Moo-lesters

http://www.wfsb.com/story/24804321/men-arrested-for-sexually-abusing-cows

And we were told cow tipping was bad.

Tipping? They weren't even paying...

You only have to tip them if they dance for you.

Cow tipping =/= to just the tip.

Imagine getting your picture in the paper for THAT! Their momma's must be proud.

Zomby Woof wrote: Tipping? They weren't even paying...

What would Uganda do with them?

aussiesmg wrote: What would Uganda do with them?

I bet they wouldn't be working their sentences off as cowboys or shepherds.

Wonder what the local gals they know are thinking right now?

so is 15% the normal tip for a cow?

mad_machine wrote: so is 15% the normal tip for a cow?

Nope. 90 degrees or nothing.

What amazed me was "men" in the story, i.e., this was a group activity. That means, at some point, two dudes were talking and one says to the other, "You know what we oughta go do . . ."

Just goes to prove the formula is (stupidity of moron#1 X stupidity of moron#2 = gross amount of stupidity) not (stupidity of moron#1 + stupidity of moron#2 = gross amount of stupidity)

Are you sure it isn't (average amount of stupidity per moron)^(to the power of) (number of morons involved)?

Wisconsin: were the men are men, and the cows are mighty scared.

aussiesmg wrote: What would Uganda do with them?

steak on the barbie.

Rufledt wrote: Are you sure it isn't (average amount of stupidity per moron)^(to the power of) (number of morons involved)?

stupidity is exponential

Were they drunken Kiwi's who thought they were sheep?

One guy from Connecticut, one from New York. That makes it an interstate commerce issue, right?

I guess they weren't consenting cows, huh?

mad_machine wrote:

Rufledt wrote: Are you sure it isn't (average amount of stupidity per moron)^(to the power of) (number of morons involved)?

stupidity is exponential

I've always thought it was groupStupid=(stupid*(alcohol+1))^(number of morons)

Alcohol must have 1 added, as in the event of 0 alcohol, stupid can still occur. Also remember that drunkenness increases stupidity logarithmically, so you need to plot number of drinks on a log scale to get the variable "alcohol".

Kenny_McCormic wrote:

mad_machine wrote:

Rufledt wrote: Are you sure it isn't (average amount of stupidity per moron)^(to the power of) (number of morons involved)?

stupidity is exponential

I've always thought it was groupStupid=(stupid*(alcohol+1))^(number of morons) Alcohol must have 1 added, as in the event of 0 alcohol, stupid can still occur. Also remember that drunkenness increases stupidity logarithmically, so you need to plot number of drinks on a log scale to get the variable "alcohol".

That's really a solid equation right there. Maybe "The Formula for Stupid" needs its own thread.

OK. I've herd enough. This is udder madness! You guys have to start thinking veally hard about the subjects you post. I suggest you steer away from such low down topics or at least keep them rare.

It has been decreed that henceforth and forevermore, all inhabitants of the region known as "NEW ENGLAND" shall be greeted with the phrase "OY, COW FOKKER".

kazoospec wrote:

Kenny_McCormic wrote:

mad_machine wrote:

Rufledt wrote: Are you sure it isn't (average amount of stupidity per moron)^(to the power of) (number of morons involved)?

stupidity is exponential

I've always thought it was groupStupid=(stupid*(alcohol+1))^(number of morons) Alcohol must have 1 added, as in the event of 0 alcohol, stupid can still occur. Also remember that drunkenness increases stupidity logarithmically, so you need to plot number of drinks on a log scale to get the variable "alcohol".

That's really a solid equation right there. Maybe "The Formula for Stupid" needs its own thread.

is that a +1 just for drinking, or are we adding 1 for every drink that is taken in the group?

In reply to mad_machine:

I'm a bit more awake now, and thus more qualified for math.

No, if it was just groupStupid=(stupid*(alcohol))^(number of morons), settign "alcohol" to zero would automatically set groupStupid to zero, since we know that people can be stupid without drinking, we have to put that +1 in there so you will still get an answer, multiplying by one will have no effect on the outcome.

Quantification of "stupid" will require some study, though we can probably go off some 1-10 scale. However we can probably approximate the exponential effect of alcohol on the equation by replacing the arbitrary (alcohol+1) with something more grounded in reality. We know that the constant "e" appears a lot in nature, stupidity is natural, and drinking has exponential effects on stupidity, so I'm going with (e^numberOfDrinks), numberOfDrinks being an average taken by total drinks divided by numberOfMorons giving us average drunkenness. The odds of only one moron in a group being hammered are quite low(the "go home, you're drunk" effect), so this should be fairly accurate.

Giving us

groupStupid=(stupid*(e^numberOfDrinks))^(numberOfMorons)

I attempted to plug this all into wolframalpha assuming stupid=5(the average moron) but it didnt like it, and I'm too lazy to drive to a university computer lab with some decent math software and do it that way.