Mensa vocabulary quiz
Steve Barnard
David Carson wrote:
>
> A book I just bought, "The Mensa Genius Quiz Book," has a vocabulary quiz that
> lets you compare your vocabulary with that of the members of Mensa. Below is
> the list of words. The actual quiz is multiple-choice. I haven't given the
> multiple choices because that would be too much typing and it would also violate
> the "fair use" provision of the book's copyright. Anyway, see how you do. I
> give the answers in a separate post.
>
> 1. Congolomeration
<snip>
These are so easy! The list reads like a spelling quiz for fifth
graders.
Is anyone else besides me annoyed at the self-congradulatory elitism of
Mensa? Just who do they think they are? The whole premise of the
organization is "I'm smarter than you."
Steve Barnard
Ralph M Jones
Steve Barnard wrote:
> <snip>
>
> These are so easy! The list reads like a spelling quiz for fifth
> graders.
>
> Is anyone else besides me annoyed at the self-congradulatory elitism of
> Mensa? Just who do they think they are?
Is this a quiz?
--
A world without walls,
Microsoft notwithstanding,
Has no need of gates.
- rmj
Steve Barnard
Steve MacGregor wrote:
>
> Is being a member of Mensa qualitatively any different than than
> being a member of any other group that is the best of whatever
> classification they set up for themselves? Like the Super Bowl
> winners, Miss America contestants, national spelling-bee winners,
> International Grand Masters of chess, etc.?
I suppose not. On the other hand, I don't feel any compulsion to hold
someone in high regard merely because they belong to a group that is the
best of whatever classification they set up for themselves. In fact, I
might hold them in low regard merely because they belong to such a
group.
How about a group of the most successful drug trafficers? Or a group of
serial killers with the most scores?
The Mensa folks are harmless compared to these examples. (Pathetic,
actually.) I'm just using the examples to make a point.
Steve Barnard
Padraig Breathnach
If I know all, or nearly all, the words, will I be forced to join?
PB
StrayShots
On Sat, 20 Dec Steve Barnard <st...@megafauna.com> axed:
>Is anyone else besides me annoyed at the self-congradulatory elitism of
>Mensa?
spam-bait follows:
rhu...@fcc.gov
jqu...@fcc.gov
sn...@fcc.gov
rch...@fcc.gov
cust...@email.usps.gov
sup...@netnames.com
he...@uunet.uu.net
postm...@uunet.uu.net
horv...@idci.com
ma...@idci.com
ga...@crushnet.com
delt...@camelot.net
Jonathan Mason
David Carson
>A book I just bought, "The Mensa Genius Quiz Book," has a vocabulary quiz that lets you compare your vocabulary with that of the members of Mensa. Below is the list of words.
>
.. and 19 more words, all of which I know the meaning of without much
thought. It's the one above that has me stumped. Either this is something
to do with the spread of HIV in Zaire (formerly known as the Congo), or
it is what happens when you try to rip up a congoleum floor that has been
down for years in a damp, hot climate.
Seriously, though, I had a fellow lodger once who was a member of Mensa.
The last I heard of him he had been discharged from his job as a
dishwasher in an old folks home for persistent oversleeping past 11:45
a.m. I'm sure he would have known congolomeration.
Steve MacGregor
Steve Barnard <st...@megafauna.com> wrote in article
<349C51...@megafauna.com>...
<<Is anyone else besides me annoyed at the self-congradulatory
elitism of Mensa? Just who do they think they are? The whole
premise of the organization is "I'm smarter than you.">>
Is being a member of Mensa qualitatively any different than than
being a member of any other group that is the best of whatever
classification they set up for themselves? Like the Super Bowl
winners, Miss America contestants, national spelling-bee winners,
International Grand Masters of chess, etc.?
--
____ Go: It's all fun and games,
(_) /: ,/ till someone loses an eye!
/___/ (_) Steve MacGregor, Phoenix, AZ
-- (Reply to SPMacGregor at NetValue dot Net)
Bill Baldwin
Steve MacGregor wrote:
> Is being a member of Mensa qualitatively any different than than
> being a member of any other group that is the best of whatever
> classification they set up for themselves? Like the Super Bowl
> winners, Miss America contestants, national spelling-bee winners,
> International Grand Masters of chess, etc.?
I would say so. Mensans aren't congratulating themselves on any particular
accomplishments, just on their intelligence. It's like a physicist asking
for the Nobel prize, solely because he's a great physicist, rather than
actually presenting any groundbreaking work. It's like the old gag that a
celebrity is a person who is famous for being known.
--
Bill Baldwin
Darryl Miyaguchi
>A book I just bought, "The Mensa Genius Quiz Book," has a vocabulary quiz that
>lets you compare your vocabulary with that of the members of Mensa. Below is
>the list of words. The actual quiz is multiple-choice. I haven't given the
>multiple choices because that would be too much typing and it would also violate
>the "fair use" provision of the book's copyright. Anyway, see how you do. I
>give the answers in a separate post.
AUE'ers are invited to take a more difficult vocabulary quiz, designed
by Peter Schmies, at:
http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/schmies.html
The average person who tries this quiz and is bold enough to email
his/her score to me misses 32 out of 200 questions. The highest
scorer, who is certainly a walking dictionary, still missed 9.
Darryl Miyaguchi miya...@netcom.com
Padraig Breathnach
Steve Barnard wrote:
>
> Is anyone else besides me annoyed at the self-congradulatory elitism of
> Mensa? Just who do they think they are? The whole premise of the
> organization is "I'm smarter than you."
>
PB
Steve Barnard
No, but you just did.
Steve Barnard
Ralph M Jones
Darryl Miyaguchi wrote:
> AUE'ers are invited to take a more difficult vocabulary quiz, designed
> by Peter Schmies, at:
>
> http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/schmies.html
>
> The average person who tries this quiz and is bold enough to email
> his/her score to me misses 32 out of 200 questions. The highest
> scorer, who is certainly a walking dictionary, still missed 9.
I just scanned and bookmarked the quiz, it's interesting. One example toward the end
compares "exasperate" and "exacerbate". These two are neither synonyms nor antonyms
according to my understanding of them. What am I missing?
Gwen Lenker
Steve MacGregor <SteveMa...@USA.Net> wrote in article
<01bd0dd0$fa957760$d19c...@goodnet.goodnet.com>...
>
> Is being a member of Mensa qualitatively any different than than
> being a member of any other group that is the best of whatever
> classification they set up for themselves? Like the Super Bowl
> winners, Miss America contestants, national spelling-bee winners,
> International Grand Masters of chess, etc.?
Mensa accepts applicants who score in the 98th percentile on a
standardized intelligence test -- that's one in every 50 of the
general population -- roughly equivalent to IQ 133. The Camelopard
Society also sets its admission level at the 98th percentile, but...
Intertel and the Top One Percent Society accept only those who score
in the 99th percentile or higher (one in one hundred -- IQ 138).
The International Society for Philosophical Enquiry (ISPE), the
Triple Nine Society, and the One-in-a-Thousand Society require a
score in the 99.9th percentile or higher. (one in one thousand -- IQ
150)
The Prometheus Society requires a minimum score in the 99.997th
percentile. (one in thirty thousand -- IQ 164)
And then there's the Mega Society -- 99.9999th percentile (one in a
million -- IQ 177).
While there are Mensa members who belong to, or could qualify for
membership in, some (or perhaps even all) of these other groups, it
is clear that just being a member of Mensa does not indicate that a
person is among "the best of whatever classification" Mensa has set
up for itself.
And that's not even considering that the vast majority of people who
could join these organizations if they wanted to have better things
to do with their time.
ObAUE: Does a definition of the word "genius" that includes one of
every fifty people appear in any reputable dictionary?
Darryl Miyaguchi
On Sun, 21 Dec 1997 09:09:41 -0600, Ralph M Jones <rmj...@hal-pc.org>
wrote:
>
>Darryl Miyaguchi wrote:
>
>> AUE'ers are invited to take a more difficult vocabulary quiz, designed
>> by Peter Schmies, at:
>>
>> http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/schmies.html
>>
>> The average person who tries this quiz and is bold enough to email
>> his/her score to me misses 32 out of 200 questions. The highest
>> scorer, who is certainly a walking dictionary, still missed 9.
>
>I just scanned and bookmarked the quiz, it's interesting. One example toward the end
>compares "exasperate" and "exacerbate". These two are neither synonyms nor antonyms
>according to my understanding of them. What am I missing?
Def. 2 of exacerbate.
Darryl Miyaguchi miya...@netcom.com
Steve Barnard
David Carson wrote:
>
> Do you actually know anything about Mensa, Steve? Or does that even make a
> difference whether you are willing to form an opinion about something *and*
> share it with others?
I don't know much about Mensa, other than the requirements for
membership. When I run across someone who says they belong to Mensa I
get that same bad taste in my mouth as when someone brags about their
SAT scores.
I hope you understand that I'm not disputing the *right* of Mensa to
exist.
This is now off-topic, so I'm bailing out.
Steve Barnard
Steve MacGregor
David Carson <david...@neosoft.com> wrote in article
<67jet5$jdn$3...@uuneo.neosoft.com>...
<<Mensa is a social organization whose members enjoy intelligent
conversation. It is a lot like a.u.e. The chief difference is that
you have to pass a test to join Mensa, but a.u.e. is open to anyone
with an opinion--no matter how speculative and uninformed it is.>>
Generally, associations of people consist of people with some
similar interest or other quality in common, such as the John Smith
Society, consisting of people named "John Smith", or the Top Hatters,
consisting of tall people. Mensa's quality is the passing of a
particular test. (Actually, the passing of any one of a particular
set of tests, either theirs, or any one of other specific tests that
supposedly measure intelligence. My Army GT score or High School SAT
score would be enough to qualify me, for example.)
But the few Mensans I've met have been really weird people, with
whom I have little in common, other than high IQ-test scores, and I
see no point in joining their organization.
Instead, I'll join organizations of people with similar =interests=
to mine, such as my church (consisting of a lot of Southern Baptists)
and <alt.usage.english> (if you'll let me get by with calling it an
organization).
--
(Reply to SPMacGregor at NetValue dot Net)
---------------------------------------------------------
Whom are you going to call? GRAMMAR BUSTERS!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
Earle Jones
>Padraig Breathnach wrote:
>>
>> Steve Barnard wrote:
>> >
>> > Is anyone else besides me annoyed at the self-congradulatory elitism of
>> > Mensa?
--
Mensa represents that set of people who spell congratulatory without a "d".
earle
--
__
__/\_\
/\_\/_/
\/_/\_\ earle
\/_/ jones
We want our Internet back! Get rid of Spam.
See http://www.cauce.org
Earle Jones
In article <349C51...@megafauna.com>, st...@megafauna.com wrote:
>David Carson wrote:
>>
>> A book I just bought, "The Mensa Genius Quiz Book," has a vocabulary
quiz that
>> lets you compare your vocabulary with that of the members of Mensa...
[...]
--
The definition implied by the answer given in the Mensa vocabulary test for
"Luminescense = producing light by means other than incandescence" might
score well for you in the Mensa test (it agrees with some dictionaries) but
it will not make your Physics 101 professor very happy.
See: phosphorescence, fluorescence, lasers, etc.
ej
Mark Baker
In article <67jbna$9...@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net>,
"Gwen Lenker" <gale...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
> Mensa accepts applicants who score in the 98th percentile on a
> standardized intelligence test -- that's one in every 50 of the
No it doesn't, I think it accepts applicants who score in the 99th or higher
percentile. Allowing those who came in the top 3% of the population but not
in the top 2% would be really wierd.
> The International Society for Philosophical Enquiry (ISPE), the
> Triple Nine Society, and the One-in-a-Thousand Society require a
> score in the 99.9th percentile or higher. (one in one thousand -- IQ
> 150)
To discuss their membership you can't use the word percentile at all.
H Gilmer
David Carson (david...@neosoft.com) wrote:
: Do you actually know anything about Mensa, Steve? Or does that even make a
: difference whether you are willing to form an opinion about something *and*
: share it with others?
: Please present any evidence you have gathered that shows that people
: in Mensa: 1) expect others to hold them in high regard, 2) are
: self-congratulatory, or 3) are elitist.
Read their newsletter.
Hg
Geoff Butler
Steve Barnard <st...@megafauna.com> writes:
>
>I suppose not. On the other hand, I don't feel any compulsion to hold
>someone in high regard merely because they belong to a group that is the
>best of whatever classification they set up for themselves. In fact, I
>might hold them in low regard merely because they belong to such a
>group.
>
>How about a group of the most successful drug trafficers? Or a group of
>serial killers with the most scores?
>
>The Mensa folks are harmless compared to these examples. (Pathetic,
>actually.) I'm just using the examples to make a point.
Clearly not. Without that parenthetical remark, you might have got away
with your point of view. With that 'pathetic' remark, it begins to seem
that you might have an axe to grind.
-ler
Peter Moylan
Steve Barnard <st...@megafauna.com> wrote:
>Is anyone else besides me annoyed at the self-congradulatory elitism of
>Mensa? Just who do they think they are? The whole premise of the
>organization is "I'm smarter than you."
I once joined Mensa, and I don't think my motivations had much
to do with "I'm smarter than you". I did it because I was
lonely; because I was bored with the people around me; and
because I wanted to meet people who could talk about something
other than football.
Since I've become an academic, I've lost that need, and long ago
I let my membership lapse. The sort of people you meet at a university
are similar to the sort of people you meet at a Mensa meeting.
I recognise, however, that there are many intelligent people
whose job or location forces them to mix mostly with boring
people. Mensa does a lot of good for people like that. It's a
sad fact that at a typical Mensa meeting you'll meet a lot of
people who feel like outcasts from society. Membership of the
group gives them some relief from a hostile world.
The newsgroup alt.usage.english performs a very similar function.
Only a minority of the regulars in this group are here because
of a professional interest in language. The rest of us are here
because we value intelligent conversation.
--
Peter Moylan pe...@ee.newcastle.edu.au
http://www.ee.newcastle.edu.au/users/staff/peter/Moylan.html
Steve Barnard
Earle Jones wrote:
>
> In article <349D20...@megafauna.com>, st...@megafauna.com wrote:
>
> >Padraig Breathnach wrote:
> >>
> >> >
> >> > Is anyone else besides me annoyed at the self-congradulatory elitism of
> >> > Mensa?
>
> Mensa represents that set of people who spell congratulatory without a "d".
Wrong. I'm a member of that set, but I'm not a member of Mensa, so they
don't represent me.
On the other hand, maybe by "represent" you meant "samples."
Steve Barnard
Steve Barnard
Geoff Butler wrote:
>
> Clearly not. Without that parenthetical remark, you might have got away
> with your point of view. With that 'pathetic' remark, it begins to seem
> that you might have an axe to grind.
I can see how it might seem that way, but in fact the remark was
prompted by a long email I received after the post. It was from a
former and embittered Mensa member, and it drew a very pathetic picture
of the organization.
Steve Barnard
Tim Fulmer
>
> >A book I just bought, "The Mensa Genius Quiz Book," has a vocabulary quiz that
> >the list of words. The actual quiz is multiple-choice. I haven't given the
> >multiple choices because that would be too much typing and it would also violate
> >the "fair use" provision of the book's copyright. Anyway, see how you do. I
> >give the answers in a separate post.
>
> by Peter Schmies, at:
>
> http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/schmies.html
>
> The average person who tries this quiz and is bold enough to email
> his/her score to me misses 32 out of 200 questions. The highest
> scorer, who is certainly a walking dictionary, still missed 9.
>
I took your exam.
I got 186 right out of 200 in 40 minutes.
Tim Fulmer
David Carson
On 21 Dec 1997 04:26:08 GMT, Jonathan Mason <j...@sunline.net> wrote:
>>1. Congolomeration
>
>.. and 19 more words, all of which I know the meaning of without much
>thought. It's the one above that has me stumped. Either this is something
>to do with the spread of HIV in Zaire (formerly known as the Congo), or
>it is what happens when you try to rip up a congoleum floor that has been
>down for years in a damp, hot climate.
I typed this post after a long night of playing Risk with some friends. We have
a habit of making up funny names for the inhabitants of the countries we are
attacking or defending. I specifically remember us throwing out some names for
the people of the Congo--"Congolites," "Congoloids," "Congolarians," etc.
(These are much funnier at 1:30 am). My error in typing "conglomeration" was
accidental, but probably unavoidable.
David Carson
To reply by e-mail, change my name from "davidcarson" to "davo".
Gwen Lenker
Mark Baker <mba...@iee.org> wrote in article
<67k4k5$qe$1...@aziraphale.demon.co.uk>...
> In article <67jbna$9...@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net>,
> "Gwen Lenker" <gale...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>
>
> > The International Society for Philosophical Enquiry (ISPE), the
> > Triple Nine Society, and the One-in-a-Thousand Society require a
> > score in the 99.9th percentile or higher. (one in one thousand
>> -- IQ 150)
>
> To discuss their membership you can't use the word percentile at
all.
Okay. What *can* I use? I ought to have mentioned that I was trying
to translate information from a chart into paragraph form. I have no
education in either psychometry or statistics myself. The chart was
compiled by Ronald K. Hoeflin, author of the Mega Test and the Titan
Test, both available (at least as of March, 1993) by writing to him
at P.O. Box 539, New York, NY 10101.
Since, on the chart, the column containing all the
ninety-nine-point-something-something numbers is labeled
"Percentile", that's the word I used. I'm guessing (based on my
cheap dictionary's definition of "percentile") that your objection
arises from the use of this word with non-integer values, yet I've
often seen test scores expressed this way. I've also been told (a
very long time ago, by a high school guidance counselor) that there's
no "hundredth percentile" in this context, which doesn't seem to jibe
with my dictionary's definition either, unless they start with the
zeroth.
So, with full faith in the power and infallibility of Usenet, I
humbly ask that anyone who can help me understand, please post, in
one thousand words or less, a full introductory course in the
terminology of statistical distribution.
Or at least explain "standard deviation". That one's had me puzzled
for ages.
Brian J Goggin
On 23 Dec 1997 00:06:19 GMT, "Gwen Lenker" <gale...@worldnet.att.net>
wrote:
[...]
>Or at least explain "standard deviation". That one's had me puzzled
>for ages.
Sheep.
bjg
Padraig Breathnach
Brian J Goggin wrote:
> [...]
>
> >Or at least explain "standard deviation". That one's had me puzzled
> >for ages.
>
> Sheep.
>
Baa! Humbug!
PB
Darryl Miyaguchi
>Mark Baker <mba...@iee.org> wrote in article
><67k4k5$qe$1...@aziraphale.demon.co.uk>...
>> In article <67jbna$9...@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net>,
>> "Gwen Lenker" <gale...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>>
>[...]
>>
>> > The International Society for Philosophical Enquiry (ISPE), the
>> > Triple Nine Society, and the One-in-a-Thousand Society require a
>> > score in the 99.9th percentile or higher. (one in one thousand
>>> -- IQ 150)
>>
>> To discuss their membership you can't use the word percentile at
>all.
>
>Okay. What *can* I use? I ought to have mentioned that I was trying
>to translate information from a chart into paragraph form. I have no
>education in either psychometry or statistics myself. The chart was
>compiled by Ronald K. Hoeflin, author of the Mega Test and the Titan
>Test, both available (at least as of March, 1993) by writing to him
>at P.O. Box 539, New York, NY 10101.
