Comment Criterion

Duncan Leave a comment

“But it’s true!”

You’ve certainly heard this defense shortly following a blunt, discourteous or obscene comment. Most of us have a compass inside of us that tells us which comments are acceptable and which ones are not. Though we may have never noticed this compass, it is certainly there, ensuring that our feet remain far from our mouths.

There are members of society who seem to function without this important subconscious device. It’s possible that by some unseen force, genetic or otherwise, they are not equipped with this feature, or perhaps they simply disregard its direction. When a thought manifests in the brain of these unfortunate folk, there is no system of testing through which it must pass in order to exit through the mouth. Example: “Oh my gosh, Melanie, your eyebrows are so bushy!”

You know a person like this, and you can’t understand why they are unable to imagine how others will feel when they speak. Since these people can’t seem to tap into their comment compass, here is a chart to guide them:

This three-dimensional choice matrix illustrates possible conditions when making a comment, indicating whether or not it’s appropriate to proceed. The first dimension (x) represents the attribute being defined in the comment, which could either be positive or negative in nature. A positive attribute would be one that most would consider desirable, such as beauty or skill. The second dimension (y) indicates whether or not the statement is true. The third and final dimension (z) describes the gender of the target of the comment. Although the chart’s accuracy varies depending on cultural convention and expectation, this is undoubtedly an important component.

So according to the chart, telling a girl that she isn’t ugly is not a good idea, even if she’s beautiful, and calling anyone heavy when they are, in fact, overweight is unwise. Pretty simple, huh? Even for us normies, this is probably a good refresher, as our compasses have been known to malfunction now and again.

Now just print this out and keep it in your wallet, or better yet, have T-shirt made up.

Hose & Bucket

Duncan Leave a comment

If someone asked you to fill a bucket with water from a tap, your options for doing this are very limited. You must simply rest the bucket under the tap and allow the water flow into the bucket. But if someone asked you to fill a bucket with water from a hose, how would you do it? Basically, you have two options:

  1. Hold the hose above the bucket, allowing the water to fall a short distance into the bucket. This method can produce splash-back and there is potential for the water to miss the bucket entirely.
  2. Put the hose in the bucket. This method requires less effort, is less messy and does not require you to aim. Since the hose is inside the bucket there is almost no chance that the water will not land in the bucket. Also, since the water is not falling as far, there is little or no splash-back.

So the question is which is the better method for filling the bucket?

The correct answer is that everyone should sit down when they pee. Just because guys have a hose does not mean that the bucket should be filled any differently.

Another consequence of standing while peeing is additional noise. This method is much more audible than sitting and most of us would rather not hear that sound.

Standing also instigates the battle over toilet seat position, which has driven many relationships to ruin.

Just in case it’s not clear, here’s a comparison:

Come on, guys. Put the hose in the bucket.

Better Days

Duncan Leave a comment

Most people don’t like working and would rather spend that time socializing, cultivating a hobby or sleeping (unless you took the red pill). When it comes to booking holidays, many choose to book around weekends and statutory holidays in order to maximize their effectiveness. For example, booking off the Monday after a long weekend, thus stretching the weekend to four days. Some strategies work very well to optimize your time off, while others do not. Let’s find out how to make your vacation feel as long as possible.

First, the obvious statutory conjunction. When a statutory holiday falls near your planned vacation time it is best to bump your vacation up against the statutory holiday – adding that extra day helps a lot. If you are planning on taking four or more days off, you can use what is known as the stat sandwich. This method involves planting your vacation days in the same week as the holiday in order to achieve a full week of total vacation. Combined with the surrounding weekends, we can get nine days off for the price of four. That’s a vacation efficiency rating of 225 per cent!

But what about the question of which days of the week to book off? Some people enjoy several short breaks instead of one or two larger holidays. Often they will book one or two days off at a time so they can stretch out their vacation over several weeks or months. These folks are pretty smart, usually incorporating tactics such as the statutory conjunction, but there is often confusion about which days to choose. So which days of the week are the best days to take off? Here is their ranking in order of worst to best:

Tuesday: A foolish choice. Your weekend stopped on Sunday, then you worked one day and now you get a break? What a waste.

Wednesday: Often attractive, as it appears to break the week in half, but we run into the same problem as with Tuesday. The holidayee may not feel as though they need the day off after only two days of work. This also produces a strange effect where one work week morphs into two smaller, more deadly weeks.

Thursday: Usually underestimated due to its lexographical and locational similarity to Tuesday. You may feel as though Thursday would be a premature and inadequate taste of the weekend, causing Friday to drag on in eternity, but in fact, taking Thursday off serves to accelerate the approach of the weekend. Upon completing the Wednesday shift, an unexpected gift is bestowed, and then the only day remaining is Friday, which usually goes by quickly anyway.

