random bits
Jun. 10th, 2004 10:00 pm![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
cellio![[livejournal.com profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/external/lj-userinfo.gif){kind=small}
aliza250), one where I had to be told
(eclectic_1), all others identified. That
was fun.
The stereotype is that smart people (including anyone whose job title implies serious analytical skills) don't get picked for juries, but I'm beginning to wonder. I've been called three times and picked twice, and our engineering director is currently away from work because he's on a jury. Do they just sometimes miss in the screening, or are the lawyers not really screening for this sort of thing after all?
A Texas judge has ordered that a person convicted of animal cruetly must post pictures of the animals she starved in her jail cell. Good for the judge! This is similar to the local story some months back of the hit-and-run driver who is required to carry a photo of the person he killed in his wallet during his probation. Such orders do no harm (it's hardly "cruel and unusual") and serve to put a human (or animal, in the one case) face on the damage done by these people. More, please. (And remember, we're talking about people convicted of criminal charges; I am not advocating haunting those who accidentally cause harm and don't try to hide it with such sentences.)
Do spammers really think that people still open messages with the subject line "URGENT"? Or that most of us think we even might know a sender named Brittany? Ah well; it doesn't fool the filters.
At my most recent physical my doctor called for a routine test that kicks in for women at age 40. (Am I being sufficiently delicate?) No surprises there; the surprise came when I called to schedule and the person said "oh, and no caffeine for two days before". After I moved from incoherent blubbering to actual words, I explained that this posed a difficulty and she relented. It turned out to be advice, not medical necessity. Don't scare me like that!
Re: Tests? We don't need no steenking tests!
Date: 2004-06-13 06:41 pm (UTC)ETS claimed that the changes made the test more fair to some certain subgroups of test-takers. They make the same claims with this most recent round of changes.
If this were so, why would MENSA have dropped it as an eligibility criteria?
Now, honestly, I find it hard to claim how good one's brains are based on one taking of one kind test. I'd much prefer seeing a person's performance on that test, or, preferably, on several different types of test, over many takings at many times. That would eliminate the statistical fluke and establish a broadly-based pattern of intelligence.
But since I last looked at the criteria, I guess that MENSA hasn't been smart (or wise, which could conceivably be called different) enough for that. :)
THAT'S why I didn't join. Their criteria are (were) too broad, and for an elitist group who prides themselves on brains, it was dumb. Besides, enough of the MENSAns I've met seem to be either really socially inept/awkward or just plain unlikeable. I just didn't like the crowd.
Funny Note: LJ's spell check flagged MENSAns and provides these as alternatives (not the full list): Manson's, Menses, Mesons, Monsoons, Minoans, Kansans, Mundanes, Ensigns, Mensch's, Mansards(!), Mansions, Meniscus, Mensches, Minivans
Further note: Failure to use a spell check (when available) may be grounds for DISqualification from MENSA, and may even fall to the level of gene pool chlorination (see previous replies).
Re: Tests? We don't need no steenking tests!
Date: 2004-06-13 07:35 pm (UTC)We'd had mandatory IQ testing in junior high school, so I used that test to enter.
Re: Tests? We don't need no steenking tests!
Date: 2004-06-13 08:21 pm (UTC)Thankfully, I wasn't ostracized (much). The funky demographics of my suburban Philly town generated a number of bright kids. I used to think it was the water because it seemed so normal to me that so many kids were "gifted" or in Honors or AP classes.
I didn't realize how sheltered my life was before I went to college and learned how unusual my town really was. Over 80% of those over 25 had an undergraduate degree, and over 50% had a masters or other post-undergrad degree, and a whopping 30% had an MD, JD, or PhD!
This makes some serious differences in a town of 15,000 or so (when I graduated) with only one school for each grade grouping (K-2, 3-4, 5-8, 9-12 when I started and K-3, 4-8, 9-12 now). Since so many people had advanced degrees, they generally had well-paying jobs. This translates into a higher tax base and, because, they could afford more expensive houses, more property tax revenue. This, in turn, translates directly into better funded schools. Good schools and expensive houses gain the attention of other people with lots of education and bigger paychecks, and tends to cause attrition among those who have trouble paying the taxes, so the cycle continues until some other factor gets large enough to intervene.
Side Note: To find the current school info, I went to the School District's Website and poked around. I found that the K-3 chess team(!) is this year's State Champion! (Go Little Lions! :)) Even though there have been some big changes since I graduated, some things appear to still be the same.
Re: Tests? We don't need no steenking tests!
Date: 2004-06-14 07:07 am (UTC)Re: Tests? We don't need no steenking tests!
Date: 2004-06-14 10:43 am (UTC)