"Percentile" is typically used by the societies in question to
describe their entrance criteria. Fractional percentiles don't seem
to bother anybody. It is equivalent to say that if a society accepts
at the 99.9th percentile, then on average, one person out of a
thousand chosen at random from the general adult population would
qualify, assuming that the qualifying test was properly designed and
normed. By the way, you should be able to find similar, if not
identical, charts at my site:
http://www.eskimo.com/~miyaguch/hard_iq.html
>So, with full faith in the power and infallibility of Usenet, I
>humbly ask that anyone who can help me understand, please post, in
>one thousand words or less, a full introductory course in the
>terminology of statistical distribution.
>
>Or at least explain "standard deviation". That one's had me puzzled
>for ages.
>
"Standard deviation" is a term used to describe the distribution of a
sample. Qualitatively, it is useful to think of it as the magnitude
of the average difference of scores from the mean. Usually when
discussing standard deviations (designated by the Greek symbol little
sigma), there is a built-in assumption that the distribution is
"normal," or bell-shaped. In such a distribution, two sigmas centered
about the mean encompass about 68% of the total sample.
Although score distributions on IQ tests tend to approximate a normal
curve, it isn't necessarily true that they do so precisely, especially
out near the tails. That is, unless the test designer has
specifically forced the score distribution to fit into a normal curve,
which is done in many cases. To be safe, it is more accurate to
describe society entrance criteria in percentiles rather than in
sigmas. It is nearly meaningless to describe entrance criteria in
terms of IQ, since there is not an agreed-upon standard of how many IQ
points should constitute a standard deviation (although 16 IQ points
per sigma is typically used by the high-IQ societies).
Incidentally, judging from the heated reaction to even the idea of a
society such as Mensa, it should be clear that this is a controversial
topic. It is even more so in societies such as the Mega, where rifts
that have developed over the meaning, validity, and legality of
certain IQ tests has threatened its very existence. My site has a
description of the issues facing these societies.
Darryl Miyaguchi miya...@netcom.com
Phil Anderson
st...@megafauna.com writes:
>> with your point of view. With that 'pathetic' remark, it begins to seem
>> that you might have an axe to grind.
>
>I can see how it might seem that way, but in fact the remark was
>prompted by a long email I received after the post. It was from a
>former and embittered Mensa member, and it drew a very pathetic picture
>of the organization.
One must bear in mind that "former and embittered" members of _any_
organisation can become that way for a wide variety of reasons and,
whatever the faults involved, can hardly be expected to give a
balanced view of the organisation. In addition, any organisation with
branches world-wide is quite possibly very different in different
places.
FWIW, the impression I've received of Mensa from members in NZ and
Australia matches Peter Moylan's description - a social group for
those whose regular social group doesn't properly appreciate word
games, logic puzzles and philosophical debates. Those of us who
already _have_ more civilised social groups have little incentive to
join.
--
----------------------------------------------
Phil Anderson *** ha...@sloth.southern.co.nz
----------------------------------------------
"No-one is equal to anyone else!"
Chris Malcolm
In article <67k4k5$qe$1...@aziraphale.demon.co.uk> mba...@iee.org (Mark Baker) writes:
>In article <67jbna$9...@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net>,
> "Gwen Lenker" <gale...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>> Mensa accepts applicants who score in the 98th percentile on a
>> standardized intelligence test -- that's one in every 50 of the
>No it doesn't, I think it accepts applicants who score in the 99th or higher
>percentile. Allowing those who came in the top 3% of the population but not
>in the top 2% would be really wierd.
When discuss positions in distribution curves in terms of percentages it
is conventional to consider the 98th as including the 99th, and so on,
otherwiase you get tangled up in this sort of silly pedantry.
>> The International Society for Philosophical Enquiry (ISPE), the
>> Triple Nine Society, and the One-in-a-Thousand Society require a
>> score in the 99.9th percentile or higher. (one in one thousand -- IQ
>> 150)
>To discuss their membership you can't use the word percentile at all.
Yes you can. The use of non-integral percentiles is very well
established.
--
Chris Malcolm c...@dai.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 650 3085
Department of Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh University
5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK DoD #205
Ahti Eric Rovainen
[crossposted to rec.org.mensa to traumatise them]
Steve Barnard (st...@megafauna.com) wrote:
: Is anyone else besides me annoyed at the self-congradulatory elitism of
: Mensa? Just who do they think they are? The whole premise of the
: organization is "I'm smarter than you."
Nobody is stupider than a Mensa member. I always scored in the
top 1-2% of those inane standardised tests (without trying BTW),
which would get me admitted automatically, but I would NEVER join
such a sissy group.
The idiot savant in character in "Rain Man" is somewhat like a Mensa
member, but different in that he was a nice guy, while Mensa dorks are
insecure, vindictive, socially inept snob-wannabees.
Fact: rec.org.mensa is the 2nd easiest newsgroup to troll on Usenet
(alt.aol-sucks is the easiest). Check Dejanews for my "Femme fatale"
Kiralynne's posts there - she had no problem manipulating them and
getting them to fall for her trolls hook, line, and sinker!
I like that 1992 Married With Children episode where the Bundy
kids infiltrate a Mensa-type geek organisation and beat the hell
out of the nerds "Let's revert to the pecking order of highschool!"
It's fun to crash the world view of Mensa geeks. They're full of
delusions and rationalisations invented during their loads of spare
time as they sat at home while the people with lives were out and
about improving their people skills. Mensa members are usually
socially retarded and easy to provoke emotionally; it's fun to
cause them nervous breakdowns and let them know their low position
in real life. Mensa members build themselves up by inventing
delusions about others, thus when you expose truths to refute their
delusions, the Mensa twat is traumatised.
Mensa members only do well on tests because they focus 100% of their
mental energy on inane rote memorization of obsolete Eurocentric
vocabulary. Anyone with common sense would not waste his/her brain
keeping such trivial nonsense inside; they'd know to consult a
dictionary, encyclopedia, math formula book, etc, in the unlikely
event they needed such info. Smart people might put a few words
in short-term memory if needed for a class, then expunge them a
minute after their final exam is over, but only an anal-retentive would
remember those useless nuggets of trivial abstract "knowledge".
In America, tax dollars are often wasted on scholarships paid for
by men who do REAL work, the taxpayer scholarships based on scores
on tests biased in favor of stupid rich/white/Jewish dweebs with
no social life, who have no job use in the real world (except maybe
as target practice! <g>) All public-funded scholarships based on
test scores should be ABOLISHED!
Don't believe me? Visit rec.org.mensa and troll them! The easiest
way to bait them is to explain flaws in standardised tests. They'll
invariably assume you don't like standardized tests beuause you did
poorly on them, whereupon you can say you finished in the top 1-2%
without trying, but because you know you're smart, you have no need
to join, and would not want to hang out with ugly pretentious dweebs
anyway. (this paragraph does just that because I xposted the article
to rec.org.mensa).
I remember the Book of Lists had a test like the one at the start of this
thread: 10 supposedly hard-to-pronounce words (data, Carribean, etc), and
said anyone who gets all ten right has an IQ of 200. I got all 10 right
at age 10 or so. Does that mean I'm a genius? No (though I am for
different reasons totally unrelated to that), it means I spent too much
time with inane academic issues at age 10 (in my defense, this was at a
time when American culture was really messed up: disco, bad fashion, etc,
and I had the good taste to avoid mainstream white American culture
of the time).
N.Mitchum
[mail&post]
Brian J Goggin wrote to >>Gwen Lenker :
-----
> [...]
>
> >Or at least explain "standard deviation". That one's had me puzzled
> >for ages.
>
> Sheep.
>.....
Except in Ireland. There, it's simply called "standard."
--- NM
Mailed copies of replies always appreciated. (Mailers: drop HINTS.)
Thomas Schenk
Justme® wrote:
> On Tue, 23 Dec 1997 16:34:45 -0800, spam...@merriewood.com (Mimi
> Kahn) wrote:
>
> >On 23 Dec 1997 18:01:49 GMT, ah...@mail1.i1.net (Ahti Eric Rovainen)
> >wrote:
> >
> >Troll alert.
>
> <sarcasm>
>
> Well my, my, my, isn't *this* a fine coincidence? First, Aman posts
> tripe written by Mr. Rovainen, and *poof*! Ahti shows up in aue!
One may alternatively posit that Mr. Rovainen may read
alt.usage.english postings, and yet not feel a pressing need
to respond to every item (unlike some people we know).
Newsgroups are not really privileged or classified
information, you know. I find it interesting that there are
those select few who feel that a usenet group somehow
with time becomes a sacrosanct realm, off limits to those who
would not maintain that level of decorum that those same few
might fancy.
Best regards,
Tom
--
*******************
Dr Thomas M Schenk
Laguna Beach, California
hesp...@clark.net
In rec.org.mensa Ahti Eric Rovainen <ah...@mail1.i1.net> wrote:
[total garbage, most snipped....]
: on tests biased in favor of stupid rich/white/Jewish dweebs
Ahhhhh!
The true agenda emerges from the dung heap, as another pathetic
antisemitic retard exposes himself in public.
*plonk*
Justme®
>On 23 Dec 1997 18:01:49 GMT, ah...@mail1.i1.net (Ahti Eric Rovainen)
>wrote:
>
>Troll alert.
<sarcasm>
Well my, my, my, isn't *this* a fine coincidence? First, Aman posts
tripe written by Mr. Rovainen, and *poof*! Ahti shows up in aue!
</sarcasm>
--Ginny
alt.aol-sucks Troll Patrol
╓╓╓╓╓╓╓╓╓╓╓╓
"I've never claimed to be sane :) . "
--Socky Moldberg, as posted in thread "Re: top ten isp's" 12/16/97
remove TRULY to reply
Ahti Eric Rovainen
This is a SIMULATED reply to the so-called "Troll Patrol". Most of
them are in my killfile (because so many are on mindspring, they
are swept away in one efficient entry: *mindspring* ) ...
: > On Tue, 23 Dec 1997 16:34:45 -0800, 59...@merriewood.com (Mimi
: > Kahn) wrote:
[snip useless drivel by Mrs. Dick A. Goodman]
: > Well my, my, my, isn't *this* a fine coincidence? First, Aman posts
: > tripe written by Mr. Rovainen, and *poof*! Ahti shows up in aue!
The Goodman^H^H^H^H^H^H^HKahn household has a phrase "mind rape" to
describe telling someone WHY they say what they say. By trying to
tell others why I made a post in a.u.e., it seems the Troll Patrol
is attempting "mind rape" against me, thus we're justified to engage in
any type of rape against them!
(the following is a parody of Mimi's trite name-dropping and
exposure of family secrets of that person who was called "Don")
BTW, an interesting anecdote about the Goodmans. Mrs. Kahn (Mimi's
mother) suffered from senile dementia. I always admired the
Goodmans for treating her as a typical family member (actually,
everyone else in the family is demented, so that's why they do it!),
and for not hiding Naomi's mother's condition (Naomi has or had a
poem by her mother about apples).
Nobody throws stones in glass houses more than the Troll Patrol,
and it's easy to make their remarks come back to bite them in the
arse!
Steve Barnard
Polar wrote:
>
> On Tue, 23 Dec 1997 20:20:22 -0800, spam...@merriewood.com (Mimi
> Kahn) wrote:
>
> >On Tue, 23 Dec 1997 19:37:21 -0800, Thomas Schenk <tmsc...@pol.net>
> >wrote:
>
> [...]
> >
> >That doesn't mean that I can't regret the passing of the civility I
> >found here when I first downloaded the accumulated posts in aue.
>
> I truly believe that civility can be restored, but it will require a
> concerted effort to IGNORE the perturbing elements who -- as has been
> pointed out by others -- can flourish only if they get the feedback
> they so eagerly crave.
Sure, I can ignore Mimi. Just what did she do to get all these people
so mad at her?
Steve Barnard
Ahti Eric Rovainen
hesp...@clark.net wrote:
: In rec.org.mensa Ahti Eric Rovainen wrote:
: [total garbage, most snipped....]
Translation: my remarks crashed the world-view and shot down
delusions held by a Mensa dweeb or Mensa wannabee (I'm assuming
he/she/it read the post from rec.org.mensa because of the above
attribution).
: : on tests biased in favor of stupid rich/white/Jewish dweebs
:
: Ahhhhh!
: The true agenda emerges from the dung heap, as another pathetic
: antisemitic retard exposes himself in public.
^^^^^^^^^^^ ^^^^^^
Assuming you imply "antisemitic" as bad behavior, your attempt at
name-calling is an oxymoron. Actual sufferers of mental retardation
tend to be very nice, do they not? Thus if I were retarded and
antisemitic, "antisemitic" would almost have to be non-malicious.
In reality, I'm neither antisemitic nor retarded. Assuming one
cannot be both a retard and a genius, I'm not retarded because I
automatically qualify as a genius by Mensa's inane "standard".
