Subject:
|
Re: i admit i was wrong
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.admin.general
|
Date:
|
Mon, 16 Aug 1999 02:51:37 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
189 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.admin.general, Larry Pieniazek writes:
> Todd Lehman wrote:
> > Spam0man said:
hehe
> > Hehheh. Sure, heck, why not 8/13 or 34/55? ;-)
> >
> > But seriously: Cool and fun the golden ratio may be, but only 61.8% it is.
> > (Er, 1/phi is 61.8%, that is; phi itself is 1.618... Anyway.)
>
> He trolled you (1). He doesn't really mean 1/phi, he is asking what the
> right ratio should be in this case.... me, I think 5/7ths isn't too bad!
> It has a good feel to it.
Yup. Gotta love those lower prime numbers :-)
> > 61.8% is more than 1/2, obviously, and more 3/5, but it's less than 2/3.
> > Isn't that a bit too small?
>
> Yes, 61.8 is too small.
Definitely too small.
> 1 - or maybe YOU trolled ME? Who can say? Maybe I was AUTO-trolling.
I was fishing for salmon and caught a sturgeon instead! No troll intended, I
plainly used an ambiguous term (see a prior post from me on Part One of
Communication ;-). If I had meant 1/phi I probly would have capped my case as
in, Golden Ratio, and would have mentioned phi to further ensure clarity via
context. Phi is good for snail and nautilus housing, but not for establishing
a decent voting majority IMHO.
-Tom McD.
when replying, the Streets of San Francisco, a Quinn Spamcake production.
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
 | | Re: i admit i was wrong
|
| (...) He trolled you (1). He doesn't really mean 1/phi, he is asking what the right ratio should be in this case.... me, I think 5/7ths isn't too bad! It has a good feel to it. (...) Yes, 61.8 is too small. 1 - or maybe YOU trolled ME? Who can say? (...) (25 years ago, 15-Aug-99, to lugnet.admin.general)
|
2 Messages in This Thread:
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
