Whether this creates any obligation for me to comply with the rules, I do not know. I did not -- and do not -- make the rules, and I don't think they're legally or morally enforceable. However, as this seems to be an established game of some sort, I'll try to play along to the extent I can.
I think it's at least fair for me to provide a written response to each rule, so here they are:
1. Let others know who tagged you.
I think I complied with that one already.
2. Players start with 8 random facts about themselves.
Random? There's no such thing as random when you're replying to a question like that, and I think most psychologists would agree. We are not computers, but biased human beings. What we would reveal in a situation like this would strike me as inherently indicative of something other than random. "Random" denotes objectivity, but providing facts about myself is anything but objective. The only way I might approach true, randomized, objectivity would be if I could have a book containing all known facts and then open it, blindly point to whatever factoid might appear, and repeat this seven more times.
I don't have a book about myself, but I do have a blog, so here are random facts about me -- gleaned by using the the disembodied poetic method in conjunction with this blog's search engine:
In college, I received an A+ grade in a Criminology course called "Sex and Crime."
I am a double-transplanted East and West Coaster who moved to California at 18, and grudgingly moved back to the East Coast where I have attempted to be bicoastal ever since.
In college at UC Berkeley, I was told that I should be a writer, and warned that law school would destroy my writing skills. In keeping with my usual pattern, I defied the warnings.
AIDS killed the majority of my friends. (My response was to engage in self destructive behavior.)
I have faith that there is a God, but that faith extends to no organized or written religion.
OK, now that I've complied with Rule 2, I guess the worst is over where it comes to me.
Phew!
3. Those who are tagged should post these rules and their 8 random facts.
I think I'm in substantial compliance with that Restatement of the Rules.
4. Players should tag 8 other people and notify them they have been tagged.
OK, here we come to a problem. I don't like administrative chores (as anyone can see by the insanely disorganized blogroll), and a major reason I object to a chore like that is that I would feel obligated to go about doing it correctly. What are "people"? Does that mean bloggers only? I'm assuming it does, but if so, how do I know the bloggers aren't already "tagged" by someone else? And how do I know that I wouldn't annoy them by tagging them either way? Am I supposed to email them? Should I make sure they comply? And suppose I hate doing this to people I like?
Sigh.
The following are selected at random, and they are not obligated in any way:
My sincerest apologies to anyone on the above list who finds being "tagged" inconvenient or annoying (or who has already been tagged).
Otherwise, I guess that ends this exercise.
Are we having fun yet?
posted by Eric on 07.19.07 at 10:41 AM
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry: http://classicalvalues.com/cgi-bin/pings.cgi/5277
Comments
The number of people required to tag required increases exponentially, last time I was tagged I explained why I wouldn't tag anyone else thusly (and this was with only 5, with 8 'tagees' the math is worse)
Now the hard part, who to TAG. I could just let this end here. afterall since this is accelerating out from a single post at 5 to a positive integer each generation within 10 generations you have presumably 9,765,625 people involved and by the 14th generation you have about as many people needing to be tagged as there are live folks on the planet (6,103,515,625). I can trace back this game of tag at least 6 generations (RIA, Pooh, Frankie, Jo, Christine, and beyond that it's behind a password).
So if everyone has been dutifully tagging 5 people with this meme then there should be at least (5^6-1)(or 15,624) other people looking for tagees and there have already been [(5^5)+(5^4)+(5^3)+(5^2)+5+1] (or 3906) people tagged (and for each person beyond the password who have been tag the numbers increase by an exponent of the number 5).
I guess another unlisted habit might be the compulsive need to 'do the math' of problems like this. I think that's a pretty rare habit for a non-mathematician/non-statistician (although former accounting data entry clerk).
So as the post indicates, I'm where chain letters go to die and though I'll participate as far as answering, I'll let the weight of those numbers give me an excuse for not tagging anyone else (as by the end of the week if everyone tagged did as they are instructed every living human on the planet would need to become literate, gain access to a computer, start a blog, write a post on this topic, and forward it along. By that time those last folks would then have to figure out a way to forward this meme to ants as despite their tiny size outweigh humans when totalled together so they could probably handle this meme well into the 20s (but probably not past) (but then, the thought of sentience ants is the stuff of 70s Sci-Fi films (now there's a remake I wouldn't mind so much, it has possibilities that weren't properly explored in the original)).
I MIGHT be able to comply with the first bit, but 8 other people? That would be difficult.
Mrs. du Toit · July 19, 2007 03:02 PM
I was born with a congenital disability: I can only write but not read. As a result, I would be unable to comply with the rules of tagging should anyone ever (hypothetically speaking) tag me.
Already did the meme, though I can add 8 more facts about me in this comment.
1. I'm for same sex marriage.
2. I'm pro science.
3. I was once swallowed alive in a (non-human) past life. (Gizzards are real dark and it's just about impossible to breathe.)
4. I recently learned that instead of being mutant mushrooms, we might be mutant slime molds.
5. I'm starting up a few more blogs over on my other domain.
6. I'm hoping to get my dentures soon.
7. I believe God.
8. I understand cats.
The Anti-Idiotarian Rottweiler
Don?t bang your head!
The number of people required to tag required increases exponentially, last time I was tagged I explained why I wouldn't tag anyone else thusly (and this was with only 5, with 8 'tagees' the math is worse)
Now the hard part, who to TAG. I could just let this end here. afterall since this is accelerating out from a single post at 5 to a positive integer each generation within 10 generations you have presumably 9,765,625 people involved and by the 14th generation you have about as many people needing to be tagged as there are live folks on the planet (6,103,515,625). I can trace back this game of tag at least 6 generations (RIA, Pooh, Frankie, Jo, Christine, and beyond that it's behind a password).
So if everyone has been dutifully tagging 5 people with this meme then there should be at least (5^6-1)(or 15,624) other people looking for tagees and there have already been [(5^5)+(5^4)+(5^3)+(5^2)+5+1] (or 3906) people tagged (and for each person beyond the password who have been tag the numbers increase by an exponent of the number 5).
I guess another unlisted habit might be the compulsive need to 'do the math' of problems like this. I think that's a pretty rare habit for a non-mathematician/non-statistician (although former accounting data entry clerk).
So as the post indicates, I'm where chain letters go to die and though I'll participate as far as answering, I'll let the weight of those numbers give me an excuse for not tagging anyone else (as by the end of the week if everyone tagged did as they are instructed every living human on the planet would need to become literate, gain access to a computer, start a blog, write a post on this topic, and forward it along. By that time those last folks would then have to figure out a way to forward this meme to ants as despite their tiny size outweigh humans when totalled together so they could probably handle this meme well into the 20s (but probably not past) (but then, the thought of sentience ants is the stuff of 70s Sci-Fi films (now there's a remake I wouldn't mind so much, it has possibilities that weren't properly explored in the original)).