Literally speaking, "anti-Semitic" means negative toward actual
Semites, a group including Moslem Arabs and the original (nonwhite)
Jews of the Middle East. The pro-Jewish bias in stardardized tests
is for AshkeNAZIc (Eastern Europe, mostly Russia and Poland) Jews
with no relation whatsoever to the original "real" Jews. Thus
my remark shows nothing against actual Semites. Also, exposing a
test as cultrally biased is not sufficient for harboring bigotry
against any of the groups for which the tests are biased. You
could say the taxpayer scholarships being unfairly given to the
groups favored by the bias would make me happier if anyone from that
group died and thus lessened the burden of my tax dollars, but that
reasoning could be used against any "favored" group, not just Jews.
Furthermore, I listed Jewish on equal footing with rich and white
in showing socio-culture bias in tests. Why would you assume
Jewish is the only motivation? Why not say I'm trying to bash
Caucasians or rich people? The reason: you're a hypersensitive,
whiny, ADL-style prick who cries "anti-Semite!", "Nazi!", and other
gratuitous names when negative truths are exposed about you. Because
of your wolf-crying about anti-semitism, I'm proud to say I'd acquit
anyone of an _actual_ hate crimes against you. You're not "God's
Chosen People", you're not the "Master Race", and burning your
silly candles for the next 8 days does nothing to justify the mass
murder of many good Gentiles (ditto for Passover, Purim, and the
other Jewish holidays that celebrate war).
Fact: not only are standardised tests culturally biased in favor
of Jews, the Jewish lack of social interaction allows them to waste
more time in trite "academic" pursuits such as spending thousands of
hours preparing for tests no real-world employers care about (and
every year, colleges care less about them).
: *plonk*
Of course you can killfile my posts to avoid being traumatised
and having your delusional world-view crashed, but others will post
the same points as I do, so your breakdown is inevitable. If you
are reading this directly, you're a liar for saying you killfiled
me, or an ignoramous for not knowing what "*plonk*" means. Either
way, you lose.
People with lives ++, Mensa 0.
Justme®
On 24 Dec 1997 16:24:26 GMT, ah...@mail1.i1.net (Ahti Eric Rovainen)
attempted to flame:
>This is a SIMULATED reply
Simulated? Looks like an actual reply to me.
>
>: > On Tue, 23 Dec 1997 16:34:45 -0800, 59...@merriewood.com (Mimi
>: > Kahn) wrote:
>
>[snip useless drivel by Mrs. Dick A. Goodman]
>
>: > Well my, my, my, isn't *this* a fine coincidence? First, Aman posts
>: > tripe written by Mr. Rovainen, and *poof*! Ahti shows up in aue!
After so many years of polluting usenet, one would think that you know
how to properly quote and attribute. I wrote the above, not Mimi.
I will not engage you in mindless flaming here in aue. If you
*really* want to know what I think of you, go post in alt.aol-sucks.
Geoff Butler
Chris Malcolm <c...@dai.ed.ac.uk> writes:
>In article <67k4k5$qe$1...@aziraphale.demon.co.uk> mba...@iee.org (Mark Baker)
>writes:
>>In article <67jbna$9...@mtinsc05.worldnet.att.net>,
>> "Gwen Lenker" <gale...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
>
>>> Mensa accepts applicants who score in the 98th percentile on a
>>> standardized intelligence test -- that's one in every 50 of the
>
>>No it doesn't, I think it accepts applicants who score in the 99th or higher
>>percentile. Allowing those who came in the top 3% of the population but not
>>in the top 2% would be really wierd.
>
>When discuss positions in distribution curves in terms of percentages it
>is conventional to consider the 98th as including the 99th, and so on,
>otherwiase you get tangled up in this sort of silly pedantry.
When I learnt this stuff, a percentile was a point on the scale, not a
region. To me, the 98th percentile is the value beyond which 98 percent
of samples fall, not the set of samples beyond this point, not the set
of samples which exceed 98% of other samples when rounded down to zero
places of decimals.
I consider it incorrect to refer to "in the 98th percentile", so a
discussion about whether that means '98 and above' or '98 up to but not
including 99' is meaningless, because it doesn't mean anything at all.
Also, the point interpretation of 'percentile' doesn't preclude
fractional, real, or transcendental percentiles.
On the other hand, of course, it may be a pondsidal difference, of the
terminology may have changed since I learnt sadistics^Wstats, or it may
just be imprecise osmosis of jargon into the language, and serves it
right too.
-ler
H Gilmer
Earle Jones (ejo...@wco.com) wrote:
: >> > Is anyone else besides me annoyed at the self-congradulatory elitism of
: >> > Mensa?
: Mensa represents that set of people who spell congratulatory without a "d".
Nope. Math/science geeks can be incredibly bad spellers, and Mensa
has plenty of 'em.
So, is "Mensa" another one of those words that is pretty much
guaranteed to start a flame war?
Hg
Brian J Goggin
On Tue, 23 Dec 1997 12:01:26 -0800, "N.Mitchum"
<HINTS...@mail.lafn.org> wrote:
[mail&post]
[...]
>Brian J Goggin wrote to >>Gwen Lenker :
>-----
>> [...]
>>
>> >Or at least explain "standard deviation". That one's had me puzzled
>> >for ages.
>>
>> Sheep.
>>.....
>
>Except in Ireland. There, it's simply called "standard."
Jealousy will get you nowhere.
bjg
Ahti Eric Rovainen
Chris Malcolm (c...@dai.ed.ac.uk) wrote:
: In article <67uv29$9c3$1...@geraldo.cc.utexas.edu> gil...@mail.take.this.out.utexas.edu writes:
: >Earle Jones (ejo...@wco.com) wrote:
:
: >: Mensa represents that set of people who spell congratulatory without a "d".
:
: >Nope. Math/science geeks can be incredibly bad spellers, and Mensa
: >has plenty of 'em.
: Surveys of the undergraduate studenty population at a number of British
: universities in the 60s found that Maths students on average tended to
: spell better, have a wider vocabulary, have a better understanding of
: complex grammaticial construction, and to be more knowledgeable of
: modern literature than students of English. In fact the usual ranking of
: English language skills was Philosophy, Maths, Law, and only then
: English. Have similar surveys been made in America?
FWIW, the university I attended has a median English SAT of over 600 for
most entering engineering class years. The university's median English
SAT is 50-100 points lower for liberal arts students, and probably much
lower for business and fine arts. The Engineering dean brags about
this in his speech to new Engineering students. Also, a much higher
percentage of Engineering students placed out of English Composition
than liberal arts students.
Of course engineers have a much bigger math SAT difference over liberal
arts students, not that ability to do junior high algebra and geometry
predicts one's ability to do higher maths, as many students "hit a wall"
at Calc 2, Diffy-Q, etc, and many people's math skills peak at age 16 or
so, then worsen with age. Thus many liberal arts kids who did great on
math SAT struggle with Calc while the engineers are more likely to do
well in higher math, so the math difference is much higher than the
SAT indicates (as I've said, SAT is almost totally worthless, but SAT
is a measurement listed every year in the "Alumni, send us $$$$$$$$$!"
letters, and someone asked for findings of math/sci types doing better
than liberal arts types in the USA).
