March 14th, 2006

Mostly social, mostly unreadable. "You eat with that mouth, too?" Mostly.

The Mostly Social Book Club met today sans Mary. Today's highlights:
  • Suzanne announced a life milestone: Her father has made an appointment to talk to a therapist about their relationship.

  • Sharon shared a little bit about a "60 Minutes" show that she saw about twins and homosexuality.

  • I shared a little bit about the "telepathy" experiment on the twins in the podcast I listened to yesterday.

  • Janet updated us on her detective work. She ended up hiring a private investigator, who got the record she needed, like .
Nary a word about books was uttered today.

The article we had to read for tomorrow's class was so difficult to read. [Pretend like you asked:] "How difficult was it?" It was so difficult that I decided to run the following paragraph from it through a readability assessment tool:

The articulation between viewer and viewed is ... conceptualized in this body of work ... as an internal relation. Indeed the two points in the circuit of articulation privileged here – the viewer and the viewed – are seen as mutually constitutive. The subject is, in part, formed subjectively through what and how it ‘sees’, how its ‘field of vision’ is constructed. In the same way, what is seen – the image and its meaning – is understood not as eternally fixed, but relative and implicated in the positions and schemas of interpretation which are brought to bear upon it. Visual discourses already have possible positions of interpretation (from which they ‘make sense’) embedded in them, and the subjects bring their own subjective desires and capacities to the ‘text’ which enable them to take up positions of identification in relation to its meaning.

which resulted in:

Readability Scores

The text you entered has been checked, and scored as follows:

Flesch-Kincaid Reading Ease: 23
Ideally, web page text should be around the 60 to 80 mark on this scale. The higher the score, the more readable the text.

Flesch-Kincaid Grade Level: 15
Ideally, web page text should be around the 6 to 7 mark on this scale. The lower the score, the more readable the text.

Gunning-Fog Index: 25
Ideally, web page text should be between 11 and 15 on this scale.The lower the score, the more readable the text. (Anything over 22 should be considered the equivalent of post-graduate level text).

In summary, I have two things to say:
  1. I've decided that it is a requirement to use the word "postmodern" in vetted papers. [Not to worry if that felt like a non sequitur; it somewhat was.] and

  2. I love that the root of the URL for this readability assessment tool is

I met av8rdude at Flex for scaryoke.

Just before Kevin got there, I was reading "This Month's Events" up on the bulletin board by the door, and I glanced at the guy staffing the door. I thought, "That guy looks oddly familiar."

Then, I remembered how Tula Box used to work the door on Tuesday night when she was the Sunday Night Karaoke host, and I had an epiphany. This was Alexsis Perry out of drag!

I felt pretty good about figuring that out, because I can never recognize drag queens "out of uniform" if I didn't know them before I knew they did drag. Another skill to add to my resume.

I mostly hung around with Michael L. and Kevin, and talked some with Rick and Blake.

Blake was waiting for a friend to arrive, and when he did, he was a real cutie. Two youngsters. 21, 22 the most.

Though young, the friend didn't seem too swift. When he was introduced to me, I couldn't understand his name because of the noise and singing -- and he had an accent. After asking him to repeat it three times, I said, "How do you spell that?"

To which he replied, "I don't know." Let's just hope he couldn't hear me either.

I mean that sounds like a joke:

"He's so dumb."
"How dumb is he?
"He's so dumb he can't spell his own name."
[Ba-dump bump. We're here all week folks.]