Group think

By Pixel | Filed in a pixelated mind

There’s an episode of How I Met Your Mother where one of the characters talks about how groups of women always look hotter than each individual woman. They called it the “Cheerleader Effect.”

In high school, my group of friends was huge. As a result, we would go out and do things almost every day. There was always something going on and always enough people so that any event would be well attended… and awesome. It was one of the best times of my life.

I think about that time still to try to understand what happened and why it fell apart. First, of course, time changed our circumstances. Pam & Miguel went to Albuquerque, Fernie joined the Navy, and so on. Second, people’s priorities changed: motherhood, getting into careers, etc. Third, there was some intra and inter-group relationship drama.

But mostly, I just don’t think most individual pairs of people in the group had that strong of relationships. The relationships were strong in the abstract, but when the group as a whole began to dissolve, many of the constitutive relationships also fell apart.

This didn’t just happen with my high school group (indeed, most of those relationships have been the most resilient to time), it also happened to my friends at Turnbull Hall in IUP, the gaggle of friends I made in Australia, and the TRUpers from my time at the student newspaper. I still hold special places in my heart for dozens of people I met in each of those places— and still talk regularly with a few— but my relationship with the rest of the assorted group is more of a casual acquaintanceship with memories of better times. I wouldn’t feel comfortable asking to stay at their house, for instance.

So yeah. I don’t really have a point. I’ve just been thinking about this recently.

Be the first to comment
Digg this! Share on Facebook! Stumble Upon this! Tweet this! TOP

¡¡o!o

By Pixel | Filed in note to self

It turns out I’m… 26 now.

I think 25 was nice. I did cool things and hung out with cool people, though never enough of either. It was actually a fairly okay year, though it seems uneventful in retrospect. Probably because there weren’t super huge highs or huge lows. I think I prefer the much more eventful years… I’ll regret saying that some day.

I’m looking forward to the festivities tonight. Mexican food! Great friends! Margaritas! Alcoholic Smoothies! Hurray!

This time last year: ¡¡oo!
Digg this! Share on Facebook! Stumble Upon this! Tweet this! TOP

Rules for Shotgun

By Pixel | Filed in the philosophy of the everyday

I swear to god, I thought I’d written this down before…

In reference to the last episode and taken from this website and this other one:

  1. Shotgun must be said audibly to all present or the person’s hand must be on the door handle
  2. Window is a separate option that must also be called independently. All other rules for Window are the same as those for Shotgun.
  3. The car must be visible, you must be outside or in the parking structure, and the ride must be imminent. Early calls are strictly prohibited. (Often this rule is split up into several other rules.)
  4. Shotgun may not be called for anybody else.
  5. Shotgun only applies among equals who are of more or less the same age, gender, and status. Also, the seat must be vacant when called. In cases where Shotgun is not available (for instance if the person with directions, an elder, or a disabled person needs the seat), anyone who called Shotgun automatically loses their bid.
  6. In case of a tie, Rock, Paper, Scissors, Australian Thumb to the Head or Mad Dash to the Car rules may be instituted in lieu of the driver’s tie-breaking decision. This is the driver’s choice and one must familiarize oneself with the local rules before playing Shotgun.
  7. The order for automatic Shotgun is as follows: owner of the car, disabled person, elderly person, person who knows the directions, spouse/partner of the driver, all other claimants.

Shotgun is awarded to the quickest thinker for a reason: he must serve as navigator, radio controller, and cop watcher. Theoretically, being the first to call Shotgun better allows for this. Failure to abide by these rules or duties may result in the person with Shotgun being forced to ride Bitch.

2 Comments so far. Join the Conversation
Digg this! Share on Facebook! Stumble Upon this! Tweet this! TOP

Hourly Comic Day 2011

By Pixel | Filed in sunday comics

This year, I got a lot faster at drawing. And presumably better, but it’s going to be really hard to tell because I also cared much less than last year or the year before. In hour 12, SElizabeth and I switched hourly comics.


















Be the first to comment
Digg this! Share on Facebook! Stumble Upon this! Tweet this! TOP

Academic Advice Column

By Gabe the Beaver | Filed in Gabe the Beaver's solo career

Dear Gabe,
Many months ago, my adviser recommended I add a particular faculty member to my committee: call him Dr. X. I had misgivings about adding Dr. X because I’ve never known him to have any students and I’d heard other graduate students disparage him for various reasons. Nevertheless, I added him to my committee. Fast forward to my prelims.  Two months before my prelim exams, I sent my entire committee a copy of my prelim document. I heard nothing from any of them. Two weeks before the exam, I sent the document again, asking for comments. My adviser signed off on the paper, but again– I heard from nobody on any specifics.

The day of my exam came and– in the very first slide, Dr. X challenged some of the setup to my presentation. This wasn’t a major issue, it wasn’t even something that was controversial. In fact, I was claiming something as basic as “the grand unified theory is a major problem for physics.” But as the presentation went on, Dr. X kept challenging every point I made and asking me to provide evidence for ridiculous things. On deliberation, the rest of my committee wanted to pass me, but Dr. X refused to sign off on me. So they told me that I had ‘conditionally passed.’ Only– it turns out there is no such thing! So I failed. Not only that, but in my department, prelims aren’t supposed to be such a big deal. The going assumption is that if your committee lets you get to the prelim exam, the actual examination is a mere formality. Obviously it wasn’t in this case.

My committee agreed on the changes I needed to make for my document and so I spent three months working on those changes. I recently sent it out for comments. I corrected all of Dr. X’s original concerns and added that I wanted to address any further concerns before my next exam. My adviser signed off on this document as well. I just now received an e-mail from Dr. X in which he added SUBSTANTIAL comments to my document in red. To fix his concerns, I would have to spend another three months. But recently I heard that there was bad blood between Dr. X and my adviser. I am at a loss. I have spent over a year on this stage of my career and am nowhere closer than I was a year ago. What do I do?

–Jake in Biology

Read the remainder of this entry »

Be the first to comment
Digg this! Share on Facebook! Stumble Upon this! Tweet this! TOP