[georgieporgie]

Did you just "I know what you are, but what am I?" me?

No.

What I said: serve up content based upon IQ and personality. Your response, regarding garbage men, was classist. Further, you seem to have assumed that I am advocating some sort of segregation based upon intelligence.

Or does hanging out with the jocks mean you're stupid by association?

Please show where I have indicated any of the projections contained in that ranting paragraph.

You don't have to defend your statement to the death. You can just say "Geeze, I didn't think about it and IQ isn't really a good indicator for what a user may want to see as content."

Your maligning of my statements is offensive. Additionally, you have done nothing whatsoever to show that intelligence and personality quizzes won't lead to better personalized content. Instead, you have merely been highly judgmental and attacked me based upon your own (apparent) prejudices.

[parfe]

I am confused why you brought class into this discussion, but I mentioned garbage men because it's a stereotypical dumb job. Not much critical thinking involved in emptying trash bins into trucks. If you want to claim IQ isn't tied to being a garbage man I applaud you. You saw my point.

>Further, you seem to have assumed that I am advocating some sort of segregation based upon intelligence.

If you are showing dumb people a different set of content then smart people you have segregated them. I don't see how you are claiming otherwise. Perhaps you should expand on how putting them in two different areas of the same website is not segregation.

On to a concrete example. What does intelligence matter when a story like NASA's Mars Rover Opportunity Begins Study of Martian Crater[1]? Can you please score that story on the IQ scale? 100 IQ? 90? 125? Should only those with science degrees be allowed to comment? Perhaps only those with Ph.D's?

Will you segregate all religious discussion to people with low IQ and atheists kept away? After all, there is a negative correlation with IQ and religiosity.

>Your maligning of my statements is offensive.

Your assumption that dumb people only have dumb interests is offensive.

>Additionally, you have done nothing whatsoever to show that intelligence and personality quizzes won't lead to better personalized content.

I only claimed your assumption that IQ correlates with interests was invalid. Personality tests is closer to something I could agree with.

>Instead, you have merely been highly judgmental and attacked me based upon your own (apparent) prejudices.

I am not the one suggesting we put dullards in a virtual cellar because they aren't smart enough to care about a new HIV vaccine or space travel, which we put the smart people in the master suite but block ESPNs because smart people shouldn't be exposed to sports.

You suggested that content be associated with IQ. but have not put forth any explanation towards what such a result might look like.

1 http://www.nasa.gov/mission_pages/mer/news/mer20110901.html

[georgieporgie]

I am confused why you brought class into this discussion

Are you kidding? Your entire rant was classist and bigoted. Theoretical physicists, garbage men, football fans, NASCAR fans, etc. You are the one who believes these activities split along intelligence lines, not me.

I am not the one suggesting we put dullards in a virtual cellar

Really? Because I certainly said nothing of the sort.

but block ESPNs because smart people shouldn't be exposed to sports

There you go again. Reread what you wrote. You have twice indicated that "jocks" and sports fans are inherently stupid. Why? And why are you holding it against me, when you yourself made that assertion?

You suggested that content be associated with IQ. but have not put forth any explanation towards what such a result might look like.

So, what, before making a comment, I'm required to research it myself? Maybe I need to build out an entire website, just so that you won't attack me. Is that how it works? Given that this is on a website for entrepreneurs, where unusual ideas are supposed to be valued, that's pretty sad.

You clearly have a chip on your shoulder about something, and I'm no longer interested in battling your onslaught of projection.

[parfe]

Oh man, thanks for answering nothing about your position. You obviously have no idea what your original comment would be manifested as.

Please answer me: What would a couple examples of content separated by IQ look like? And how is this not segregation (as you repeatedly claimed it was not)?

Here is me predicting your next comment is either "You aren't worth my time" or "You just don't understand what I'm saying." Go ahead and hide from your ill-thought out and intellectually prejudiced idea.

And kudos for side-stepping the concrete example I asked about. Really shows some spine.