![]() ![]() ![]() Merely stating the discussion is lame is frequently not sufficient every opposing statement must be denied with increasingly vehement assertions of the lameness. What's the fun in that? It is essential that as many editors as possible chime in, not adding to the discussion at hand but pointing, LOL, and lamely commenting about how lame it is and how it's a big waste of time (See Self-fulfilling prophecy, Positive feedback, and Exponential growth). ![]() ![]() Left to its own devices, the discussion might inadvertently become useful. Upon coming across a discussion that is borderline lame, some Wikipedians may be tempted to go do something useful. Some discussions are born lame some achieve lameness some have lameness thrust upon them. Rather, it illustrates standards or conduct that are generally not accepted by the Wikipedia community. It is not, has never been, nor will ever be, a Wikipedia policy or guideline. On the other hand, nobody gets dispatched (so far!). It has changed them from actually getting done to never getting done. Truly, the revolutionary Wikipedia outlook has changed the way things get done. In modern times, physical combat has been outlawed and replaced by the careful citing of personal attacks, strategic 3RR templating and canvassing, timely notices on WP:AN/I, accusations of incompetence, and (in some cases) marking the changes as a minor edit. In some earlier instances of edit warring, dating back from before the good old days, participants would simply brandish their swords and fight a battle, or later, their guns and fight a duel. A careful and scholarly study of available archeological evidence has even suggested that edit wars may have recurred on a regular basis going back all the way to the beginning of recorded history, even before the advent of proper writing circa 2001 C.E. It isn't comprehensive or authoritative, but it serves as a showcase of situations where people lose sight of the big picture and obsessively expend huge amounts of energy fighting over something that, in the end, isn't really so important.Įdit warring is believed by some to be important, possibly due to the historical regularity and frequency of the occurrence of these wars. Occasionally, even experienced Wikipedians lose their heads and devote every waking moment to edit warring over the most trivial thing, wasting time debating topics of no practical value, or wrestling over questions whose answers hold no practical consequence. Soon a referee will pull them apart and decide their fates at WP:AN3. Two editors at each other's throats, while engaging in an edit war. At her feet, three bewildered newcomers are seen caught in the middle of the dispute. Watching dogs fetch in an optimal way is no less remarkable to me than if they were using calculus.What mighty contests rise from trivial thingsĪn unidentified clerk (centre) tries to bring an end to a great edit war involving dozens of respected editors. It’s more likely that their experience allows them to make choices that result in getting to the ball faster. I agree that dogs act to optimize their travel time when fetching in the water-I’ve observed dogs doing this-but that does not mean they are making complex mathematical calculations. I think it’s more accurate to say that dogs act as though they know calculus rather than to say that they actually know calculus. Pennings has suggested that dogs do in fact know calculus, because their paths match what the mathematics of calculus predict. With information about the position of the ball and the dog, and the dog’s running and swimming speeds, it is possible to use calculus to determine the exact place at which the dog should switch from running to swimming in order to minimize his travel time. Mathematicians describe his actions by saying that Elvis optimized his travel time. Elvis always chose this last option, which resulted in reaching the ball the fastest. A third option is to run part of the way along the shore and then finish traveling to the ball by swimming in the water. Another possibility is to run on the sand until he is even with the ball, and then swim to it. Running is faster than swimming, so the overall time the dog spends heading to the ball depends on how the dog decides to split his path into running and swimming parts.Įlvis could run directly into the water and swim a long way to the ball, which would mean traveling the shortest distance, but not getting there as fast as possible. Mathematician Tim Pennings watched his dog Elvis fetch balls thrown in the water and noticed that the dog consistently chose the quickest route. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |