| Author |
Message |
Riddim
Moderator
Joined: 04 Dec 2005
Posts: 7118
Location: Quitting smoking
|
 Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 7:42 am Post subject: |
 |
|
| HuJwang wrote: |
| But keep posting, though. Irony is fun. |
| Article wrote: |
| But because humor is idiosyncratically defined, the researchers said, the results were less conclusive. |
| bdbranch wrote: |
| One writer did state a better example, those lousy idol wannabes. A video of that would make a excellent example. |
|
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
StevieWard
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 12 Jul 2007
Posts: 1383
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 7:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Please sticky Riddims link in the first post in the poker stories forum. It sums up a lot of thew poorer/rigged theorists on here. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drtre1987
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1882
|
| Posted: Wed May 07, 2008 11:23 am Post subject: |
|
|
| HuJwang wrote: |
| drtre1987 wrote: |
| HuJwang, start posting 3-5 page essays explaining your reasoning for every post you make. Your simple moderately sized paragraphs of well constructed, consise explanations simply aren't cutting it. |
Yeah, well your mom isn't cutting it. |
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FAST EDDIE 88
Full House
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 158
Location: Chicago area
|
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 11:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
| And I see what the article discusses in place regularly when you're in a group and it leads to a philosophical or political debate - it's normally the most clueless people who will speak up first, be the loudest or try and be the most convincing (normally through sheer volume rather than logic/fact). While the ones who have a better understanding of the topic will normally sit back and listen to others rant before offering their point of view (if they do at all). This is often especially true in philosophical and religious debates, where the intelligent realise a conclusion can't be reached and therefore aren't interested, while the ignorant keep trying to make everyone else accept their conclusion as correct (because they haven't actually applied enough thought to realise there's no definitive answer). |
I want to tatoo this paragraph to my forhead so everyone I ever meet will read it. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
FAST EDDIE 88
Full House
Joined: 27 Oct 2006
Posts: 158
Location: Chicago area
|
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 12:05 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I used to think that one day poker would die out. I though too many people would realize they suck and not play anymore. And that only the best people would end up playing each other.
Every time I go to one of my local casinos I sit there and wonder where all these morons come from. Day after day they play with seemingly no knowledge of what they should be doing. They ask no questions and show no evidence of trying to learn.
This article helped explain why there will always be stupid people the good players can make money from. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
jamesq70
Straight
Joined: 31 Oct 2007
Posts: 124
|
| Posted: Fri May 09, 2008 3:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I think I've learned more from this thread than i did from the article.
The obvious tests produced obvious results, but people here know how to debate  |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dumwaldo
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 1654
Location: look to the stars
|
| Posted: Sun May 11, 2008 8:07 pm Post subject: |
|
|
When I was 20 years old I knew everything.
When I was 30 years old I knew how much I did not know at 20 years old.
If I participated in this study when I was 20 my results would have matched the conclusions.
If I participated in the study at 30 years old then my results would have deviated from the conclusion.
If I were t participate in the study right now at 38 years old I am quite sure that my results would indicate th exact opposite of the studies conclusion.
So what exactly does a study of a bunch of college kids prove about the general population? The answer is it proves nothing. I could do a study of 3 year olds that concludes the majority of the population drools and it would be accurate by the burden of proof accepted by everybody that accepts this study as relevant.
This is one of the reasons why psychology is NOT an exact science and why any COMPETENT person would absolutely not accept this 'study' as blindly as the supporters in this thread have done so. A COMPETENT person would only accept it if it carried the disclaimer that it is only applicable to 18 to 23 year old people that are educationally centered enough to be attending advanced education institutions.
Basically it should have stated that the results are NOT indicative of the entire population but instead the ARTICLE ignorantly omitted that pertinent information and some of the members here in their blind mob mentality forgot to actually THINK for themselves and realize this.
This thread is about as reliable as a post about online poker being rigged after a sample size of 200 hands. Ironically some of the most vocal members that would denounce a 200 hand sample size have forgone their common sense and accepted this study as if it means something when the reality is it means nothing except privileged young people tend to overestimate themselves.
DW 
BTW
sorry I took so long to get back to this, I was in Atlantic City losing some more money. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 5723
Location: Halifax, NS
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 3:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
afaik the article doesn't mention anything about the age of the participants
nice effort though. you're really good at making even the most trivial subjects seem like life or death matters. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
dumwaldo
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 23 May 2006
Posts: 1654
Location: look to the stars
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 4:57 am Post subject: |
|
|
| HuJwang wrote: |
afaik the article doesn't mention anything about the age of the participants
nice effort though. you're really good at making even the most trivial subjects seem like life or death matters. |
afaik a COMPETENT person would use google and not simply rely on the word of one person that wrote an article in the hopes of selling newspapers.
nice effort though. you're really good at making up drama when it is time for you to say you were wrong.
