Direct involvement in research

[GadAbout]

How I think: I would say my thinking style is integrative, with some algorithms or rules-of-thumb for weighting variables.

An example: I have to buy a wheelchair accessible van sometime soon. Based on brand preference, I have test-driven a Honda Odyssey in the past, and found it comfortable to drive; it also has decent gas mileage. But then I went online to places where "best minivan" or "cost-to-own of minivans" are listed, and found that the Odyssey was in fact one of the highest rated or the very highest rated.

In this case, two sources of information were in agreement. Therefore, I can with confidence proceed with a vehicle search for Odyssey, skipping all other makers. Dealers may tempt me with other makes, and I will just say no, I have decided on an Odyssey. Having reached this one decisional node, I have no need for reconsideration and find such offers mere distractions. This is parsimony in action.

 

[Crossbreed]

The only way I could do the above is break the frame, arrange the squares and glue it back together. But that has to count for something right?

(It does if you are Captain Kirk...

)
Kobayashi Maru - Wikipedia

 

[Tom]

(It does if you are Captain Kirk...

)
Kobayashi Maru - Wikipedia

I had that scenerio in mind when I was replying, lol

 

[Streetwise]

Opinions aren't facts, for starters. I'm quick-footed, too. My attitude's necessary because it spares the nonsense. Nobody needs it. If you can't realise I pee in the pan too, then clear off. I do accept points, what was the opening here about if not asking other opinions? You don't have to buy into everything you're told. I don't necessarily expect much response, but if I don't try I'll get nowhere.

 

[Ronald Zeeman]

Interesting, although not quite as interesting as following the ABC conjecture if it was resolved or not.