Friday: There was a large debate regarding the supremacy of Friday as the ultimate day to book off of work. This debate was resolved with the election of U.S. President Barack Obama. Friday is a great day to book off work, but its key weakness lies in the sheer delight experienced by empolyees as their Friday shift approaches completion. As the final day of the work week, Friday seems to slide right past us because our attention is so focused on the impending weekend.

Monday: The champagne of days. Truly, if you’re going to book off only one day, make it a Monday. Both Monday and Friday increase the length of the weekend, but unlike Friday, Monday is a work day worthy of dread. A bonus feature of booking off Monday is that it cuts into the week following your vacation, not preceding it. And, as we all know, you eat your dessert after your dinner, not before.

Have an efficient and optimized holiday.

Ash

Duncan Leave a comment

Children often fantasize about living in worlds that they see in movies, television shows, or video games, though adults are not above this method of escaping reality. These worlds are appealing because they offer a clear distinction between right and wrong, a simplified view of the world and they are usually wrapped up nicely with a happy ending. One of the worlds that many children longed to experience was the world of Pokemon. They imagined how awesome it would be to travel around town capturing critters and leveling up their Charmander, then roasting some poor kid’s Bulbasaur. Vine Whip ftl.

Now before you allow your thoughts to wander back to this imaginary world, you should know something. This world does exist! You can choose your companion, feed him, train him, teach him to fight. Then, once he is strong, you can battle other people’s pets and enjoy the sweet juicy taste of victory.

It’s called dog fighting.

Dog fighting is almost identical to training and battling with Pokemon, but instead of cute little animals speaking gibberish as they shoot water at each other, we have dogs ripping each other’s throats. Instead of battling at the local Pokemon Gym, fights take place in poorly lit basements on blood-stained concrete. Instead of winning respect of the town for your victories, you win some cash and then get suspended from the NFL, and instead of taking your losing pet to the PokeCenter, you drown or shoot it.

Parents, if you hate dog fighting do not let your children play Pokemon games or watch the television show.

Unit E

Duncan Leave a comment

“The most important unit? It must be Unit A.”

“I don’t think so, friend, I know it’s Unit B.”

“You both are quite mistaken, the answer’s Unit C.”

“A, B and C? All wrong. The choice is clearly D!”

“Can we just stop all this fighting? After all, the most important thing is Unit E.”

Caught

Duncan 1 Comment

Humans are rational creatures that behave irrationally. We do many things that make absolutely no sense, and some of these things can even hurt ourselves and others. A great example of this is the common motorist’s compulsion to exceed the speed limit. We all do it, but why?

It could be a behavioral remnant from our ancestors to keep at the front of the herd to avoid being picked off by predators. It may also be that a cost-benefit analysis determines that the benefit of getting to our destination more quickly outweighs the cost of a potential fine or collision.

Some people say that increased punishment doesn’t discourage crime, since someone planning to rob a bank wouldn’t reconsider if they were to learn of an increase in the minimum sentence for armed robbery. This is because the cost-benefit analysis is usually skewed by emotion or simply doesn’t take place at all. Another example is that people play the lottery.

Increased punishment doesn’t discourage crime, but a serious lack of punishment, or enforcement, can encourage crime. For if the punishment for robbing a bank was a $200.00 fine, or there was only a 1% chance of being caught, it is likely that we would all reach for our sack with a dollar sign on it.

We can see here that the knowledge of likely and significant punishment does discourage certain behavior, to a degree. If, however, we were to graph deterrence and enforcement, the graph would be much more linear. This is because the threat of punishment is empty without enforcement. Likewise, enforcement is meaningless if the punishment is not significant enough to cause offenders to reassess their strategy.

The punishment for speeding is fairly well-suited to the seriousness of the offence, so an increased in punishment likely wouldn’t convince motorists to slow down. The failure is likely in the extreme lack of dispensation of punishment.

It’s true that police are constantly on the road enforcing traffic laws, but how often do speeders get a ticket? What is the ratio of our infractions to tickets received? Though the exact statistics are unknown, it’s likely that each of us breaks traffic laws dozens, if not hundreds of times for each time we’re caught. The solution? Self-policing.

Since police can only catch a fraction of infractions, it only makes sense to allow drivers to collectively dispense punishment on one another. Every person with a valid driver’s license could report other drivers for their infractions and, based on those reports, tickets could be issued. The system would be computerized, online and fully automated, allowing whistleblowers to upload data from their personal computer or mobile device.

The jerk in a big truck who zips past you in a school zone? Reported.

What about the grandma driving into oncoming traffic with her high beams on? Reported.

That guy who keeps reporting you? Reported.

Obviously, there are some difficult details to work out, but once in place this system would increase revenue from traffic fines, clamp down on rampant speeding and free up the police force to tackle more serious matters.

If you don’t like this idea, it means you’re a big smelly speeder.