NBCS V1.7
Bob Donahue
SOMEDAY we'll get V2.0 out! But until then here's V1.7.
Any comments and suggestions can be sent to either of us.
So, tack it up on your wall next to the hankie list!
BBC & JLS2
(the parents of the beast)
P.S. Existence of this classification scheme does NOT state that
this is any sort of exclusive or superior item. If someone wats
to classify Smurfs or CYTs or whatever go for it! If someone
wants to self-classify (Hi Amelia!) go for it! It's just a tool
like a ruler or a computer mouse...
END OF DISCLAIMER --- time for lunch!
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Date: Tue, 12 Dec 89 23:13:05 pst
From: jl...@bearhug.UUCP (Jeff L. Stoner)
Subject: Classification System #473
{{ You know those crazy scientist types... always CLASSIFYING things...
terrible when a bored astro grad student on Thanksgiving
break visits a programmer with a B.S. degree in astronomy who
longs to "get back to it"... }}
/* A classification system for bears, and bear-like men */
/* Version 1.0 11/22/1989 */
/* Authors: rdon...@nmsu.edu and jl...@bearhug.UUCP */
Because "Bears" mean so many things to different people,
because bears come in all shapes and sizes and have different sexual
proclivities, because classified ad prices are SOOOOOO expensive,
we (while eating lunch at a Boulder, Colorado, Wendy's on Thanksgiving
weekend) came up with this incredibly-scientific system to describe bears
and bear-like men.
Since we both have backgrounds in astronomy, we are well-versed in
star and galaxy classification systems, which use prototypes to set the
standards for describing things. Rather than just saying something is of
"Type I" or "Type II" (etc.), it is better to use natural features to describe
an object, in particular as a continuum of a range of features. Such is
the case with bears.
------------- T H E C L A S S I F I C A T I O N S C H E M E -------------
The most obvious characteristic of a bear is understandibly
his facial fur. So, that is the most logical place to begin. Using
a capital "B" to denote "BEAR", we have added a sub-class characterizing
"beard type" which combines a bear's beard's length, thickness, and
overall "keptness", numbered from 0 to 9 and defined in the following
way:
0 - (Little/no beard, or incredibly sparse) Such a beard is
the absolute minimum that could ever be classified as a
beard. We're talking 5-o'clock shadow, here!
1 - (VERY slight beard) This is the kind of beard that people have
who REALLY want to have a beard, but can't grow one.
Or someone who is contantly at the 1-week phase.
2 - (Slight beard) A beard kept VERY short at all times, or
thinned out.
3 - (Thin beard) A beard in all respects but kept thin
and short.
4 - (Mostly full) A beard that is full except for a few noticable
bald spots, or kept trimmed. Example: Rob Bernardo
5 - (Full beard) A full beard not generally trimmed, though not
generally bushy. May have a few bald spots on inspection.
Usually full and roundish beards fall into this category.
Example: Bob Donahue
6 - (Very full) A full beard, not trimmed. May be slightly
bushy but very full. Thick, full beards (moreso than B5's)
are B6's. B6's beards also generally are higher up on
the cheeks than B5's. Example: Jeff Stoner
7 - (Longish/bushy beards) A full beard or slightly thin beard
with longish fur. This beard is not trimmed and does come
away from the chin.
8 - (Very Long Beards) These beards are usually very bushy and
haven't seen clippers for a very long time.
Example: Ken Dykes
9 - (Belt-buckle-grazing long beards) The prototype is ZZ Top.
Need we say more?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Ok... Using this scheme, it shouldn't be hard to narrow a person
down to within 1 sub-class, although occasionally people may fall between
two classes, and then the end result is left up to the person classifying,
or one may use a hybrid designation (for example: B7/4) for those who
vary across time (end of range they spend more time near given first)...
---------- O T H E R C L A S S I F I E R S F O R B E A R S -------------
While beards are a big part of bears, there are other things that
different people take into consideration as to "what makes up a bear",
and things that people like in their bears. So, bearing that in mind
(pun intended) there are other classifications that can/should optionally
follow the "B" designation. There are defined as follows:
f - "The FUR factor". Some bears are particularly hairy about the
rest of their bodies, others INCREDIBLY furry, yet others
though rightfully bears have little or no fur on their
chests, arms, legs, back, butt, etc. So, one of the
following may be added to better describe a bear's fur:
f (default) average expected amount of body fur
f+ above average fur
f++ WAY above average fur
f- below average fur
f-- WAY below average fur--"Nair-smooth to the max!"
t - "the TALLNESS factor". To describe bears that are tall or
short for their frame.
t++ a virtual giant bear
t+ taller than average
t tall but not very tall
t- shorter than average
t-- a bear of very small stature
w - "the WEIGHT factor". For those who perfer their bears more
or less fluffy.
w bear with a tummy
w+ a big boned bear
w++ a round bear/BIG TEDDY bear
w- a thin bear (otters!)
w-- a bony bear
c - "the CUB factor". For the junior up and coming bears.
c cub tendencies
c+ definite cub
c++ complete daddy's boy
c- looks like a cub but isn't
d - "the DADDY factor". For the cubs, etc.
d daddyish tendencies
d+ definite DADDY
d++ DADDY with a vengenance (even his parents call him SIR!)
d- looks like a daddy but isn't
Note there are now also HYBRID classes "cd" and "dc":
cd A cub with "daddy tendencies"... Sort of like
a "grown up cub".
dc A daddy with cub-like tendencies/features.
k - "the KINKY factor"... for those who dare.
k open minded. Might choose SOME things on the "menu"
k+ picks and choose according to likes; willing to consider
new ideas
k++ likes just about EVERYTHING... we mean *EVERYTHING*!!!
k- has definite ABSOLUTE dislikes
k-- totally vanilla
[NB this WAS the "s" factor! "S" is now sort of a
promiscuity/relationship ratio --- s++ very polygamous,
no relationships really desired, s-- strictly monogamous
relationships ONLY (still to be a ratified class!)]
m - "the MUSCLE factor"... for those who like meat on them bones.
m some definition/blue collar
m+ definitely works out or is a ranchhand
m++ Arnold Schwartzineger is that you?
e - "the ENDOWMENT factor"... sometimes a size queen's gotta do
what a size queen's gotta do.
e noteworthy
e+ gets attention
e++ gets complete respect even from straight men
["e" and "m" are only semi-official and may be dropped with V2.0]
h - "the BEHR factor"... for behrs (men without beards but bears).
You might also put a parenthesized number for the "B"
designation to give an idea of WHAT the person would
look like with a beard.
h behr (moustache no beard)
h+ Definite BEHR (moustache no beard)
h- no beard OR moustache! (very rare)
r - "the RUGGED/OUTDOOR factor".
r Spends some time outdoors/camping
r+ Flannel/jeans/C&W really *are* second skin
r++ "Grizzly Adams"
r- prefers indoor-type activities (techie or 3-piece)
r-- never seen outside a building
The following aren't graded, they are just flags attached to the
overall classification:
p - "the peculiar factor"... for the unexplainable.
q - "the *Q* factor"... for people who look like bears, but
"when they open their mouths, yards of chiffon come out"
Plus any SINGLE classification can be marked "v" for variable,
e.g. for those who change their beard type occasionally
but is *mostly* a B6, "B6v", or "?" for those cases where
the trait is assumed but not verifiable.
[Qualifiers to individual traits --- this is patch V1.7]
In cases where you are guessing, append "?". In cases where you
are not completely sure, use ":". In cases where the
particular attribute is as good as a prototype use "!"
So, any "f++!" bears or "d+! f++! r+" bears can reprto to
me IMMEDIATELY! :-)
NOTE: None of the classification materials in any way suggests a ranking or
value judgement, in terms of what constitutes a "better" bear. Every
person has their own favorite type!
----------------- S O M E S P E C I F I C E X A M P L E S ----------------
We classify each other...
Bob Donahue: B4/5 c+ f s- w ("No, I'm not REALLY a c++")
Jeff Stoner: B6 s+ f+ w r ("What, not r+...?!?!")
A sampling of our joint classifications of other mailing list folks...
Steve Dyer: B5/7 d f++ t- w++ s-- (the shoulders get the f++)
Ken Dykes: B8 s++ f+ w- t e+
"Furr" Madison: B4 c s++ f+ w- t+ e (or should it be s+++?)
Rob Bernardo: B4 d t- w- f+ r+
Jay Schuster: B3 c f- s+ w- p?
Bob Rowe: Bh(5) m s+ r+ e (Jeff trying not to put +++'s)
Notables from Bobby...
Wilford Brimley: Bh w++ d+ s? f (OK I'm wishing for an "s")
Hacksaw Jim Duggan: B6 w++ t+ s+? m++
Lyle Alzado: B3 w+ s+? f-- m++ e++ (so I'm told)
model in 4/84 HONCHO: B6 w+ d+? r f+++ <---- an exceptional case
Dan Blocker: Bh- w+ d+ f+ r++ t+
Notables from Jeff...
Dan Seals: B4 r+ d f+? t+ s+? (wishful thinking!)
Randy Owen: B5 r+ f+? w- m e? s++? (more wishful thinking!)
So let's hear some feedback on this! It's been a little quiet around
here lately. While we wait for more to come along, here's an appropriate
classification for the season:
Santa Claus B8 d++ f? t- w++ s--?
Enjoy!!! From half of the states required to make the "Four Corners" exist...
-----------------------------------------------------
Added note: We're still working on this... Some bears
have asked that we extend the system to include "beard parameters
like thickness, length, kemptnmess, etc...., so inevitably "VERSION 2"
will be done... I have run across a bear or two that for me defied
"good classification", mostly because of the beard. So... we'll see.
Have fun!
BBC
()() | BBC a/k/a Bobby bear cub a/k/a Bob Donahue
() ()() | rdon...@arktouros.mit.edu
() () | (and other places)
() |
Gerry Swetsky
B4 f+ t w k+: rv
Thanks, Bobby.
--
============================================================================
| Help stamp out stupid .signature files! Gerry Swetsky |
| vpnet offers callers free access to selected Usenet conferences |
| Home (708)833-8122 vpnet (708)833-8126 lis...@vpnet.chi.il.us |
============================================================================
Bad Bernardo
>A sampling of our joint classifications of other mailing list folks...
>Rob Bernardo: B4 d t- w- f+ r+
Lest someone get the wrong impression (without even having met me), a more
accurate one would be (given that the system is flawed)
Rob Bernardo: B4 dvcv t- w- f+ r+ m+
--
Rob Bernardo, Mt. Diablo Software Solutions
email: r...@mtdiablo.Concord.CA.US
phone: (415) 827-4301
SESP...@ysub.ysu.edu
SC26...@ysub.ysu.edu
Brian (the stud!!!)
Stephanie Moore-Fuller
Thanks for interpreting the bear code to 'the rest of us'. Two
questions remain, one, how about hair on the head, is it a bearish
characteristic, and two, for traits of female bears, does 'average'
refer to the female average, or the male average? Enquiring minds
want to know!!!
stephanie, the pest
B0 f/f- t++/t+ w+/w p r (compared to female avg/male avg)
euc...@lindy.stanford.edu
ga....@forsythe.stanford.edu
ga....@stanford.BITNET