?

Log in

No account? Create an account

Previous Entry | Next Entry

So nameless_abyss and I were conferring over a rather puzzling state of affairs occurring between me and another person...



The Situation:

  1. The other person (henceforth, O) said statement ~A and statement B yesterday.
  2. Statement ~A is a not so good thing. Statement B is a good thing.
  3. In the normal scheme of things, statement ~A would lead to ~B.
  4. However, this is not the case here.
  5. Given the rather contradictory nature of the data points, nameless_abyss and I decided that we simply needed more data points from O in order to determine which was aberrant, statement ~A or statement B.
  6. Unfortunately, asking for more data points straight out is very likely to irritate O, since O has tacitly indicated that the discussion is over.
  7. If O were irritated sufficiently, ~B would probably then be true.


Suggestion containing possibly spurious analogy to the way religion deals with things: Since the problem is a lack of balance between ~A and B (~A should lead to ~B), and ~B can be brought about by poking for more data points, I should thus poke for more data points. Trust in the power of the balance and all will be well. Yes, alllllll....

The appropriate analogies to religion can be drawn with sufficient cynicism and are left as an exercise to the reader.







Comments

( 5 comments — Leave a comment )
thewronghands
Oct. 26th, 2005 08:26 pm (UTC)
Is there anything you need to do to plan for B or ~B? I'd plan for the worst, hope for the best, and do my best to achieve B. It sucks that asking for clarification will doom you, though -- I hate those situations. I so hear you on the dependence issues.
jalenstrix
Oct. 27th, 2005 12:47 pm (UTC)
Is there anything you need to do to plan for B or ~B?

Not terribly much, no - I'm already planning for B, since it's been status quo for a long time. ~B would be incredibly unfortunate timing if it occurred now, but there wouldn't be much to do about it other than grump.

Fortunately, it turned out that O provided one more data point last night (without being asked) that showed ~A to be the aberrant one from before. (Well, at least for now....). So, phew.

And thank you for the empathy on the dependence issues. :)
y2kdragon
Oct. 27th, 2005 04:38 pm (UTC)
I will point out, just for the sake of obscurity, that the shortest distance between 2 point is not a line, but an arc, since we are on a (somewhat) spherical object.
boojum42
Oct. 28th, 2005 05:42 pm (UTC)
I am amused. You can totally describe a problem without describing the problem. :) Yay abstraction.

Also, good luck keeping B and may ~A become A.

:) Rebecca
jalenstrix
Oct. 28th, 2005 06:15 pm (UTC)
I am amused. You can totally describe a problem without describing the problem. :) Yay abstraction.

[grin] Lo, this is what I have learned from being a graduate student. Very rarely must the gory details be explained in order to give a sense of the general problem.

Also, good luck keeping B and may ~A become A.

;) Thanks. It seems that ~A has become A, so all is now well.
( 5 comments — Leave a comment )

Profile

Owl Side
jalenstrix
Jalen Strix

Latest Month

May 2011
S M T W T F S
1234567
891011121314
15161718192021
22232425262728
293031    

Tags

Powered by LiveJournal.com
Designed by Ideacodes