Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!ames!think!bloom-beacon!gatech!hubcap!beede
From: beede@hubcap.UUCP
Newsgroups: comp.misc
Subject: Re: A test of discernment/employment
Message-ID: <414@hubcap.UUCP>
Date: Sun, 30-Aug-87 10:20:30 EDT
Article-I.D.: hubcap.414
Posted: Sun Aug 30 10:20:30 1987
Date-Received: Sun, 30-Aug-87 19:48:01 EDT
References: <7660001@hpfcls.HP.COM>
Organization: Clemson University, Clemson, SC
Lines: 33

in article <7660001@hpfcls.HP.COM>, neutron@hpfcls.HP.COM (Jack Applin) says:
] 
] preis@bc-cis.UUCP (David Preisler) writes:
] 
]>			A Test Of Discernment
] 
] This sort of test bothers me.  I think we can boil this test down a bit:
] 
] 1.  Read all directions before you do anything.
] 2.  Draw a horse on the paper.
] 3.  Make sure not do draw on the paper.
]     (or: Ignore instruction #2)
] 
] Upon reading #3, I think: "This test is inconsistent." 
] Instructions 2 & 3 have the same level of importance; who says
] that #3 can override #2?  If #2 had come after #3, would we be
] expected to obey the latter one?
] 
I agree.  This is merely a gag -- to state that someone has
``failed'' if they answer any question but number 3 is to
reward the plodders who perform tasks as you would expect
a computer to.  

Hopefully a test of ``discernment'' would not eliminate all
candidates with initiative.

But, then again, maybe you could just blow off all the
candidates that passed . . . (donning protective gear now :->)
-- 
Mike Beede                      
Computer Science Dept.          UUCP: . . . !hubcap!beede
Clemson University              INET: beede@hubcap.clemson.edu
Clemson SC 29634-1906           YOUR DIME: (803)656-{2845,3444}