Curse my addled brain.

Er, wait… maybe that’s every episode.

No no… it’s worse in this episode than in other episodes. And I know what happened. I didn’t have any chocolate beforehand. That’ll teach me.

Anyway, for the record, my uncle did say, “He’s no closer to God than I am.” I’m not sure how the term “religious” came into it, or even if it did. I’ve told this story a thousand times, because it was such a significant event in my life, so I don’t know how I could mess it up on the air. But, again… no chocolate.

Oh, and sincerely… I hope I didn’t offend any of our Catholic listeners. My beliefs differ from yours, obviously, but I have nothing but respect for devout Catholics.

*sigh*

I often hate my addled brain.

Also, first post woot!

Perhaps The Magical Talking Hat’s actual magical power is to link all the multiverses together? And so when questions are drawn from The Magical Talking Hat they could theoretically get pulled from another universe?

Jet Li’s The One: That was a horrible remake of Highlander.

Gravy flavored frosting: Mmmmmmmm.

Evil William is eeeeeeeevil.

Quit/Give up:

Willing/Able: If you’re willing to do something but you know as fact that you can’t do it; then you have to decide if the journey to try to do it is worth it even if you never reach the goal.

Tony/Unicorn: Impossible? Bah, he could wear a costume or get surgery to resculpt his face into a horse head with a horn on it.

Sociological argument stuff: I’ve listened to this bit of the podcast multiple times and I keep getting distracted each time without writing down any notes or comments. So I guess I’m just going to say: people suck, individuals may or may not suck.

I’m organizing a big UAT effort at work using Google docs, let me know if I can help you guys.

Indeed, many people who consider themselves geeks or nerds want to differentiate themselves and/or perhaps feel as though they belong to an elite group, but this actually supports my assertions regarding the role status plays. I didn’t mean to suggest that the “being a geek is just being passionate about something” definition is an attempt to construct a “big tent” for geekdom. The point I was trying to make is…

OK, first take your point about a geek wanting to feel like they belong to an exclusive group. Next, add that in spite of their somewhat superior feeling in belonging to this group, they and/or people like them are actually ridiculed by the larger culture. What will this geek do? It’s true that they don’t want everyone trying to be them, because if that happened they’d lose their “specialness”. But being misunderstood is one thing, and being marginalized is another. The former may make you a social outsider — which you can imagine others thinking is cool even if they aren’t hip enough to be an outsider themselves — but the latter makes you a social outcast — putting you in a “social pit”, as it were. What I’m suggesting is that defining geek as “someone who has a passion for something” is an effort to fill “the pit” and put geeks on a level social playing field with everyone else. Once this is accomplished, there are still many ways for them to be social outsiders, they just don’t have to be social outcasts anymore.

All of that said… I think when Wil Wheaton uses this kind of definition, he’s looking to be neither a social outcast or a social outsider. I don’t think Wil is elitist about geekdom in the slightest. He’s like… an evangelist for geek who wants to make everyone a born again geek and through some kind of nerd faith healing rid them of their joyless, fun-banishing cynicism. This explains, actually, why Wil defines the terms this way, because he wants people to connect — or re-connect — to what is likely a childhood passion and learn to be playful with it again. I think he, too, would be better served focusing on the playful rather than the passion, but I understand his definition given what his goals are. I still think others, though, like the “passion” definition for the reasons I’ve already described — not so that they’ll be accepted, but so that they won’t be summarily rejected.

Personally I suspect the reason all the responses were so positive is due to the the mind control messages that you’ve embedded in the audio and which play during the catatonia phase of listening to the podcast.

Frog/Sausage: For some reason when William first mentioned Tony playing both of these parts; I immediately thought of sausage made from frogs. *sigh* Sometimes I even disturb myself.

Tony: You’ve always been a little funny.

Chopping trees: Did you really chop down a tree? Was it a cherry tree? Could you not tell a lie about it?

Congratulations on your ninth anniversary!

100 things you must eat before you die? Did you discuss this on the podcast previously and I’ve just forgotten?

A video game recommendation for me? Really? Oh and now you’re going to leave me hanging till next time?

Dresden Files: Magical overkill, ha! And yes, complications/mistakes are what make stories interesting.

Geeks: William did you perchance watch this video ( Why it’s awesome to be a nerd) by Wil Wheaton before recording this episode?

Nerd vs Geek: I think that’s rather much a regional colloquialism. Additionally, I don’t think the loss of status is really tied into definition and your hypothesis that geeks want the definition to include as many people as possible is wrong. Rather they are more likely to narrowly define being a geek to exclude as many people as they can, specifically to differentiate themselves.