test administered by a different group that came
> out to 169.
>
> Given how much trouble I've had in life, I swiftly concluded that
> being IQ-smart might be useful for some things but sure as hell
> wasn't an answer for everything. [snip]

High IQ is its own reward. And, quite often, its own punishment...

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

"Christopher J. Henrich" <chen...@monmouth.com> wrote in
news:050720142253506251%chen...@monmouth.com:

> In article <XnsA361BAA779...@216.196.121.131>,
> Cryptoengineer <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Mensa seems to attract a disproportionate number of people who
>> have very sharp tools, but haven't used them to accomplish
>> much, so have little to pride themselves on beyond 'Look how
>> sharp my tool is!'
>
> The world doesn't care about "sharp."
>
> The world cares about "big and hairy."
>

Especially in female porn stars.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
news:n8A0q...@kithrup.com:

The first time I ever felt old was when my sister told me she was
going to be a grandmother. I still ahven't forgiven her.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

Lawrence Watt-Evans <l...@sff.net> wrote in
news:lpakev$5aa$1...@dont-email.me:

> On 2014-07-05 17:42:39 -0400, Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy
> said:
>
>> I've never, once, ever met someone who had a different opinion
>> of Mensa than me (or you) that wasn't a member, very obviously
>> someone no rational human being would want to hang out with.
>
> I have -- a guy who desperately WANTED to be a member but hadn't
> qualified. Sad case.
>

Now there's someone who can't even get failure right.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in

news:n8A0w...@kithrup.com:

> In article <XnsA361A2051E2...@69.16.179.42>,
> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>Or, to paraphrase Dorothy, "If you're so goddamn smart, why cna't
>>you get laid? Or get anyone to like you at all? Including the
>>family dog?" Well, paraphrase, and expand upon, I guess.
>
> Make that, paraphrase and expand on Dorothy quoting somebody
> else.

I stand corrected.

> I never made a remark like that to enybody's face.

Well, you never would. That would be rude.

> Perhaps it's just as well. Why rub into someone's already
> sensitive consciousness the fact that he is unlikely to get
> to reproduce any time soon?
>

This is the real danger of technology like Bujold's uterine
replicator. People like that *will* be able tor reporudce.

Which may well be the solution to the Fermi Paradox. All socieities
die out when Quaddie gets the ability to procreate.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in

news:n8A0z...@kithrup.com:

Again, not surprising.

[Jim G.]

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy sent the following on 7/7/2014 11:42 AM:

> "Christopher J. Henrich" <chen...@monmouth.com> wrote in
> news:050720142253506251%chen...@monmouth.com:
>
>> In article <XnsA361BAA779...@216.196.121.131>,
>> Cryptoengineer <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Mensa seems to attract a disproportionate number of people who
>>> have very sharp tools, but haven't used them to accomplish
>>> much, so have little to pride themselves on beyond 'Look how
>>> sharp my tool is!'
>>
>> The world doesn't care about "sharp."
>>
>> The world cares about "big and hairy."
>>
> Especially in female porn stars.

Well, at least now we know what kinds of posters you have hanging on the
walls of your bedroom. Not that we needed to know that, of course.

--
Jim G. | A fan of good reading, good writing, and fellow bookworms
http://www.goodreads.com/jimgysin/
http://www.librarything.com/home/jimgysin

[Jim G.]

Dorothy J Heydt sent the following on 7/3/2014 5:43 PM:

> I have a perhaps erroneous
> picture of Mensa members as people who get together solely for
> the purpose of bragging about their IQ scores.

It's not erroneous. At least not for the vast majority of them. I went
to a gathering in Milwaukee once and...was not impressed. The few I knew
ahead of time were nice and normal (or I wouldn't have taken the time to
get to know them over the years), but the rest? Lots of scary and sad
and socially awkward types desperately in need of a bar of soap.

[Robert Carnegie]

On Monday, 7 July 2014 19:26:26 UTC+1, Jim G. wrote:
> Dorothy J Heydt sent the following on 7/3/2014 5:43 PM:
> > I have a perhaps erroneous
> > picture of Mensa members as people who get together solely for
> > the purpose of bragging about their IQ scores.
>
> It's not erroneous. At least not for the vast majority of them. I went
> to a gathering in Milwaukee once and...was not impressed. The few I knew
> ahead of time were nice and normal (or I wouldn't have taken the time to
> get to know them over the years), but the rest? Lots of scary and sad
> and socially awkward types desperately in need of a bar of soap.

That aside, it wasn't clear to me what they do for fun;
why one would want to be a member, besides the opportunity
to be intelligent at people who can probably appreciate it.
Are they just trading on a premised that many intelligent
people aren't exactly bright?