The engineering students' higher scores are more impressive if you
note the higher percentage of international students in engineering.
Despite a much higher % of students with English as a 2nd language,
engineers still score higher. OTOH, you could argue the engineers'
superior logic and intuition allow them to get English questions
right w/o knowing the actual words (through root words, elimination
of impossible choices in multiple guess problems, etc), so their
high scores are somewhat of a "hack job".
The fact that math/sci students do better than liberal arts students
on English tests makes National Merit's double-weight of English PSAT
less annoying, but still it's a disgrace if tax $ fund Nat'l Merit
based in inane culturally-biased tests that have nothing to do with
intelligence or future academic success. I'm lucky about the English
double weight; if they had been weighted equally, I would have been a
Semifinalist and wasted tons of time writing essays (pressured by
school officials claiming a Nat'l Merit scholarship is worth pursuing),
but because they doubled English, I was "only" Commended (top 2%), and
didn't waste any time applying and writing essays.
Anyway, engineering/science/math types are capable of perfect grammar,
spelling, English comprehension, etc, when it's important (such as
wording things unambiguously and concisely in technical writing).
However, often we need to allocate more thinking for the math and
logic, so when it's not important to have perfect spelling or grammar,
we don't care if we make spelling/grammar errors. Usenet is an ideal
place to not care about such errors. <g>
colf...@minn.net
On Fri, 26 Dec 1997 12:01:39 GMT, b...@wordwrights.ie (Brian J Goggin)
wrote:
>>> >Or at least explain "standard deviation". That one's had me puzzled
>>> >for ages.
>>>
>>> Sheep.
>>>.....
>>
>>Except in Ireland. There, it's simply called "standard."
>
>Jealousy will get you nowhere.
Ah, synchronicity. Just as I read the lines above, a character on "A
Prairie Home Companion," to which I am listening, said, "I have to see
a man about a sheep." That would be our Brian, I'll wager.
Best wishes,
Carol Kennedy
colf...@minn.net
Albert Marshall
In article <67i5p0$1...@snews1.zippo.com>, Jonathan Mason
<j...@sunline.net> writes
>Seriously, though, I had a fellow lodger once who was a member of Mensa.
>The last I heard of him he had been discharged from his job as a
>dishwasher in an old folks home for persistent oversleeping past 11:45
>a.m. I'm sure he would have known congolomeration.
>
The only person I've ever known who claimed to be a member of Mensa was
als the only person I have ever seen *literally* bore someone to tears.
(And I mean that "literally" literally.)
(And I know I shouldn't start a sentence with "and".
--
Albert Marshall
Executive French
Language Training for Businesses in Kent
01634 400902
Ram Randhawa
: > (And I know I shouldn't start a sentence with "and".
: Isn't doing that acceptable these days..?
No. But it's often done anyhow. So I can understand why you'd think
it was acceptable. And just to even the score, let me add a closing
bracket and take away two periods from this thread.
Ram Randhawa
Robert Lieblich
Paul Cook wrote:
> mix present and past tenses in a sentence, split an infinitive, or
> place a comma to the right of a closing quotation mark.
>
> But the very best writers concur that it ain't so!
I'm beginning to wonder if we need some sort of indication -- other than
a smiley -- that irony is being committed. Because no matter how
obvious the irony may seem to the author (and most readers), there's
invariably someone who misses the point.
Would "<irony alert>" do?
Bob Lieblich
N.Mitchum
Robert Lieblich wrote:
-----
> I'm beginning to wonder if we need some sort of indication -- other than
> a smiley -- that irony is being committed. Because no matter how
> obvious the irony may seem to the author (and most readers), there's
> invariably someone who misses the point.
>
> Would "<irony alert>" do?
What would be the point? You'd merely be murdering humor for the
benefit of a few thick-wits. Let irony stand on its own.
Bill Baldwin
N.Mitchum wrote wrote:
>Robert Lieblich wrote:
>-----
>> I'm beginning to wonder if we need some sort of indication -- other than
>> a smiley -- that irony is being committed. Because no matter how
>> obvious the irony may seem to the author (and most readers), there's
>> invariably someone who misses the point.
>>
>> Would "<irony alert>" do?
>>.....
>
>What would be the point? You'd merely be murdering humor for the
>benefit of a few thick-wits. Let irony stand on its own.
Come on, Mitchum! He was joking. Sheesh.
Bill Baldwin
Paul Cook
Truly Donovan
On Mon, 29 Dec 1997 22:22:14 -0500, Robert Lieblich
<lieb...@erols.com> wrote:
>I'm beginning to wonder if we need some sort of indication -- other than
>a smiley -- that irony is being committed. Because no matter how
>obvious the irony may seem to the author (and most readers), there's
>invariably someone who misses the point.
>
>Would "<irony alert>" do?
No, that would spoil the entertainment I get from those who *didn't
get it*. (Even on the occasions when that includes myself, after I
get past the initial "Oh, shit.")
--
Truly Donovan
reply to truly at lunemere dot com
Ram Randhawa
Paul Cook (c...@plantaganet.com) wrote:
: >: > (And I know I shouldn't start a sentence with "and".
: >
: >: Isn't doing that acceptable these days..?
: >
: >No. But it's often done anyhow. So I can understand why you'd think
: >it was acceptable. And just to even the score, let me add a closing
: >bracket and take away two periods from this thread.
: And I suppose you think that one should never dangle a preposition,
: mix present and past tenses in a sentence, split an infinitive, or
: place a comma to the right of a closing quotation mark.
: But the very best writers concur that it ain't so!
Well, friend Paul, between you and me, I agree. My last post was supposed
to be funny. Okay -- I won't quit my day job.
If breaking a rule or convention of grammar, usage, or spelling enables
me to better convey an idea or emotion, I won't hesitate to do it. What
is "acceptable"? Any text that successfully conveys what its author
intended it to convey to the highest percentage of readers using the
fewest words. (an off the cuff definition)
An editor I once worked with wanted to change the end of an editorial
from: "And I guess that's just the world we live in." to "That's just
world in which we live." Loses a lot, I think. I fought to keep it as
written, but lost -- unthinking application of rules is to this day a pet
peeve of mine.
Would you agree, however, that in the majority of cases where these
"rules" are broken, it is done not purposefully but through sloppiness?
Regards,
Ram Randhawa
Steve MacGregor
bas <b...@cybernexus.demon.co.uk> wrote in article
<47ffc5...@cybernexus.demon.co.uk>...
