Adam Cadre ([info]adamcadre) wrote,
@ 2009-05-31 23:59:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend  Next Entry
http://adamcadre.ac
May 2009 minutiae posted.

(17 comments) - (Post a new comment)


[info]inkylj
2009-06-01 05:55 am UTC (link)
[info]lpsmith's wife also has a bell pepper allergy (as you no doubt recall). You guys can form a club.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]adamcadre
2009-06-01 07:07 am UTC (link)
Already I have discovered that it is well-nigh impossible to go to restaurants if you are a vegetarian and don't eat bell peppers. At least in Victoria.

On the other hand, I have twice had small quantities of bell pepper since my discovery and the results have been manageable, so maybe I just need to avoid megadoses.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]lpsmith
2009-06-01 05:28 pm UTC (link)
Heh, right, though with her it's an upset stomach.

Also, of course, you really needed to record what you had when you *didn't* have a headache afterwards as the negative control. As you say, if you'd been eating out a lot, you might have had bell peppers all the time, so the correlation could be a function of having bell peppers at every meal rather than just those meals before headaches. (Though if you're pretty sure those were all your bell pepper meals, you're probably good.)

Also also, I also say 'fack'. Which I swear actually sounds slightly different in my head than 'faq' (the sound of the 'a' changes) but is close enough.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Anonymous)
2009-06-01 11:17 am UTC (link)
I think I've usually seen it spelled "pizza margherita".

PS That 2/3 vote leaves me speechless.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]adamcadre
2009-06-01 07:37 pm UTC (link)
Yeah, different pizzerias spell it different ways. But if it'll keep you from envisioning a blended beverage of ice, tequila, tomatoes and mozzarella, I'll change it.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

(Anonymous)
2009-06-01 01:10 pm UTC (link)
Using .6666, wouldn't the deciding vote need to be 138, or is that why you're considering suicide?

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]nothings
2009-06-01 04:14 pm UTC (link)
The correct way to compute 2/3rds of 206 is to compute '206*2/3'.

The fact that nobody involved knows this is presumably the inducing fact.

But your point about rounding-up is also true. Perhaps if they tried computing '137/206' and comparing it to 2/3rds they would understand why rounding 137 is not the right thing to do... but maybe not.

(One can also keep the calculator out of it by asking '137/206 >= 2/3'? and then multiplying through the various integers and finding the question is the same as '411 >= 412'?)

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]sargent
2009-06-01 08:53 pm UTC (link)
The clever no-calculator version someone suggested to me on Twitter post-posting is to ask "did more than twice the people vote for as against it?"

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]nothings
2009-06-01 09:10 pm UTC (link)
I actually rejected that approach when I wrote up that comment -- when you're given for/against numbers, that's a lot handier to compute, but I realized it would suck for proving to some vote talliers that it was the correct, valid rule. They need to see '2/3rds' in there somewhere.

And it's easier to be led astray; e.g. assuming the law is phrased as 'at least two/thirds', than your quote should actually be 'did at least twice the people vote for it as against it' rather than 'more than twice'.

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]sargent
2009-06-01 09:30 pm UTC (link)
Assuming it's worded correctly, I'm not sure it's any easier to be led astray by that than by the approach of removing the fractions: sure, you have "2/3" in there somewhere, but if we're talking about mathematical misapprehension at the level described in the article, either way will look like magic.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]katsaris
2009-06-02 05:04 am UTC (link)
That would require no "present" votes.

It's basic arithmetic -- if one wants to calculate 2/3s of somethings they ought multiply by 2 and divide by three.

0.66 or 0.6666 or 0.6666666666666 are nowhere involved. They may just as well multiply by 0.7 if they want to go with decimals.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]simon_stylites
2009-06-01 02:41 pm UTC (link)
I also say "fack".

(Reply to this) (Thread)

(Anonymous)
2009-06-02 06:49 pm UTC (link)
I only say "fack" as part of a title (like Gamefaqs) or if it is already an understood part of the conversation (while pointing at the screen, for example). In vague circumstances I say "frequently asked questions", and I never say "eff ae kew". "Fack" sounds too much like "fact" and has too similar a contextual usage to make it distinct in general conversation.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]shihtzu
2009-06-01 05:35 pm UTC (link)
I say "fack", as in, "Look it up on Gamefacks." I mean, who has the time to spell out an acronym when it's conveniently pronounceable, unlike some ill-considered neologisms I might name?

Also, before hanging the poor bell peppers out to dry (uh, idiomatically), it might do to establish a control group.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

(Anonymous)
2009-06-02 02:05 pm UTC (link)
I also say "gamefacks" when referring to the site. In all other instances I say Ef-Ay-Queue... Don't know why that is. To me, saying "Game-Ef-Ay-Queues" just doesn't feel right, but neither does saying "fack" on its own. maybe its too close to swearing for comfort!

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]ballykissinger
2009-06-03 02:34 am UTC (link)
I say "muh-mor-pegger" a la Zero Punctuation, and generally this results in at least as much confusion as if I started spitting letters at people, or even if I had said "massively multiplayer online roleplaying game." But I find it at least twice as amusing!

But yes, I also say "gamefacks." And otherwise I never have to refer to FAQs.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]dfan
2009-06-02 08:36 pm UTC (link)
Most people I know pronounce it fack.

(Reply to this)

(17 comments) - (Post a new comment)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…