December 14, 2006 7:07 pm

I have just finished my final final (heh)! That means I’m done for the semester. As I was walking back from class, I got very excited and did a little skip and jump. It was sort of embarrassing because there was a car behind me and I didn’t land very well. Do you ever feel like if you just believe hard enough, you can make something come true? I felt, walking along, as though if I just started running and believed that I was running up stairs, I could run into the air and go where ever I wanted. I tried it, though, and I didn’t elevate at all! I was very disappointed, even though I believed with all my might. Perhaps I wasn’t running fast enough.

There was an acronym on the test that I couldn’t figure out. What could it possibly stand for? It had no bearing on the question but I got sidetracked for a long time trying to think of humorous combinations of interesting words. I have always loved doing that; in fact, there is a game called Acromania devoted entirely to it, which is very old, in computing terms. I originally discovered Acromania on a game called WorldsAway (now VZones) which began its life on CompuServe in the mid 90’s. I played for a couple of years and fell completely in love (reference Abigail’s Acromania for the WA incarnation). As a side note, I also discovered things like “LOL” and learned netiquette there. I also played a MUD for a number of years, where I programmed a few Acromania tools and hosted a couple of games (it never caught on, sadly).

As a tribute to this long-standing tradition, then, I am starting a game of Acromania right here, on my blog! You should read the Wikipedia page, but here are the basics: Every time I post, I will include an acronym. You respond with your submission in the comments (only one per person, please). I will pick the one I like best and post it next time; you will also get a point! At the end of the game (whenever it ends), the person with the most points wins a fabulous prize. It might die out after a few rounds; but if it catches on, maybe I’ll write some code so we can have a proper game with anonymous submissions and voting.

Okay. The acronym for today is MOCR. It was the one on the test. Have fun, and good luck!

17 Responses to “Most Overtly Creative Receives!”

Kathlyn says:
December 14th, 2006 at 7:44 pm

Monkeys, of course, rock.

Mike says:
December 15th, 2006 at 1:56 am

Multicollinear orthogonally correlated residuals. Econometrics is awesome.

indorphin says:
December 15th, 2006 at 6:18 pm

Aww. CheesyMUD.

Wonder if my character is still alive.

Or if I can remember my password.

My submission: Most overrated communist revival. And if I were the comic book guy from the simpsons, I’d add: EVER.

And the correct answer is: Mission Operations Control Room

Stormy says:
December 15th, 2006 at 6:50 pm

Oh, wow. You’re right! Because the questions actually stated, “You’re sitting in mission control, actually MOCR, …” However, I like my answers of “Mildly Ostracized Criminal Rehabilitation”, “Mongol Occupied Classical Rome”, and “Matt Ominously Cried, ‘Ravens!'”

Kevin says:
December 16th, 2006 at 9:06 am

Boring answer: Magnetic Optical Character Recognition

My submission: My Ocular Cock Rocks

Matt says:
December 16th, 2006 at 4:48 pm

ravens, huh?

How about: May omit criminal record…

Not sure I’d want that job.

Kathlyn says:
December 19th, 2006 at 6:54 pm

ERIC HANKINS I can’t stand the suspence!

indorphin says:
January 10th, 2007 at 5:13 pm

FYI

Your present should arrive Friday or Saturday…so sayeth the post office.

Kathlyn says:
January 11th, 2007 at 6:35 pm

ERIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIC!!!!!! This is not a game if someone does not allow those of us playing to further the game by giving us more phrases to make!!!!

Kathlyn says:
January 13th, 2007 at 3:04 pm

Eric? Why are you doing this?

Kathlyn says:
January 15th, 2007 at 7:33 pm

MR. HANKINS!!!!! I will continue to harass you until you post.

Stormy says:
January 21st, 2007 at 4:21 pm

RESULTS

I was tempted to go with Kevin’s answer, but then I started pondering that sort of technology. If it was magnetic (implying that some sort of magnetic ink had been used for printing), why would it need to be optical? And if it was optical, how is it magnetic? The obviously opposing words caused me to rule it out. I also enjoyed Mike’s answer, but the sheer length of the words employed caused me to wonder if he was just trying too hard. I didn’t know what any of the words meant so I googled the unquoted phrase and only got 28 results. Suspicious! So I googled the quoted phrase and the only result was his submission on my blog. Even more suspicious. So I ruled it out on the grounds that I’m pretty sure it’s nonsensical. Mike, if you can provide a reasonable explanation as to why your answer DOES make sense, I will give you a point. Further, I will give you a bonus point if it is riotously hilarious. I enjoyed the punctuation on Kathlyn’s response as well as its grammatical correctness, but I was completely turned off by the word ‘monkeys’ (reference here). This left it as a tie between Indo and Matt. I liked them both so I flipped a coin and Matt won.

SCOREBOARD
Matt: 1

Kathlyn says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 11:13 am

….alright….but I don’t get why you don’t like the word monkeys…..that post really didn’t explain it.

Mike says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 1:30 pm

Multicollinearity is a term in econometrics regarding the (unwanted) relationship between two or more variables in a multiple regression. Applying an orthogonal transformation to those explanatory variables (using the residuals as measurement of them) is a way to fix the unwanted multicollinearity.

So then multicollinear orthogonally correlated residuals would refer to the residuals of two or more variables that have been orthogonally transformed to fix their multicollinearity. The word “correlation” is in there to just link the concepts together.

While it’s not riotusly hilarious, it’s certainly a real thing, something which I actually had to do in my econometrics class

Kevin says:
January 22nd, 2007 at 6:33 pm

OK, I should’ve gone with “Magnetic/Optical Character Recognition” instead.

Stormy says:
January 24th, 2007 at 10:49 am

*frowns* Well. I’m still suspicious. But your explanation seems reasonable so I’ll give you the point.

SCOREBOARD
Matt: 1
Mike: 1