Measuring Bullshit ...

In many contexts the conversation often revolves around the quality of bullshit that someone may commit and how we should measure this. After all, many of us would reason that great bullshit is an art form, like sarcasm must be preserved and developed in those showing great promise for this talent.

Consider the following simple formula:

... with b (for bullshit); that should be obvious, has three indicators, impact (i), relevance (r) and quality (q):
  • (i)mpact scale 0 to 10
  • (r)elevance scale 0 to 5
  • (q)uality scale 1 to 10 (which is an inverse, so 1 is top notch and 10 is dire)
Now for the important part, each of these values are subjective. Using i as an example, zero is obvious, what is 10 and how do we agree on 5?

If I am a prime bullshitter, my score could be b=((10*5)/1)^2=2500. Whereas the worse would be ((0*0)/10)^2, which would be 0 (of course).

So, for the important questions ...

  1. Am I missing any indices?
  2. How do we agree on the scale for each of the current indices?
  3. Do I need to use lower values? 

I look forward to your comments.


Popular posts from this blog

HeartBleed article in @ConversationUK ...

Simulation vs emulation vs virtualisation ....

Slow are the wheels that maketh the #Linux NAL ...