What the heck is that? I just Googled “gladwell game Gay, Black, Canadian, Jewish, or a Runner” and your post was the #1 hit. Nothing else that mentions this “game.”
I was riffing on a game I saw on the Graham Norton Show, Gay or European, Canadians being our local equivalent of men of indeterminate sexual orientation. 
Also seen in the musical Legally Blonde.
In other words, it was a joke, son.
Gladwell appeared on Dax Shepard’s Armchair Expert podcast, fans might find it interesting to hear him being the one interviewed. He’s quite engaging, as is Shepard. Check it out.
Yes, I think I would like his books better if they were presented as a set of unrelated short essays rather than a set of short essays that are supposed to add up to a dubious conclusion.
I agree. My experience with Gladwell is that he forms a theory, finds examples that fit the theory, and then presents the theory as a general principle. That’s not how it works.
Let’s take his idea about David beating Goliath. Does it ever happen than an apparently weaker individual or group defeats an apparently stronger opponent? Sure. But the majority of times, the stronger individual or group beats the weaker one. If you cherry pick the rare exceptions to show David beating Goliath, you’re misrepresenting the reality of the situation.
I love the 10,000 hours analogy. Anecdotally, it holds pretty true IMHO and my kids are sick of me mentioning it. 
The trial chapters at the end of his books are just that, test balloons. Take those with a giant grain of salt. But the actual core of his books seem solid to me.
I like RioRico’s XKCD more than Thudlow Boink’s.
I like him too and read most of his stuff, but he has an astonishing ability to jump to conclusions and quietly ignore the aspects of his subjects that don’t conform to his chosen narrative. Despite that he is still often insightful and occasionally witty. You just have to read him with a critical eye.
I like this one better than either of them.
Well, your elementary teacher didn’t really do a good job then. Slings were weapons not toys. You don’t protect your herd with a toy.
This classic article by Steven Pinker does a good job of explaining some of the problems: https://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/15/books/review/Pinker-t.html
Unless I misremember him, I felt that he was saying that even with talent it still takes 10,000 hours to become quite proficient at it. I will say that I did have mathematical talent but I still had to work at it to become a mathematician. 10,000 hours? I don’t actually know. What do you for those hours anyway? Time spent lying on a couch thinking about things, does that count?
I enjoy reading Gladwell, but I find him a bit shallow. But he does get you to think. I don’t think you have be embarrassed because you read him.
I’m not embarrassed, and most of the objections here I share. I was just making conversation.