<<Isn't doing that acceptable these days..?>>
Yes, but ending a sentence with two periods and a question mark is
not. Cut it out.
--
(Reply to SPMacGregor at NetValue dot Net)
---------------------------------------------------------
Whom are you going to call? GRAMMAR BUSTERS!!!
---------------------------------------------------------
N Mitchum
"Bill Baldwin" wrote concerning >>>Robert Lieblich :
-----
>>> Would "<irony alert>" do?
>>
>>What would be the point? You'd merely be murdering humor for the
>>benefit of a few thick-wits. Let irony stand on its own.
>
>Come on, Mitchum! He was joking. Sheesh.
In which case, Baldwin, I am the thick-wit and you just killed the
joke for him. What, though, if he was not joking or being ironic?
--- NM [real address : aj...@lafn.org]
Paul Cook
ra...@unixg.ubc.ca (Ram Randhawa) wrote:
>Well, friend Paul, between you and me, I agree. My last post was supposed
>to be funny. Okay -- I won't quit my day job.
My apologies. You and the other posters are right -- I read too
fast and missed the joke (not to mention the the whole preceding
thread).
Robert Lieblich
Put away the rubber hose, guys. I'm not telling.
Bob Lieblich
Robert Lieblich
Ram Randhawa wrote:
>
> Paul Cook (c...@plantaganet.com) wrote:
>
> : >: > (And I know I shouldn't start a sentence with "and".
> : >
> : >: Isn't doing that acceptable these days..?
> : >
> : >No. But it's often done anyhow. So I can understand why you'd think
> : >it was acceptable. And just to even the score, let me add a closing
> : >bracket and take away two periods from this thread.
>
> : And I suppose you think that one should never dangle a preposition,
> : mix present and past tenses in a sentence, split an infinitive, or
> : place a comma to the right of a closing quotation mark.
>
> : But the very best writers concur that it ain't so!
>
> to be funny. Okay -- I won't quit my day job.
>
> me to better convey an idea or emotion, I won't hesitate to do it. What
> is "acceptable"? Any text that successfully conveys what its author
> intended it to convey to the highest percentage of readers using the
> fewest words. (an off the cuff definition)
>
> An editor I once worked with wanted to change the end of an editorial
> from: "And I guess that's just the world we live in." to "That's just
> world in which we live." Loses a lot, I think. I fought to keep it as
> written, but lost -- unthinking application of rules is to this day a pet
> peeve of mine.
>
> Would you agree, however, that in the majority of cases where these
> "rules" are broken, it is done not purposefully but through sloppiness?
I'd certainly agree with this last proposition, along with much of what
precedes it.
During my abortive and not-very-successful attempts to teach other
lawyers how to write English (somthing the average lawyer does only
intermittently at best; what he/she writes the rest of the time is best
left unlabeled), I decreed that Rule One was "Get your point across" and
that all other rules should be subordinated to that one. In fact, my
top ten rules were actually nine, because I declared that you didn't
need a Rule Two (or, really, any others) if you could always follow Rule
One.
How hard is it to follow Rule One? Consider the post I have quoted
above and the sub-thread I started on "<irony alert>." Who is
responsible when someone doesn't get the joke -- the reader or the
writer?
Bob Lieblich
Bill Baldwin
N Mitchum wrote in message <68b9tq$25me$1...@newssvr04-int.news.prodigy.com>...
>"Bill Baldwin" wrote concerning >>>Robert Lieblich :
>-----
>>>> Would "<irony alert>" do?
>>>
>>>What would be the point? You'd merely be murdering humor for the
>>>benefit of a few thick-wits. Let irony stand on its own.
>>
>>Come on, Mitchum! He was joking. Sheesh.
>>.....
>
>In which case, Baldwin, I am the thick-wit and you just killed the
>joke for him. What, though, if he was not joking or being ironic?
Are you serious?
--
Bill Baldwin
Ram Randhawa
N Mitchum (KSG...@prodigy.com) wrote:
: >>> Would "<irony alert>" do?
: >>
: >>What would be the point? You'd merely be murdering humor for the
: >>benefit of a few thick-wits. Let irony stand on its own.
: >
: >Come on, Mitchum! He was joking. Sheesh.
:
: In which case, Baldwin, I am the thick-wit and you just killed the
: joke for him. What, though, if he was not joking or being ironic?
Now hang on -- I thought Baldwin was having us on when he said Lieblich
was joking. Of course, it's entirely possible that Mitchum was pulling
our legs just now, and only pretending to be serious.
I think I'll go lie down.
I'm joshing, of course. But not about the going to lie down -- that seems
a like a good idea.
Ram Randhawa
Mike Barnes
In alt.usage.english, Robert Lieblich <lieb...@erols.com> spake
thuswise:
>Who is
>responsible when someone doesn't get the joke -- the reader or the
>writer?
Why am I not surprised that a lawyer seems to assume that "someone is
responsible"?
:-)
--
-- Mike Barnes, Stockport, England.
-- If you post a response to Usenet, please *don't* send me a copy by e-mail.
Chris Malcolm
Robert Lieblich <lieb...@erols.com> writes:
>Who is
>responsible when someone doesn't get the joke -- the reader or the
>writer?
Very funny :-)
--
Chris Malcolm c...@aifh.ed.ac.uk +44 (0)131 650 3085
Department of Artificial Intelligence, Edinburgh University
5 Forrest Hill, Edinburgh, EH1 2QL, UK DoD #205
"The mind reigns, but does not govern" -- Paul Valery
Robert Lieblich
> >responsible when someone doesn't get the joke -- the reader or the
> >writer?
>
> responsible"?
Hey, at least I didn't say "guilty."
Bob Lieblich
Padraig Breathnach
Robert Lieblich wrote:
> >
> > Why am I not surprised that a lawyer seems to assume that "someone is
> > responsible"?
>
> Hey, at least I didn't say "guilty."
>
PB
Ralph M Jones
Bill Baldwin wrote:
> N.Mitchum wrote wrote:
> >Robert Lieblich wrote:
> >-----
> >> I'm beginning to wonder if we need some sort of indication -- other than
> >> a smiley -- that irony is being committed. Because no matter how
> >> obvious the irony may seem to the author (and most readers), there's
> >> invariably someone who misses the point.
> >>
> >> Would "<irony alert>" do?
> >>.....
> >
> >What would be the point? You'd merely be murdering humor for the
> >benefit of a few thick-wits. Let irony stand on its own.
>
> Come on, Mitchum! He was joking. Sheesh.
Well why didn't he say so?
--
"Algorithmic" is an oxymoron.
- rmj