![]() |
If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mxsmanic wrote:
Bertie the Bunyip writes: Why, don't they accept the bankrupt? Doesn't answer the question asked. Because (1) people who know the organization well know how dysfunctional some of its members are, and that they might not make good team players; and (2) people who aren't Mensa-qualified themselves might resent the mention on a resume. 1) In some jobs the ability to be autonomous is of great value, in most jobs intelligence is of great value. 2) An employer that only hires people lesser qualified than himself is an idiot. This is why many of the club's members do _not_ mention it on a resume, although it's quite a topic of debate. Sour grapes. A Mensa member who's a student might not want to mention it on a resume for a summer job flipping burgers. -- Jim Pennino Remove .spam.sux to reply. |
#2
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]() |
#4
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
"Bertie the Bunyip" wrote in message
.. . Mxsmanic wrote in : writes: yes, yet another piggyback 1) In some jobs the ability to be autonomous is of great value, in most jobs intelligence is of great value. Intelligence is useful in almost any job and is a valuable predictor of success in most jobs. However, joining a social club based on IQ says other things about a person that are not necessarily positive. And as I've said, anyone who has a good knowledge of Mensa might think twice about hiring someone in the club. How the **** would you demonstrate that you have the "valuable predictor" of intelligence without a group, such as Mensa, that filters applicants based on intelligence, dip****? And don't tell me "standardized tests." I've interviewed too many dumb****s that couldn't tell me the difference between a pointer and a reference even though they had a "computer science' degree. Like I said. The *ONLY* qualifier of membership in Mensa is a demonstration of the upper 2 percentile. Nothing more, nothing less. (well, that and the ability to pay dues g). Your statement is just a giant non sequitor, obviously caused by "sour grapes". -- Doug Semler a.a. #705, BAAWA. EAC Guardian of the Horn of the IPU (pbuhh). The answer is 42; DNRC o- Gur Hfrarg unf orpbzr fb shyy bs penc gurfr qnlf, abbar rira erpbtavmrf fvzcyr guvatf yvxr ebg13 nalzber. Fnq, vfa'g vg? |
#5
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Doug Semler writes:
How the **** would you demonstrate that you have the "valuable predictor" of intelligence without a group, such as Mensa, that filters applicants based on intelligence, dip****? An IQ test would suffice. However, intelligence is usually fairly obvious. And don't tell me "standardized tests." I've interviewed too many dumb****s that couldn't tell me the difference between a pointer and a reference even though they had a "computer science' degree. Given that Mensa requires results from a standardized test to qualify for membership, I find your comment rather odd. Like I said. The *ONLY* qualifier of membership in Mensa is a demonstration of the upper 2 percentile. Nothing more, nothing less. Yes, and Mensa has a list of standardized tests, just like the ones you disdain, that it will accept as proof of being in the upper two percent. |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Mxsmanic wrote in
: Doug Semler writes: How the **** would you demonstrate that you have the "valuable predictor" of intelligence without a group, such as Mensa, that filters applicants based on intelligence, dip****? An IQ test would suffice. However, intelligence is usually fairly obvious. And yet, even people of moderate intelligence can understand bernoulli Bertie |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Martin wrote in
: On Fri, 17 Aug 2007 10:58:02 +0000 (UTC), Bertie the Bunyip wrote: Mxsmanic wrote in m: Doug Semler writes: How the **** would you demonstrate that you have the "valuable predictor" of intelligence without a group, such as Mensa, that filters applicants based on intelligence, dip****? An IQ test would suffice. However, intelligence is usually fairly obvious. And yet, even people of moderate intelligence can understand bernoulli The average IQ of US enlisted men tested during WW1 was that of a12 year old. IQ isn't really age related. though it is true that capacity increases with age, the measurement is usually like/like otherwise it's kind of pointless. So it would be fairer to say that they had a sub-normal IQ of say ,less than 85 than to say they had the IQ of a 12 year old. It'd be a bit like comparing the horsepower of a modern airplane to the horsepower of a airplane from 75 years ago. In general, airplanes of 75 years ago had smaller engines, but you could b talking about a mustang. IOW, you're not neccesarily comparing like with like. |
#8
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
Martin writes:
The average IQ of US enlisted men tested during WW1 was that of a12 year old. IQ does not vary with age, so "the IQ of a twelve-year-old" has no meaning. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
![]() |
||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
Those *dangerous* Korean War relics | Kingfish | Piloting | 192 | June 19th 06 07:06 PM |
reporting dangerous aircraft | [email protected] | General Aviation | 4 | October 20th 05 09:15 AM |
Okay, so maybe flying *is* dangerous... | Jay Honeck | Piloting | 51 | August 31st 05 03:02 AM |
Dangerous Stuff | [email protected] | Rotorcraft | 21 | July 16th 05 05:55 PM |
Flying - third most dangerous occupation | David CL Francis | Piloting | 16 | October 22nd 03 02:38 AM |