Edward O'Connor ([info]hober) wrote,
@ 2008-03-31 11:29:00
Previous Entry  Add to memories!  Tell a Friend!  Next Entry
Current location:San Diego, CA
Current mood:amused

oist macking graph

I immediately thought of [info]other when reading the latest XKCD. Whatever happend to the graph?


(Post a new comment)


[info]radtea
2008-03-31 06:58 pm UTC (link)
I had the same thought, after I got done busting a gut over the alt-text.

(Reply to this)


[info]gedanken666
2008-03-31 07:32 pm UTC (link)
http://community.livejournal.com/oishmacking/

(Reply to this)


[info]madbard
2008-03-31 07:39 pm UTC (link)
Perhaps the many people who threatened his life if they were to appear on such a chart began to make an impact.

(Reply to this) (Thread)

[info]other
2008-03-31 09:25 pm UTC (link)
If I remember correctly, you were on an early draft and I took you off after you requested it. Everyone else said that it was wrong, but quickly added "oh, you have Foo and Bar, right?".

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

(Deleted post)

[info]hober
2008-03-31 09:39 pm UTC (link)
That wasn't very nice.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]radtea
2008-04-01 12:36 am UTC (link)
Hey, I didn't say it was wrong (morally). I just said if I was on it was bound to be wrong (factually).

(Reply to this) (Parent)(Thread)

[info]other
2008-04-01 01:53 am UTC (link)
Did you? Okay. Actually, I said that wrong. A lot of people thought it was just damn funny. I meant to say that everyone else who said it was morally wrong didn't find it so wrong that they weren't willing to name names. They usually add "this is so wrong" and giggle as they were naming names. [info]madbard was the the only one who wouldn't play along and asked me to remove his name. I did. Someone else asked me to remove his sister's name, but he was okay with him on the list and added a few names himself. I never made the list public, so pretty much everyone took it as it was. I think only a half a dozen people saw a version of it.

It was odd. I made the joke threatening to do it and people jumped on it giving me lists of people. I just threw the names into graphviz and it was there. It happened so fast. I seemed to have the most moral qualms about it of the people working on it and that is why I kept it carefully under guard.

There were mistakes. Quite a few actually. Someone mentioned that I should link someone's husband to her oval. "What? *looks* Hey, that's wrong." "lol. That's how rumours start." I was going by the Sum Sem attendance list and I got two names confused. Another mistake is that I heard that two couples did every permutation between them, which was almost but not entirely true.

(Reply to this) (Parent)

[info]kirinqueen
2008-03-31 08:13 pm UTC (link)
Ew.

(Reply to this)


[info]other
2008-03-31 09:22 pm UTC (link)
LOL. Whoops! I shouldn't have been checking my friend's page during religion class.

The graph exists... somewhere. I think. It's backed up on a CD-ROM somewhere in my room. Some people have seen the chart, but no one but me has seen the source. It might be lost to time.

I started the chart when I was sort of in the loop but not really and the chart was my way of getting deep into the loop. The problem is that I haven't seen any Objectivish people in real life since 2001. Oh wait, I saw Walter once a few years ago. I'm completely out of the loop now. I wouldn't know where to start with it.

Also, there was the remote possibility then that someone would say "Hey [info]other, we need to get you on the graph." Since I haven't seen an Objectivish girl in six or seven years, the motivation to maintain this illusion has gone away.

I don't know about them, but my graph was way too large to be worried about symmetries. I bet they used UML or something static like that to make their chart (instead of graphviz). Amateurs!

Oh yeah, April was Oish Macking Month... Maybe I should start it up again tomorrow. Any leads?

(Reply to this)

Create an Account
Forgot your login or password?
Login w/ OpenID
English • Español • Deutsch • Русский…