Collage 095               H u m o u r N e t                    1995

Hello all! Welcome to Collage 95, which contains two very good
pieces:

"Going to College," with kudos to Lorraine
    and
"Dilbert Index," with kudos to Nancy.

The "Dilbert Index" is [apparently] by Scott Adams, the author of
the comic strip "Dilbert," and the article "Men Who Use Computers
Are The New Sex Symbols Of The `90s," featured in Collage 68.

::snip outdated information::

And while we're speaking URLs, Nancy provided this
one, which will compute for you--among other things--your risk of
being murdered:

            http://www.Nashville.Net/~police/risk/index.html

There are some short questionnaires that ask lifestyle-related
questions (no, Mark, not *alternate* lifestyle questions--sorry),
and they use the information you provide to (1) compute your risk
factor in a specific area, and (2) update your FBI profile. ;-)

Anyway, happy surfing ...

- Vince Sabio
  HumourNet Moderator
  HumourNet@telephonet.com
____________________________________________________________________
          Opener (above) Copyright 1995 by Vincent Sabio
  Permission is hereby granted to forward or post this "Collage";
  please observe the guidelines stated at the end of the message.
____________________________________________________________________

SUBJ: Going To College?

 Many of you young persons out there are seriously thinking about
going to college. (That is, of course, a lie. The only things you
young persons think seriously about are loud music and sex. Trust
me: these are closely related to college.)

  College is basically a bunch of rooms where you sit for roughly
two thousand hours and try to memorize things. The two thousand
hours are spread out over four years; you spend the rest of the
time sleeping and trying to get dates.

  Basically, you learn two kinds of things in college:

 * Things you will need to know in later life (two hours). These
include how to make collect telephone calls and get beer and
crepe-paper stains out of your pajamas.

  * Things you will not need to know in later life (1,998 hours).
These are the things you learn in classes whose names end in -ology,
-osophy, -istry, -ics, and so on. The idea is, you memorize these
things, then write them down in little exam books, then forget them.
If you fail to forget them, you become a professor and have to stay
in college for the rest of your life.

  It's very difficult to forget everything. For example, when I was
in college, I had to memorize--don't ask me why--the names of
three metaphysical poets other than John Donne. I have managed to
forget one of them, but I still remember that the other two were
named Vaughan and Crashaw. Sometimes, when I'm trying to remember
something important like whether my wife told me to get tuna packed
in oil or tuna packed in water, Vaughan and Crashaw just pop up in
my mind, right there in the supermarket. It's a terrible waste of
brain cells.

  After you've been in college for a year or so, you're supposed to
choose a major, which is the subject you intend to memorize and
forget the most things about. Here is a very important piece of
advice: Be sure to choose a major that does not involve Known Facts
and Right Answers.

  This means you must *not* major in mathematics, physics, biology,
or chemistry, because these subjects involve actual facts. If, for
example, you major in mathematics, you're going to wander into class
one day and the professor will say: "Define the cosine integer of
the quadrant of a rhomboid binary axis, and extrapolate your result
to five significant vertices." If you don't come up with *exactly*
the answer the professor has in mind, you fail. The same is true of
chemistry: if you write in your exam book that carbon and hydrogen
combine to form oak, your professor will flunk you. He wants you to
come up with the same answer he and all the other chemists have
agreed on. Scientists are extremely snotty about this.

  So you should major in subjects like English, philosophy,
psychology, and sociology--subjects in which nobody really
understands what anybody else is talking about, and which involve
virtually no actual facts. I attended classes in all these
subjects, so I'll give you a quick overview of each:

  ENGLISH: This involves writing papers about long books you have
read little snippets of just before class. Here is a tip on how to
get good grades on your English papers: Never say anything about a
book that anybody with any common sense would say. For example,
suppose you are studying Moby-Dick. Anybody with any common sense
would say that Moby-Dick is a big white whale, since the characters
in the book refer to it as a big white whale roughly eleven thousand
times. So in *your* paper, *you* say Moby-Dick is actually the
Republic of Ireland. Your professor, who is sick to death of
reading papers and never liked Moby-Dick anyway, will think you are
enormously creative. If you can regularly come up with lunatic
interpretations of simple stories, you should major in English.

  PHILOSOPHY: Basically, this involves sitting in a room and
deciding there is no such thing as reality and then going to lunch.
You should major in philosophy if you plan to take a lot of drugs.

  PSYCHOLOGY: This involves talking about rats and dreams.
Psychologists are *obsessed* with rats and dreams. I once spent an
entire semester training a rat to punch little buttons in a certain
sequence, then training my roommate to do the same thing. The rat
learned much faster. My roommate is now a doctor. If you like rats
or dreams, and above all if you dream about rats, you should major
in psychology.

