bapu

SteveStrummerUK


Fleetwood Mac - Never Going Back High Gain

As a seemingly nonsequitur to this dullard I say:


Well Done


Good Times


:-)

 
I really must be an A-Hole^TM*
 
 
 
 
 
* © Daveny5 ~ 2013

SteveStrummerUK

bapu

SteveStrummerUK


Fleetwood Mac - Never Going Back High Gain

As a seemingly nonsequitur to this dullard I say:


Well Done


Good Times


:-)

 
I really must be an A-Hole^TM*
 
 
 
 
 
* © Daveny5 ~ 2013

With a little bit of work you could be an Am-Hole, wouldn't that be betterer?

SteveStrummerUK
 

     

I understand this graph fully.
 
It shows how much you have to shift from your original viewpoint on a particular topic when you realise through reactance that people have exposed it as being a crock of horsemeat and therefore you feel a need morph it into something completely different to what it was at the outset.

Is it known as the McQ factor?
 
So say for example you wanted to signify at the beginning that your observation was about good suppliers of products and then decided to turn that observation into a thread about about, say again for example, building a custom mic from stock parts this graph then signifies the amount of shift that is occuring from that original standpoint as the thread progresses.
(edited to add some theoretical examples for illustration purposes)

Jonbouy
Is it known as the McQ factor?

I loved that TV show in the first season. After that it just seemed to be reactance repetitive.

Jonbouy

SteveStrummerUK
 

     

I understand this graph fully.
 
It shows how much you have to shift from your original viewpoint on a particular topic when you realise through reactance that people have exposed it as being a crock of horsemeat and therefore you feel a need morph it into something completely different to what it was at the outset.

Is it known as the McQ factor?

 
I think we have a winner
 
 

SteveStrummerUK

Jonbouy

SteveStrummerUK
 

     

I understand this graph fully.
 
It shows how much you have to shift from your original viewpoint on a particular topic when you realise through reactance that people have exposed it as being a crock of horsemeat and therefore you feel a need morph it into something completely different to what it was at the outset.

Is it known as the McQ factor?

 
I think we have a winner
 
 

Sorry I had to apply a slight amount of McQ to that post AFTER you had quoted it.
 
My bad. 

Bub


... can you get away with knowingly providing false information as long as you provide the disclaimer that it's 'your opinion' ... after the fact?

Just curious.

This is the internet.

Any opinion different than one's own is always "false information".

drewfx1

Bub


... can you get away with knowingly providing false information as long as you provide the disclaimer that it's 'your opinion' ... after the fact?

Just curious.

This is the internet.

Any opinion different than MY is always "false information".

Personalized.

drewfx1

Bub


... can you get away with knowingly providing false information as long as you provide the disclaimer that it's 'your opinion' ... after the fact?

Just curious.

This is the internet.

Any opinion different than one's own is always "false information".

Is that true?...
 
(see what I did there?)

Jonbouy

drewfx1

Bub


... can you get away with knowingly providing false information as long as you provide the disclaimer that it's 'your opinion' ... after the fact?

Just curious.

This is the internet.

Any opinion different than one's own is always "false information".

Is that true?...
 
(see what I did there?)

I keep being reminded of a commercial (don't remember what insurance company it's for though - so bad for them, eh?).
 
HERE is the relevant snippet.