Re-post Your First Post Here.

My first post is lost in the nether regions of changes in MB systems, but I’ll try to reconstruct it as best I can. It was actually a new thread. It was in General Questions.


The Gay Porn Problem

Linguists have long recognized a problem with English pronoun cases popularly called “the gay porn problem”. Our cases fail to differentiate among third persons of the same gender. An example might best illustrate the problem.

“Peter sat beside Paul on the couch. He rested his hand on his thigh.”

Clearly, we don’t know who rested whose hand on whose thigh:

(1) Peter rested his own hand on his own thigh.
(2) Peter rested his own hand on Paul’s thigh.
(3) Paul rested his own hand on his own thigh.
or (4) Paul rested his own hand on Peter’s thigh.

Note that with two genders, the problem clears up:

“Peter sat beside Susan on the couch. She rested her hand on his thigh.”

How do you deal with the gay porn problem, and what would be a good general solution?


Someone complained about the thread title, despite that it was utterly benign. A particular moderator changed it nonetheless to something like “Problems with pronouns”. It was my first experience with the anal retentive side of SDMB culture.

Ack! He’s letting the corporations take away our breathable water? Notice how during the Bush administration, 100% of the drowinings in Texas were due to inhaling non-breathable water! We can’t let him do that to the rest of the US!

[/quote]

Yeah, my first post was a bad joke in Great Debates…

Apparently my first post was berating OldScratch in a GD about economics. Reading it again actually makes me cringe, but here you go anyway:

**Good afternoon to everybody.

I have been a lurker on this message board for many months. This has led to the slightly surreal feeling in posting this message that I know many of you, despite the fact that you clearly never will have heard of me. It also means that I’m fairly well up on etiquette around here. In particular I never like it when a poster flagrantly ignores the OP in order to fly off at an irrelevent tangent.

Nonetheless the comment that inspired me to end my self-imposed silence was this one:

** Oldscratch: “Well considering that the IRA only targets the millitary. And has publicly apologized every time a non military or government target was hit. And considering that the ULA targets innocent civilians. Yes it would make a difference. But, we are getting away from the debate on stealing. I’ll address your earlier post later today.” **

Hmm. I’d like to declare first that half my family are Irish and indeed my great-grandfather was part of the original IRA and always claimed to be first to Michael Collins when he was assisinated. This comment however was out of line.

I am British and have lived in London all my life. One impression we very much have over here is that Americans do not understand the Irish situation at all. This is not an attitude helped by these kind of comments. The situation is immensely complicated but one unequivocable fact is that the IRA do target “innocent civilians”. Of course they sometimes disagree about the word “innocent”. When a bomb is planted in a tube station in London - as one was just the other week - how is that “targeting the military”?

I have learned a great deal of respect for your opinions, Oldscratch. Please do not disappoint me.

Thankyou for indulging my diversion. Hopefully now that I have emerged from my lurking status, you will be seeing more of me. I’m not promising anything though!

As regards the OP: FWIW I have distinctly left-wing tendencies (many of my friends know me as a bit of a commie). These have however mellowed over the last couple of years as I have been involved in studying economics and finance at a post-graduate level - studying these subjects has given me a slightly different perspective.

From an economic viewpoint alone, theft is certainly a non-optimal allocation method of wealth (as pointed out in excellent posts earlier by, amongst others, tymp and lemur866). I think however that one argument oldscratch and Mr Feely are using is that it is not necessarily a sub-optimal allocation of utility. An optimal utility distribution however will necessarily be dependent on your world view and belief system; different axioms lead to essentially logical arguments yielding different answers.

As for the old chestnut of who owns a public company’s profits - why the shareholders do of course! In the UK at least 40% of equity is owned by pension funds and 30% by “ordinary people” via Life Assurance companies. A further whack is owned by other types of funds in which the little guy has a direct interest in. If nothing else this shows that to attempt to distance the stockmarket from the public is a futile exercise.

(I do note that in the case of a public co however, ownership is divorced from control; some profits are retained for investment in the business. The implications for that are probably best left for another post.)

My first post was in the pit :eek:
I never got flamed back :frowning:
As a very new newbie, I think I can give an opinion here. MMMM now lets see, I wouldent say my IQ was any better than the average person, but even I can see that if you come in here in response to threads and say something stupid that warents a flame,your gonna get it! Isnt the pit here for a reason? Like, the fact the moderators would rather any bad feeling ect be taken out here rather than clogging up the other forums with it? DUH! I would say so. Now let me get this right, your accusing oldscratch and co of ganging up on people in here because they happen to feel that as its <insert day of the week>,therefore it must be pick on <insert posters name> day, and you feel thats a reason to ban the pit? Well, I’v lurked here for quite some time and havent seen anything of the sort. And the reason I feel qaulified to say that is because I know not a single soul here and have absolutely NO reason to agree with anyone, but I just had to write and disagree with you grienspace because I’v never seen anyone gloss over questions you get asked about your OP quite as much as you(that can only be because you dont have the answers) so my advice to you would be (take it or leave it at your peril) back down admit your wrong and maybe you’ll be let of the hook."

