Seasons

Klato: And Bev, I beg to differ with you on that nerdy mathematician from Numbe3s (also Santa Clause, and 10 Things I Hate About You). It don't work quite like that. I have taught thousands of young ladies in my lifetime and they still majored in psychology, journalism, gen-ed, etc.

Well now, there are two things you need to consider:

(1) I am not like the young ladies you taught. I am only me, (but I am me with a vengence); and

(2) with all respect, you may not have the same blend of hotness and simply nerdy charm as the character in question, though I am sure you have many nice qualities.

No offense. I am sure you inspired your share of students in a variety of ways.

Bev: I've only been here a week.I don't know how just a few words turned into a dissertation on my sex appeal and my teaching skills. Look carefully and you will see nowhere did I write anything to attract such cunning slams and innuendo. I made a general comment on your statement, that's all and I did it in a way that it became self-deprecating. I made no personal comments about you. You chose to make it personal and public at the same time. So be it. You may not like my sense of humor, but that doesn't give you a license to invade my privacy. You can tell me my humor sucks, that's fine. You can tell me you disagree, that's fine also.

You think you are you with a vengeance, watch out. And DON'T ever patronize me again. Just because I am new doesn't give you special rights over my life.

[Note: For your own personal copy of the full text of this post, make a donation to the PF and you will find the full extent of my displeasure.]

Klato, I'm not looking to get drawn into this one, but I think there's a little bit of over reaction in your reply to Bev's lighthearted teasing. While I'm sure she will apologise unreservedly the minute she reads your post, I think you have to allow for the fact that the tone we intend when we write is not always conveyed in the bland typeface the reader reads. (There was a smiley attached, which doesn't exactly exonerate, but at least hints that the words weren't intended seriously.

If you read back a ways in this forum, you will find debates on a range of subjects, quantum mechanics and theology being just two of them. Always there is a little bit of light-hearted ribbing mixed in with the philosophy.

Anyway, I'll leave it to you two to sort out, but I thought it was worth mentioning that the Bev that we know isn't in the habit of belittling people or putting them down.

Oh, and I had something else to say back on topic. Psi's post made me think about my hours of TV watched and led me to a question I'd like to put to the group. Most of us have two numbers of hours of TV we watch a week. The first is made up of the programs that we make every reasonable effort to watch, our regular shows and our not-to-be-missed shows. Then there is the total number of hours we watch. That would be the first lot plus the "I'm bored" or "I just wanted to see if there was anything about x on the news" or "Putting it on for background noise" (which sadly I have noticed has increased in myself these past few years. Once I played music. Now I'm just as likely to have the tube on).

Now for me the first category would amount to six hours. I think most would agree that less than one a day ain't bad. But if I'm honest with myself about the more casual viewing, I think the range of total hours watched would amount to something like 15-25.

So what I'm wondering is firstly: What would those two numbers be for most people here?

And secondly: Can I (and you may want to ask this of yourself) cut back on that incidental viewing?

Tune in next time to find out . . .

Klato, I'm not looking to get drawn into this one, but I think there's a little bit of over reaction in your reply to Bev's lighthearted teasing.

I second that - Bev's got a heart of gold, and I know she didn't mean to offend. Seasons is just like that - part sand-pit, part arena, part debating club. We love to argue, and tease, and occasionally vent some spleen.

Look on the bright side - if you'd got into a disagreement about the propagatability of psi, you'd be embroiled in a many hundred-post argument now, wondering how it all got so intense

Most of us have two numbers of hours of TV we watch a week.

Another useful factor to consider might be how many recorders (VHS or DVD) you have, and whether they are enough to handle overlapping "must-see" programs on different channels (ie: do you ever have to get other people to video programs when there's a larger clash than can be accommodated.)

I'm sorry to say we have 2 recorders, 1 TV, and still have to not infrequently ask family and friends to video a fourth channel. I'd say that indicates either excessive viewing, or a quite improbable degree of chance in program distribution (I think you can guess which I tend to believe.)

Hee hee. Psimagus has been pushed into posting with footnotes. Gosh I hope my scrutiny of your past post had nothing to do with that.

Having cheered myself up after the latest TV-related row by reacquainting myself at some length with the contents of my "why TV is evil" bookmarks folder, it would have seemed a shame not to use the links

Ya want I should have a word with them?

I fear that even SuperBev couldn't fix the dysfunctionality of an entire community (though I do wish the people at work would stop relentlessly asking my opinion about/suggesting I ought to watch/relishing the squalid and transitory interpersonal dynamics in Big Brother. I've only told them a hundred times that I don't watch it, don't want to watch it, would rather eat my own head than be forced to watch it!)

I don't see why anyone would be offended by your choice not to watch TV.

You must live in a saner world than I do. And, sadly, you don't see a lot of people if they insist on spending most of their time doing something you refuse to participate in. It's not difficult to interpret as neglect, I guess.

how many recorders (VHS or DVD) you have, I don't have any. I can only think of a half dozen movies I would ever want to watch over and over. My family, on the other hand, have what looks like some DVD VHS library. Shelves of mostly horrid ...um what's a nice word for crap?

Excellent - try to hold onto that sanity when the cable companies finally reach your area, and everyone has a hundred channels of crap to fixate on. I know it was the arrival of satellite and cable that so suddenly turned what had been merely a mildly disturbing habit into a toxic addiction in this country.

I hope you know how lucky you are living in the wilds outside the ever expanding mediasphere - enjoy it while you still can (or head north - even the Inuit can get the internet, but they may be the last people to have cable TV inflicted on them, if it has to be laid through permafrost!)

On a slightly different note: The Omnificent English Dictionary In Limerick Form

http://www.oedilf.com/db/Lim.php

I looked up bot, but the only entry was for botfly. Ah well.

If you're bit by a botfly, my son,
You should get yourself home on the run!
Quickly cover each bite
With petroleum white,
'Cause those flesh-eating bots are no fun!

Klato, I am very sorry to have offended you. I think there was a misunderstanding about what I meant. In my first post I wrote:

On a very superficial level (and knowing I sound like every jerk who says "We didn't have teachers who looked like you when I was in school."), not only do I find the characters on Numb3rs interesting, I also believe that if I had had a math professor who looked like Charlie when I was in university, my undergraduate degree would not be in psychology.

Meaning that I would have become a math major if I had a math professor who was like that specific character from the show.

You responded by making a comments about women you taught, which is fine. I took it as a joke, but you did make a jump between "young ladies" and myself. I was simply pointing out the equivocation. You said:

"It don't work quite like that. I have taught thousands of young ladies in my lifetime and they still majored in psychology, journalism, gen-ed, etc. "

My response was a light hearted attempt to point out that just because the women you taught were not enticed to switch majors doesn't mean that I would not have been inspired to do so by a math teacher who was like the character Charlie.

I tried to qualify the part about how you might not be exactly 100 percent like the TV character. I was not being insulting. Did you think I was being sarcastic? I said:

I am sure you have many nice qualities. No offense. I am sure you inspired your share of students in a variety of ways"

For some reason you found that patronizing. It was not meant to be. It was not a put down and I didn't say it because you are new. I said it because it's my honest reaction to that comment.

I have re-read it a few times and I still don't see it as insulting or patronizing. It was a minor point, and maybe be I should have let go, but it's not an insult.

The truth is, if I say I would do do something if a specific person or character were involved, and anyone responds by saying it wouldn't happen because of his or her experiences with females as a group, it's reasonable to point out that I am not like the females known by the writer and that the writer may not be exactly like the other person I was writing about. I am not attacking the writer. I was merely saying in what I meant to be a lighthearted way that we shouldn't compare apples and oranges.

I can see how you meant your comment to be self depreciating. I do appreciate the humor. I guess when I first read it I took it at face value. Maybe you read sarcasm and patronizing tones into my reply. I assure you I did not intend then to have such connotations, and I am very sorry to have hurt or upset you.


PS As for this

Note: For your own personal copy of the full text of this post, make a donation to the PF and you will find the full extent of my displeasure.]

I made my donation on the first day the Prof started the drive, and I have had a FOF account for years. If I have extra money next month, I'll donate again. You can post as much or as little of your displeasure as you like

PPS Please note the emoticon The smile means I am kidding and you shouldn't take it personally.

Psimagus and Corwin, thanks for the kind words.

I'll be back to defend the evil on slovenly habits of watching kung fu movies into the wee hours in a bit.