Warrior General Games

Originally posted by vladykins
If you have a job where this is important, then I recommend you question your assumptions each time,
i already do. you should question your assumption that i don't.

Originally posted by vladykins
or otherwise you are going to be killing a lot of people with your logic. Good luck and try not to harm anyone with your faulty logic.

hasn't happened yet because my logic isn't faulty. good luck and try not to cut yourself on your keyboard.

p.s. https://repl.it/CVD0 <--- click 'run'

Originally posted by ibleedgreen007
I think the problem is that you're both trying to figure out different things, but you're not realizing it. spin is trying to make a point that you don't know how long each dude lasted with her on average until you have all of the information of how many guys she's doing at a time, whereas cat is essentially calculating the amount of time she has spent with each guy over that amount of time.

almost.

i fully agree with everyone's calculation of duration. the only dispute left is that i'm claiming that average time-per-dude is not equal to that duration while everyone else seems to think if we close our eyes hard enough we can ignore how many extra terms we're cramming down the treadmill and voila, average time-per-dude is suddenly not total time divided by total dudes because fuck math.

it's bizarre.

Originally posted by spindoctor02
http://cdn.someecards.com/someecards/usercards/MjAxMy03NmRhYTc1MWE5NzUxNDgy.png

p sure you were the one condescending to me, dude.

not my fault you were wrong at the time.

Originally posted by ibleedgreen007
I think the problem is that you're both trying to figure out different things, but you're not realizing it. spin is trying to make a point that you don't know how long each dude lasted with her on average until you have all of the information of how many guys she's doing at a time, whereas cat is essentially calculating the amount of time she has spent with each guy over that amount of time.

He's stuck on the exact definition of "artihmetic mean". In that situation, he's correct. However, nobody is talking about the arithmetic mean. They are talking about multiple dudes banging a chick over a set period of time.

Catallus was just arguing semantics essentially

Originally posted by spindoctor02
He's stuck on the exact definition of "artihmetic mean". In that situation, he's correct. However, nobody is talking about the arithmetic mean. They are talking about multiple dudes banging a chick over a set period of time.

dude, you realize anyone can just go back and look at the posts, right?

Originally posted by spindoctor02
Originally posted by Catullus16
also, it would still be 103sec/dude
that's how average rates work.
That's how averages work if it's only 1 at a time.
If you have 4 at one time, then its 43 min / (25 guys / 4 guys at 1 time) = 6 min 53 seconds per dude.
/learntomath

there seems to be a positive correlation between the number of times you post and the number of times you're wrong. try thinking first.

Originally posted by Darren Sanders
Catallus was just arguing semantics essentially

nope, but that's always the desperate cop-out of people who can't admit that they were wrong.

Originally posted by Catullus16
nope, but that's always the desperate cop-out of people who can't admit that they were wrong.

you're arguing about the language of "average" no?

Originally posted by Catullus16

you are leaning rather hard on this particular little theory, to your detriment. the only assumption being made here is that by "average" we mean the arithmetic mean. at which point, exactly how many definitions for arithmetic mean do you think there are? if we're looking for the mean in terms of time-per-dude, well then that's total time divided by total dudes. end of story.

i realize that's not the number you like, but you can't just pretend that we've entered the world of opinions and do a little handwaving to get the number you want -- because doing so means you're now dealing with other terms entirely. if you want the mean in terms of girltime-per-dude, then calculate that. the error(s) you're making here are tantamount to thinking that yen is yaun or that years are lightyears. your innumeracy is troubling.

Again, your issue is you are equating "total time" as "total period of time spent by chick" which does not necessarily equal total time spent by dudes. Once you realize this, your whole world will be rainbows and unicorns. Because what we do not have addressed, anywhere, is the total amount of time spent in the bathroom by the dudes, only the amount spent by the chick. Time per dude means you need to use the amount of time spent by the dudes and so once you want to admit that you have made certain assumptions, then I am willing to acknowledge that you have correctly calculated your number.


Let's use an entirely different example:

A bank has been open for a year. 365 people have had deposits in the bank for varying amounts of time. If you wanted to know the amount of time, on average, each account had been open, you would not use your calculation and say "1 day/account".

Originally posted by Darren Sanders
you're arguing about the language of "average" no?

nope.

'average' is a mathematical concept. unless you're calling everything a semantics dispute, then this clearly isn't.

Guys I'd just like to apologize for my daughter's actions. Not that she's a filthy whore, but the fact she didn't invite you guys to the gang bang.

Originally posted by Catullus16
nope.

'average' is a mathematical concept. unless you're calling everything a semantics dispute, then this clearly isn't.

"semantics - the branch of linguistics and logic concerned with meaning"

Originally posted by vladykins
Again, your issue is you are equating "total time" as "total period of time spent by chick"
nope.

total time is total time. 43min. end of story.


Originally posted by vladykins
which does not necessarily equal total time spent by dudes.
exactly!

to calculate duration, you need to account for simultaneity. the average in terms of time-per-dude does not capture simultaneity, so to calculate duration you need to include another term -- which is precisely what you keep doing and what i keep agreeing with, so we're fine to that point. the only problem is that you then take the unnecessary step of further claiming that the duration is the average as if you didn't include the term you just included. why are you being so sloppy?


Originally posted by vladykins
Once you realize this, your whole world will be rainbows and unicorns. Because what we do not have addressed, anywhere, is the total amount of time spent in the bathroom by the dudes, only the amount spent by the chick.
wrong again.

total time is total time. 43min. end of story.

Originally posted by vladykins
Time per dude means you need to use the amount of time spent by the dudes
which is 43min. end of story.


Originally posted by vladykins
and so once you want to admit that you have made certain assumptions,
the only assumption made is that by "average" we mean the arithmetic mean.


Originally posted by vladykins
then I am willing to acknowledge that you have correctly calculated your number.
frankly, i don't care if you ever figure this out, let alone bring yourself to admit it. i don't need an apology.


Originally posted by vladykins
Let's use an entirely different example:
A bank has been open for a year. 365 people have had deposits in the bank for varying amounts of time. If you wanted to know the amount of time, on average, each account had been open, you would not use your calculation and say "1 day/account".

do you understand how that's an entirely different question? do you realize what the word "each" means? this would be like saying bob's average speed was 45mph -- which is a perfectly correct answer to a question that wasn't asked.

And you have asked the wrong question yourself every time. If you had said "what was the average amount of time per dude that the girl experienced having dudes, then your answer would be correct. But you equate that time is a constant and is separate from duration (something I usually only see in project managers working with elapsed time). But go ahead and search up time versus duration and you will find that only some folks out there agree with your "Time can only mean one thing" argument. Thus, you have assumed something else as well in making your answer the only "correct" one.

Would you like to try again?

So again, you equate the bank being open for a span of "time" one year to be the only measure of time, and thus it becomes 1 day/account.