There’s supposed to be quotation marks on the “As”, so you know that’s the start of the post :o

My first post was just over a year ago in this thread

Odd Little Habits You Have

From this thread:

**Timid intrusion **

tentative attempt to join in reindeer games

embarrassed silence

resolve to do better next time

<sigh>


I used to know everything, till everything changed…

How the heck do you guys know what your first post was??

I have NO clue… it was most likely something stupid (as per my track record), but I can’t even guess which forum it was in! Probably GQ or MPSIMS…

Yeah, finding my first post would be a toughie. The current search only lets you go back two years, and I registered two-and-a half years ago. The only way I could think of looking for it would be a definite violation of search policies, and I don’t feel like being banned.

I’m not sure if I actually posted anything back then or not. I vaguely remembering registering, looking around, realizing I was out of my league, then disappearing until about a year ago.

Plus, just searching for any of my posts is tough these days. Since I changed my username, the search engine seems to think Duck Duck Goose and I are the same (yes, I know why).

Well, according to “The Matrix”, humans are the most powerful energy source in the world. As I get all of my scientific knowledge from the movies, this must be correct.

Seriously, a few points:

  1. Your recommended calorie intake is very low. A more accurate number is 1800-2000 calories (I think that’s the number current RDA’s are based upon)

  2. This is nitpicking, but your analogy to boiling 12 kilos of water is also inaccurate. At phase transition points (solid to liquid, liquid to gas), additional energy is required.

  3. A problematic part of your post is the definition of “energy-efficient.” If, as your post seems to suggest, you are measuring by how much energy it takes for humans to do things, then we are damn efficient. In this, your analogy of the motorized wheelchair is apt. Less calories (someone help me here - are we really talking about ergs, or some other measure) are used by a human to walk a block than a motorized wheelchair to transport the same weight a block. This is more an operation of musculoskeletal system, with its incredibly effective use of leverage, etc., as well as the up-to-now unreproducible operation of muscles (the ability to contract, etc.)

If, however, you are talking about the ability to convert fuel into energy, IMHO, the question is unanswerable. For example, humans are incredibly more efficient at deriving energy from a steak than automobiles, but incredibly less efficient at deriving energy from gasoline.

Now, if we put different fuels aside, then the question goes to how much of the potential energy in a given fuel is converted into useful energy. Again, there are three lines of thought that can be followed here. The first is: - how much potential energy gets wasted? (in cars as waste heat, in humans as crap) Again, unanswerable - human food has too many variations, for example, we actually expend more energy digesting celery than we derive from it.

The second is, how much energy is used to convert the fuel into usable form? Here, humans lose big time. Cars just burn the gas; humans have an incredibly extensive GI system that expends a great deal of energy extracting energy from food (chewing, peristalsis, etc.)

Finally comes the question of how efficiently is the fuel used once it’s processed? Here, I don’t know. Autos do poorly, as should by waste heat and all those (energy-packed) hydrocarbons that go out the tailpipe). Humans have mitochondria that derive energy from sugar in a three-step (sic?) process - anerobic respiration, the Krebs Cycle, and, argh, can’t think of the last (electron transport?). I just don’t know how efficient that is.

Didn’t mean to go on this long.

V.


And I really didn’t mean to go on that long.

Sua

Hey, Fun idea for a thread!

My first was in “Comments on Cecil’s Columns” about Virus Killers

Ah, I started out such a promising young man.

From this GQ thread about funeral practices for various religions. From my first day here, I was a thread-killer.

http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?threadid=823

Here it is, although I must say that I’m kind of embarassed by it. It shows a minimum of thought and doesn’t accurately portray at all what I think. Oh well. I guess that’s what I get when I start out in Great Debates after lurking for all of like a day or something.

In an MPSIMS thread started by the dear departed concrete entitled **I want to hucklebuck the Straight Dope Hags…each and everyone of them. ** I made my debut with the ever memorable:


Sheesh!
You mean everyone isn’t a “Honeymooners” fan?
No one can hucklebuck like Ed Norton!
Next you’ll be asking what’s the Swizzle.
Someone hasn’t been watching their fair share of television.

August 4th, 2000.

Mine was easy enough to find because I remembered my first post was in ATMB. Soon after that I got entrenced in some thread about Delaware…

It figures…my first post was about McDonalds…

On a side note though, congratulate me-I just hit my 1 year birthday! (And I finally figured out how do to the coding without refering to the cheatsheet!)

Mine was from here:

Not a bad post…trying a little to hard, perhaps, but not without a certain naive charm.

And note the misspelling of Scylla’s name. The origins of the long-lasting rivalry can be given at last!

from: this Monty Python thread

Succinct, revealing, humorous, and true. The perfect newbie.

My first post was a New Thread in GQ titled I Scream, You Scream:

The general consensus answer to my question was : Don’t believe everything you read.

I am still generally unsatisfied with that answer. Perhaps that early trauma explains my minimal attendance in the more serious fora. :wink: