|
16 Oct 06 - 05:06 AM (#1860062) Subject: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: GUEST,Mr notso irritating waffle I was in discussion with a certain 'catter who will know which troll I am. However we discussed the nature of a tendency in certain directions for threads to degenerate because ............. Well if we coined the verb "to Shamble" and measured the effect in microShambles (µSh) - because the unit is too large in normal usage - the effect could be muted at a stroke. I submit. Blue touch paper has been lit. Sits back and does what any troll would ..................... |
|
16 Oct 06 - 05:50 AM (#1860093) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Richard Bridge I think the unit is the manager, for measuring the use of managementspeak, but it's a curvilinear scale starting with foreman who tends to call a spade a f****ing shovel, the middle manager who will call it a detritus removal instrument, the "human resources" manager who will call it a space reframing opportunity or enabler, and upper management who will call it a manual tool if they know what it is. Then you have the micromanager, and most of us have suffered from those. |
|
16 Oct 06 - 06:58 AM (#1860131) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: jeffp Shouldn't the unit of waffling be the Belgian? |
|
16 Oct 06 - 07:12 AM (#1860142) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Liz the Squeak It's not a spade, it's a simple hand operated vertical earth lifter. In my office the same unit is known as a 'Joe' after the irritating, mysoginistic little shit who spends about 5 minutes out of every 60 at his desk and the other 55 wombling around the office disturbing people and telling them things they couldn't care less about. LTS |
|
16 Oct 06 - 07:17 AM (#1860148) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: The Fooles Troupe The Suiw. so Suiw me.. |
|
16 Oct 06 - 07:55 AM (#1860171) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Bunnahabhain The minister trying to avoid answering the question. Unfortunatly, the acronym, Mtaaq, sounds like klingon, with a welsh accent.... |
|
16 Oct 06 - 09:44 AM (#1860278) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: GUEST,lox Stand'n'Waff |
|
16 Oct 06 - 04:04 PM (#1860640) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Bert ...the nature of a tendency in certain directions for threads to degenerate because ... Shouldn't the unit be a GUEST, of course they are so small that the usable unit would be a gigaGUEST. |
|
16 Oct 06 - 04:16 PM (#1860658) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Amos The unit of irritation is the irk. The unit of waffling is the waff. Expert wafflers produce high annoyance values measured in irks per waff. The density of annoyance values D(a) in a given office space is usally measured in terms or (irks/waff)* (number of command channels (Cn) ) * (# of PHBs) / (number of staff whose sanity index is > 50%). (where PHBs= number of Pointy-Headed Bosses). When the product of these calculations is divided into the number of square feet of office space, one gets the net sanity index for the company or department being measured. A |
|
16 Oct 06 - 04:39 PM (#1860675) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: jeffp I've been working in a cube for too long. Amos, that almost makes sense to me! |
|
16 Oct 06 - 06:08 PM (#1860760) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Amos LOL!!! Well, it is mathematically self-consistent. Da = i/w * PHB (SSI>50%) Net Sanity Index = Da Sq. feet allocated :D A |
|
16 Oct 06 - 06:29 PM (#1860783) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Mr Red So how long before Shambles spots this, unless the clues are above........... |
|
16 Oct 06 - 06:38 PM (#1860795) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: GUEST,Autolycos I've always thought that the standard is one square with a bit of sand in it. Always. yhought of little else since I could kick a football. One second thoughts, the unit is an irrelevance. Ah, now we're cooking. ivor |
|
17 Oct 06 - 04:25 AM (#1861081) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Richard Bridge Very good, Amos. |
|
17 Oct 06 - 05:14 AM (#1861103) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: JohnInKansas Amos obviously has been exposed to excessively high PHB factors. A masterful creation of a consistent and apparently rational calculation that looks great on paper but signifies absolutely nothing (almost). It should IMMEDIATELY be recorded as a PowerPoint presentation chart and made available for universal access by all. Your own PHB factor contributers will be IMPRESSED. (But only if the chart is "pretty.") Amos omitted however the influence of Fg on the effective "strength" of the PHB. Fg(PHBi) = Glaze Factor, defined as the number of decimal points you can include in a number before the "ith" PHB's eyes glaze over. Note that if this function is included, it often is necessary to separately evaluate the factor for EACH of the PHB influences presence, however it's customary to just use a consolidated mean of the values in calculations. In many cases, all present PHBi will have nearly identical Fg, usually in the lower range of values. Some argue that inclusion of this factor is insignificant, since nobody has ever identified a PHB with Fg > 2. This makes the factor limited to three values (0, 1, or 2) in all cases1; hence it exerts only a mild influence on the Da value, but PHBs with the lowest Fg seem always to operate over the widest areas, so that when the density is multiplied by the area of operation astronomical AT (total annoyance) frequently results. Sorry: AT is the common term used in some circles for the paramer Amos defined as INS = Net Sanity Index. 