<http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mensa_International>
mentions a Hallowe'en event involving making "pun-based costumes",
but, of course, someone can make Wikipedia say anything.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

"Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote in
news:lpeon4$elr$1...@dont-email.me:

> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy sent the following on 7/7/2014
> 11:42 AM:
>> "Christopher J. Henrich" <chen...@monmouth.com> wrote in
>> news:050720142253506251%chen...@monmouth.com:
>>
>>> In article <XnsA361BAA779...@216.196.121.131>,
>>> Cryptoengineer <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Mensa seems to attract a disproportionate number of people
>>>> who have very sharp tools, but haven't used them to
>>>> accomplish much, so have little to pride themselves on beyond
>>>> 'Look how sharp my tool is!'
>>>
>>> The world doesn't care about "sharp."
>>>
>>> The world cares about "big and hairy."
>>>
>> Especially in female porn stars.
>
> Well, at least now we know what kinds of posters you have
> hanging on the walls of your bedroom. Not that we needed to know
> that, of course.
>

I did not say the world cared because such was desirable, just that
the world cared.

It's like the Eight Deadly Words. They do not apply to the character
that you want do see die horribly - you care very much what happens
to them.

[William December Starr]

In article <XnsA36363231FA...@69.16.179.42>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> said:

> The first time I ever felt old was when my sister told me she was
> going to be a grandmother. I still ahven't forgiven her.

Could've been worse. She could've told you that _you_ were going to
be a grandmother.

-- wds

[Rod Speed]

"Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy" <taus...@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:XnsA36367E52A9...@69.16.179.43...

> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
> news:n8A0w...@kithrup.com:
>
>> In article <XnsA361A2051E2...@69.16.179.42>,
>> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>Or, to paraphrase Dorothy, "If you're so goddamn smart, why cna't
>>>you get laid? Or get anyone to like you at all? Including the
>>>family dog?" Well, paraphrase, and expand upon, I guess.
>>
>> Make that, paraphrase and expand on Dorothy quoting somebody
>> else.
>
> I stand corrected.
>
>> I never made a remark like that to enybody's face.
>
> Well, you never would. That would be rude.
>
>> Perhaps it's just as well. Why rub into someone's already
>> sensitive consciousness the fact that he is unlikely to get
>> to reproduce any time soon?
>>
> This is the real danger of technology like Bujold's uterine
> replicator. People like that *will* be able tor reporudce.

Completely blotto, as always...

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote in
news:lpf1pa$ofd$1...@panix2.panix.com:

Yeah, a sex change I hadn't noticed would have been a little
disturbing, and giving birth afterwards woulds like a SyFy Channel
movie of the week plot.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

"Rod Speed" <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote in
news:c20he3...@mid.individual.net:

>
>
> "Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy" <taus...@gmail.com> wrote in
> message news:XnsA36367E52A9...@69.16.179.43...
>> djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
>> news:n8A0w...@kithrup.com:
>>
>>> In article <XnsA361A2051E2...@69.16.179.42>,
>>> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Or, to paraphrase Dorothy, "If you're so goddamn smart, why
>>>>cna't you get laid? Or get anyone to like you at all?
>>>>Including the family dog?" Well, paraphrase, and expand upon,
>>>>I guess.
>>>
>>> Make that, paraphrase and expand on Dorothy quoting somebody
>>> else.
>>
>> I stand corrected.
>>
>>> I never made a remark like that to enybody's face.
>>
>> Well, you never would. That would be rude.
>>
>>> Perhaps it's just as well. Why rub into someone's already
>>> sensitive consciousness the fact that he is unlikely to get
>>> to reproduce any time soon?
>>>
>> This is the real danger of technology like Bujold's uterine
>> replicator. People like that *will* be able tor reporudce.
>
> Completely blotto, as always...

Of course you are. What else do you have to do, in the home, other
than drink heavily and masturbate furiously?

>
>> Which may well be the solution to the Fermi Paradox. All
>> socieities die out when Quaddie gets the ability to procreate.
>
>
>

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA36363231FA...@69.16.179.42>,

I've been a grandmother for six years.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <lpf1pa$ofd$1...@panix2.panix.com>,

Pffffkt.

(glad I had put the teacup down before reading)

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA36362BC830...@69.16.179.42>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>"Christopher J. Henrich" <chen...@monmouth.com> wrote in
>news:050720142253506251%chen...@monmouth.com:
>
>> In article <XnsA361BAA779...@216.196.121.131>,
>> Cryptoengineer <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Mensa seems to attract a disproportionate number of people who
>>> have very sharp tools, but haven't used them to accomplish
>>> much, so have little to pride themselves on beyond 'Look how
>>> sharp my tool is!'
>>
>> The world doesn't care about "sharp."
>>
>> The world cares about "big and hairy."
>>
>Especially in female porn stars.
>

Gurk.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA3639A294B1...@69.16.179.42>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote in
>news:lpf1pa$ofd$1...@panix2.panix.com:
>
>> In article <XnsA36363231FA...@69.16.179.42>,
>> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> said:
>>
>>> The first time I ever felt old was when my sister told me she
>>> was going to be a grandmother. I still ahven't forgiven her.
>>
>> Could've been worse. She could've told you that _you_ were
>> going to be a grandmother.
>>
>Yeah, a sex change I hadn't noticed would have been a little
>disturbing, and giving birth afterwards woulds like a SyFy Channel
>movie of the week plot.