  SOCIOLOGY: For sheer lack of intelligibility, sociology is far
and away the number one subject. I sat through hundreds of hours of
sociology courses, and read gobs of sociology writing, and I never
once heard or read a coherent statement. This is because
sociologists want to be considered scientists, so they spend most of
their time translating simple, obvious observations into
scientific-sounding code. If you plan to major in sociology, you'll
have to learn to do the same thing. For example, suppose you have
observed that children cry when they fall down. You should write:
"Methodological observation of the sociometrical behavior tendencies
of prematurated isolates indicates that a casual relationship exists
between groundward tropism and lachrimatory, or 'crying,' behavior
forms." If you can keep this up for fifty or sixty pages, you will
get a large government grant.

========================[ H U M O U R N E T ]=======================

SUBJ: Dilbert Index

I'm starting an index of the top ten most irritating` business
practices.  It's a non-scientific survey that will eventually be
construed as scientific because most people don't care whether their
information is reliable or not.

To participate, just vote for the THREE that irritate you the most
and send your vote to:  IndexBert@aol.com for tabulation.  This will
be an ongoing measure.

   *  Quality
   *  Empowerment
   *  Performance reviews
   *  Idiots promoted to management
   *  Reengineering
   *  Status reporting
   *  Ordering office supplies
   *  Micromanagement
   *  Longer hours without overtime pay
   *  Hoteling (first-come cubicles)
   *  Lack of training
   *  Being forced to work with idiots

-- Annoying Index Results

In my last newsletter I asked people to vote for their top three
annoying business practices.  Nearly 1,500 people voted.

The results will surprise nobody in the DNRC:  the winning irritant
was "Idiots promoted to management" followed closely by "Being
forced to work with idiots".

                                       Votes
                                       -----
   - Idiots promoted to management      924
   - Being forced to work with idiots   638
   - Empowerment                        428
   - Micromanagement                    390
   - Status Reporting                   353
   - Performance Reviews                330
   - Reengineering                      285
   - Quality                            270
   - Overtime without pay               262
   - Lack of training                   142
   - Ordering Supplies                  112
   - Hoteling                            60

     Total votes                      4,194

The Associated Press picked up the story and it got reprinted in
major newspapers all over the country.  CNN reported it several
times on Prime Time News.

Dozens of reporters and radio shows called me to ask for my opinion
on how to deal with the idiot infestation problem.  I fed them a
bunch of crap about the importance of training.  But I'll tell you
my real opinion:

I think the only solution to the idiot problem is to have specially
trained German Shepherd dogs who identify idiots and separate them
from the rest of the people in meetings.

For example, when the idiot comes to the meeting 15 minutes late and
insists on revisiting the first agenda item the dog will burst into
the room and sink its teeth into the idiot's donut-fattened thigh
and drag him into the hallway.  This may seem cruel, but the dogs
will get used to it.

But suppose you have no budget for trained dogs.  What then?  The
answer is to assign all of the idiots to a new project that requires
lots of meetings and has no vital business purpose.

You could call it something like "The Quality Competitiveness Task
Force" to conceal your treachery.  Wait nine months (a respectable
time) then eliminate the project and its staff without having to
address the question of their individual shortcomings.

********************************************************************
 Anyone Without a Sense of Humor Is At The Mercy of The Rest of Us.
********************************************************************

"HumourNet" is brought to you by Lyris -- an innovative new e-mail
list server from The Walter Shelby Group, Ltd. For more information
on Lyris, see <http://www.lyris.com/>.

To subscribe to the "HumourNet" mailing list, send the following
command to <lyris@lyris.net>:

subscribe HumourNet your_name, your_city, your_state or country

where "your_name" is your real name, etc. If you run into problems,
then either (1) send any message to <HumourNet-info@lyris.net> for
a more detailed set of instructions, (2) subscribe via Lyris's Web
interface at <http://www.lyris.net/>, or (3) send a *detailed*
description of the problem to <Listmom@telephonet.com>.

To unsubscribe, visit our Web interface at <http://www.lyris.net/>
or refer to your Welcome message for detailed instructions.

For instructions on contributing to HumourNet, send any message to
<contribution-guidelines@lyris.net>.

>>> Note: Attributions in Collage openers are to the contributors,
not necessarily the authors. Authors' credits are included in the
text wherever possible. <<<

The HumourNet archives can be accessed via the Web and FTP:

    Web: <http://www.humournet.com/HumourNet/>
    FTP: <ftp://ftp.humournet.com/pub/HumourNet/Collage.Archives/>

Permission is granted to forward or post this Collage, provided that
1) the message is forwarded/posted in its ENTIRETY, from the line
containing the Collage number and date to the end of this trailer,
and 2) no fee is charged.

There are "relaxed" forwarding/posting guidelines available; for a
copy of them, send any message to <posting-guidelines@lyris.net>, or
refer to your Welcome message.

********************************************************************
    "HumourNet" is a trademark of HumourNet Communications, Ltd.
********************************************************************
</collage095>