1 Some argue that fractional values should be allowed for Fg, to account for PHBs who glaze over at the anticipation that you're about to add a decimal point, however the majority of authorities seem to prefer simple multiplication by the function PLIC(PHBi) to separately describe the Probablility that a particular PHB will "Leap to Irrational Conclusions." Including the factor in this way allows one to apply it more flexibly to numerous other calculations where it has more separate significance than Fg. In many cases that have been studied, the PLIC(PHBi) function alone appears to account for nearly the whole value of AT (= INS). A very good start on a subject that obviously merits extensive additional study, documentation, and standardization of the method(s). We well might form a Standards Committe in furtherance of this; but that would make all of us "low-value PHB contributors." John |
|
17 Oct 06 - 06:06 AM (#1861128) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: julian morbihan I don't know much about waffle 'cause I can never get a word in edgeways. But I do know that the standard British Measure of Excess is the Firkin. It's usually measured in twos, as in 2 Firkin heavy or 2 Firkin big... |
|
17 Oct 06 - 08:43 AM (#1861216) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: The Fooles Troupe I like tasty waffles, not irritating ones. Although, the addition of tumeric is supposed to stave off Alzheimer's... |
|
17 Oct 06 - 09:27 AM (#1861240) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: jeffp Must be too late for you as you seem to be forgetting your r's. (it's turmeric) |
|
17 Oct 06 - 09:35 AM (#1861246) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Amos John: Why not bin the individual data points on PHBs and do a Fast Fourier transform to arrive at a composite magnitude? LOL I don't know if any one has tried this, as I have been out of the PHB environment for a few years now. But if anyone still "in country" wants to make a Power Point presentation of my math, by all means help your self! Let's ask John to put out an IRC paper on it. A |
|
17 Oct 06 - 08:05 PM (#1861740) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: The Fooles Troupe "forgetting your r's." I use paper... |
|
18 Oct 06 - 12:24 AM (#1861882) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Bert julian morbihan, is that your real name or is it a made up name derived from where you live? |
|
18 Oct 06 - 06:56 PM (#1862703) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Tootler There is also the unit of muttering. It is a rhubarb (Rb) A MegaRhubarb has a special name, it is called a rant (Rt) There is a special type of Rant hereabouts, mostly confined to Northumberland, though it has been known to sneak out southwards. It is 32 bars long and is called a Morpeth. So we have; 106 rhubarb = 1 rant 32 Rant = 1 MP |
|
18 Oct 06 - 07:16 PM (#1862729) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: skipy and how many MPs do we have in Westminster? That is a lot of rhubarb. Skipy |
|
18 Oct 06 - 09:07 PM (#1862796) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: The Fooles Troupe You do know, that when they built the place, they installed natural air conditioning, designed to run on hot air... I'm not making this stuff up, you know... |
|
19 Oct 06 - 01:14 AM (#1862887) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Bert They also clain that the Morpeth Rant is a dance, but nobody has ever been able to dance it. |
|
19 Oct 06 - 01:30 AM (#1862890) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: The Fooles Troupe ... but they DO rant on about it... |
|
19 Oct 06 - 02:48 AM (#1862906) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: John MacKenzie The proper units are the Gern, and the Smee, as in. Mild annoyance = Gern f**k yourself Extreme annoyance = Smee again; gern f**k yourself Giok |
|
19 Oct 06 - 11:01 AM (#1863233) Subject: RE: BS: Standard unit of irritating waffle? From: Bunnahabhain I will resist the urge to make some comment about a shambles censorhip rant. I did some looking, as I've ranted quite often in Scotland, and found Andersons, Armstrongs, Alisons, Munro, Montgomeries, Morays, Oregon, and Ruffians Rants, and got bored at that point. Looks like the Geordies didn't nail it down, so the Scots borrowed it... |