The early-20th-century comedienne Fanny Brice, after having given
birth, was asked by a friend, "What does it feel like?"

She replied, "Like pushing a piano through a transom."

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <lpeook$f19$1...@dont-email.me>,

Jim G. <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote:
>Dorothy J Heydt sent the following on 7/3/2014 5:43 PM:
>> I have a perhaps erroneous
>> picture of Mensa members as people who get together solely for
>> the purpose of bragging about their IQ scores.
>
>It's not erroneous. At least not for the vast majority of them. I went
>to a gathering in Milwaukee once and...was not impressed. The few I knew
>ahead of time were nice and normal (or I wouldn't have taken the time to
>get to know them over the years), but the rest? Lots of scary and sad
>and socially awkward types desperately in need of a bar of soap.
>

Hmmm. Maybe that's a later development? The crowd I observed
that evening were fairly kempt and clean. Their *values* were
somewhat askew, but at least they didn't smell bad.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in news:n8DEuD.1Jy9
@kithrup.com:

> In article <XnsA36363231FA...@69.16.179.42>,
> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
>>news:n8A0q...@kithrup.com:
>>
>>> In article <c1rski...@mid.individual.net>,
>>> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Gaaaa. How can my "little" sister have a teen kid?
>>>
>>> My son turns forty next week.
>>>
>>The first time I ever felt old was when my sister told me she was
>>going to be a grandmother. I still ahven't forgiven her.
>
> I've been a grandmother for six years.
>

I suspect you've been old for a lot longer than that. Possibly since
you were born. :)

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in

news:n8DEx...@kithrup.com:

> In article <XnsA3639A294B1...@69.16.179.42>,
> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote in
>>news:lpf1pa$ofd$1...@panix2.panix.com:
>>
>>> In article <XnsA36363231FA...@69.16.179.42>,
>>> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> said:
>>>
>>>> The first time I ever felt old was when my sister told me she
>>>> was going to be a grandmother. I still ahven't forgiven her.
>>>
>>> Could've been worse. She could've told you that _you_ were
>>> going to be a grandmother.
>>>
>>Yeah, a sex change I hadn't noticed would have been a little
>>disturbing, and giving birth afterwards woulds like a SyFy Channel
>>movie of the week plot.
>
> The early-20th-century comedienne Fanny Brice, after having given
> birth, was asked by a friend, "What does it feel like?"
>
> She replied, "Like pushing a piano through a transom."
>

I am entirely willing to defer to your superior knowledge on the
subject. Since I have no desire for personal knowledge whatseover.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA36455EFE51...@69.16.179.42>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
>news:n8DEx...@kithrup.com:
>
>> In article <XnsA3639A294B1...@69.16.179.42>,
>> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>wds...@panix.com (William December Starr) wrote in
>>>news:lpf1pa$ofd$1...@panix2.panix.com:
>>>
>>>> In article <XnsA36363231FA...@69.16.179.42>,
>>>> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> said:
>>>>
>>>>> The first time I ever felt old was when my sister told me she
>>>>> was going to be a grandmother. I still ahven't forgiven her.
>>>>
>>>> Could've been worse. She could've told you that _you_ were
>>>> going to be a grandmother.
>>>>
>>>Yeah, a sex change I hadn't noticed would have been a little
>>>disturbing, and giving birth afterwards woulds like a SyFy Channel
>>>movie of the week plot.
>>
>> The early-20th-century comedienne Fanny Brice, after having given
>> birth, was asked by a friend, "What does it feel like?"
>>
>> She replied, "Like pushing a piano through a transom."
>>
>I am entirely willing to defer to your superior knowledge on the
>subject. Since I have no desire for personal knowledge whatseover.
>

Since it would take a degree of gender-reassignment surgery that
we don't have yet, don't worry about itr.

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA36455A13D2...@69.16.179.42>,

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in news:n8DEuD.1Jy9
>@kithrup.com:
>
>> In article <XnsA36363231FA...@69.16.179.42>,
>> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
>>>news:n8A0q...@kithrup.com:
>>>
>>>> In article <c1rski...@mid.individual.net>,
>>>> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>Gaaaa. How can my "little" sister have a teen kid?
>>>>
>>>> My son turns forty next week.
>>>>
>>>The first time I ever felt old was when my sister told me she was
>>>going to be a grandmother. I still ahven't forgiven her.
>>
>> I've been a grandmother for six years.
>>
>I suspect you've been old for a lot longer than that. Possibly since
>you were born. :)
>

Yeah; I was born in 1942; my daughter in 1975; my son in 2008.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in

news:n8EIE...@kithrup.com:

I'm sure I could simulate the experience with a watermelon,
provided no lubricant were used.

[Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy]

djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in

news:n8EIG...@kithrup.com:

> In article <XnsA36455A13D2...@69.16.179.42>,
> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in news:n8DEuD.1Jy9
>>@kithrup.com:
>>
>>> In article <XnsA36363231FA...@69.16.179.42>,
>>> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy <taus...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>djh...@kithrup.com (Dorothy J Heydt) wrote in
>>>>news:n8A0q...@kithrup.com:
>>>>
>>>>> In article <c1rski...@mid.individual.net>,
>>>>> Greg Goss <go...@gossg.org> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Gaaaa. How can my "little" sister have a teen kid?
>>>>>
>>>>> My son turns forty next week.
>>>>>
>>>>The first time I ever felt old was when my sister told me she
>>>>was going to be a grandmother. I still ahven't forgiven her.
>>>
>>> I've been a grandmother for six years.
>>>
>>I suspect you've been old for a lot longer than that. Possibly
>>since you were born. :)
>>
> Yeah; I was born in 1942; my daughter in 1975; my son in 2008.
>

You missed it entirely, didn't you? "Born old," and all?

[Dorothy J Heydt]

In article <XnsA3646527F4F...@69.16.179.43>,

You wouldn't need to go as far as a watermelon. A small
canteloupe would do, ten centimeters or so in diameter.

[Jim G.]

Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy sent the following on 7/7/2014 2:59 PM:

> "Jim G." <jimg...@geemail.com.invalid> wrote in
> news:lpeon4$elr$1...@dont-email.me:
>
>> Gutless Umbrella Carrying Sissy sent the following on 7/7/2014
>> 11:42 AM:
>>> "Christopher J. Henrich" <chen...@monmouth.com> wrote in
>>> news:050720142253506251%chen...@monmouth.com:
>>>
>>>> In article <XnsA361BAA779...@216.196.121.131>,
>>>> Cryptoengineer <treif...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Mensa seems to attract a disproportionate number of people
>>>>> who have very sharp tools, but haven't used them to
>>>>> accomplish much, so have little to pride themselves on beyond
>>>>> 'Look how sharp my tool is!'
>>>>
>>>> The world doesn't care about "sharp."
>>>>
>>>> The world cares about "big and hairy."
>>>>
>>> Especially in female porn stars.
>>
>> Well, at least now we know what kinds of posters you have
>> hanging on the walls of your bedroom. Not that we needed to know
>> that, of course.
>>
> I did not say the world cared because such was desirable, just that
> the world cared.

So you're saying that those *aren't* your posters hanging on your walls?

> It's like the Eight Deadly Words. They do not apply to the character
> that you want do see die horribly - you care very much what happens
> to them.

I can see that. It still doesn't get you off the hook for liking big and
hairy pr0n stars, though.

[Jim G.]

Robert Carnegie sent the following on 7/7/2014 2:22 PM:

> On Monday, 7 July 2014 19:26:26 UTC+1, Jim G. wrote:
>> Dorothy J Heydt sent the following on 7/3/2014 5:43 PM:
>>> I have a perhaps erroneous
>>> picture of Mensa members as people who get together solely for
>>> the purpose of bragging about their IQ scores.
>>
>> It's not erroneous. At least not for the vast majority of them. I went
>> to a gathering in Milwaukee once and...was not impressed. The few I knew
>> ahead of time were nice and normal (or I wouldn't have taken the time to
>> get to know them over the years), but the rest? Lots of scary and sad
>> and socially awkward types desperately in need of a bar of soap.
>
> That aside, it wasn't clear to me what they do for fun;

I don't think it's clear to them, either.

> why one would want to be a member, besides the opportunity
> to be intelligent at people who can probably appreciate it.
> Are they just trading on a premised that many intelligent
> people aren't exactly bright?

Like seeks like, and all that. And a lot of the folks I saw were a lot
alike, and not in many good ways. I asked the gal who took me if it was
a typical gathering, and she said that it was. The same was true with a
few other Mensa members I'd known beforehand and who I also saw there.

To be fair, there were *some* reasonably normal strangers there, but
most of them seemed to be connected in some way to the group that I'd
already liked enough to get to know beforehand (in another "like seeks
like" kind of deal). There was also some encouragement to get me to
commit to attending HalloweeM, the Chicago RG, later on, but I already
knew that one gathering was enough for me. Still, it was clear that
recruiting is a thing for them...