You already admitted you are 100% uninformed, sans ONE NEWSPAPER ARTICLE so maybe its time for you to do like you should have in the very first post and STFU and let the grown ups with a brain in their head discuss matter that involve cognitive thought. Is abundantly obvious that you are not equiped for such a discussion.
DW |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Blackray
Straight
Joined: 20 Mar 2008
Posts: 111
Location: Bergen, Norway
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 6:10 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dumwaldo wrote: |
| Basically it should have stated that the results are NOT indicative of the entire population but instead the ARTICLE ignorantly omitted that pertinent information and some of the members here in their blind mob mentality forgot to actually THINK for themselves and realize this. |
The article is about incompetent people, not the entire population. Your age example is probably true for many people, but there's still incompetent people at all ages. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 5723
Location: Halifax, NS
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 6:52 am Post subject: |
|
|
| dumwaldo wrote: |
| HuJwang wrote: |
afaik the article doesn't mention anything about the age of the participants
nice effort though. you're really good at making even the most trivial subjects seem like life or death matters. |
afaik a COMPETENT person would use google and not simply rely on the word of one person that wrote an article in the hopes of selling newspapers.
nice effort though. you're really good at making up drama when it is time for you to say you were wrong.
You already admitted you are 100% uninformed, sans ONE NEWSPAPER ARTICLE so maybe its time for you to do like you should have in the very first post and STFU and let the grown ups with a brain in their head discuss matter that involve cognitive thought. Is abundantly obvious that you are not equiped for such a discussion.
DW |
making up drama huh? you're the one who comes into every god damn thread to blast everyone else about how stupid, uninformed, and thoughtless they are, and most of the time you end up looking like a complete idiot. why do you still come here, why do you get off on making these kinds of hostile posts, and why aren't you banned yet? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
bdbranch
Banned
Joined: 13 Mar 2008
Posts: 503
Location: At home wdyt. Btw. I'm not opinionated all the time, umm can you be opinionated when you're asleep
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 10:08 am Post subject: |
|
|
| HuJwang wrote: |
| dumwaldo wrote: |
| HuJwang wrote: |
afaik the article doesn't mention anything about the age of the participants
nice effort though. you're really good at making even the most trivial subjects seem like life or death matters. |
afaik a COMPETENT person would use google and not simply rely on the word of one person that wrote an article in the hopes of selling newspapers.
nice effort though. you're really good at making up drama when it is time for you to say you were wrong.
You already admitted you are 100% uninformed, sans ONE NEWSPAPER ARTICLE so maybe its time for you to do like you should have in the very first post and STFU and let the grown ups with a brain in their head discuss matter that involve cognitive thought. Is abundantly obvious that you are not equiped for such a discussion.
DW |
making up drama huh? you're the one who comes into every god damn thread to blast everyone else about how stupid, uninformed, and thoughtless they are, and most of the time you end up looking like a complete idiot. why do you still come here, why do you get off on making these kinds of hostile posts, and why aren't you banned yet? |
HuJwang, I understand that this is difficult for you but why don't you attempt to actually say something constructive about your apparent point of view instead of this constant stupid & childish flaming. Whether dumwaldo is correct or incorrect, at least he has put forward a constructive viewpoint on the topic. This is something that you appear incapable of doing. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
drtre1987
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 07 Nov 2006
Posts: 1882
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 11:13 am Post subject: |
|
|
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
HuJwang
Forum Blight
Joined: 20 Aug 2006
Posts: 5723
Location: Halifax, NS
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 11:14 am Post subject: |
|
|
| bdbranch wrote: |
HuJwang, I understand that this is difficult for you but why don't you attempt to actually say something constructive about your apparent point of view instead of this constant stupid & childish flaming. Whether dumwaldo is correct or incorrect, at least he has put forward a constructive viewpoint on the topic. This is something that you appear incapable of doing. |
What? dumwaldo just went on another one of his rants like he does all the time on subjects that really aren't important enough to go on rants about. I'm just getting annoyed at him constantly hijacking threads to spew vitriol and inflate his own ego. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
rockycatt
Message Board Junkie
Joined: 03 Jan 2007
Posts: 2638
|
| Posted: Mon May 12, 2008 11:19 am Post subject: Re: Interesting article that I'm posting here for no particular reason |
|
|
| Riddim wrote: |
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/2000/01/18/MN73840.DTL
Please discuss, because I'm too lazy to do it myself. |
i think i was banned for that once  [only a guess though ] |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
FAQ
Search
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
