I must have been the other BOT person, because I marathoned it a few months ago. I'm trying to convince the AD fans I just sold on Community that they should give it a look, but they're more interested in rewatching all three seasons of the Greendale shenanigans. Which...I dig, but you can mix it up. Just watch more…

Do you think it would have played better with Colin Ferguson as Herman (yeah, I'm kind of stuck on this point)?

It's the fandom shibboleth. And my fandom niche is actually pretty small. I do peek over the wall at other fandoms, or at the fandoms for things I like, but am not fannish about. Fascinating stuff happens, man. Sometimes I go looking for the trainwrecks to rubberneck.

The writers are in the weird place where more and more of their protagonists are *technically* a menace that it makes total sense to eliminate (on most shows, Connor has a shot of maybe not being the antagonist—but the guy who shows the antagonist what it's like to go OTT when you're saving people, hunting things.

When you do the honors class can I be a fuzzed-out interviewee with the distorted voice so no one can determine my true identity?

Oh...oh.

No! I need a transcription! I don't have access to find out the answer on YouTube, at least not for the work day!

Is Kinja really so bad that you had no idea that that's well asked and answered, and you're just late being helpful?

In the context that George did not choose to use the "adequately powered" results for his article. But I did the legwork, and it means he chose not to use only the results for which there is a large enough sample size to be meaningful.

If only the author had something intrinsic to blame his math slipup on like that...

Hey, it could be the All Gary All The Time Show, and I wouldn't complain until maybe the first hiatus.

You say weak sf cliche—is it either not weak or not cliche outside sf?

"What's wrong with her??"

And there's never an edit button—is the window 10 minutes now? I thought it was 15...not paying attention.

Oh, hey, while you're answering questions, what does "adequately powered" mean?

Not "just", no:

"It's pretty revealing that only 7% of studies could link a negative emotional phase with the premenstrual phase, and that 8.5% (almost the same number) could link negative emotions with other non-premenstrual phases."

Der. So the deeper meaning I'm looking for...doesn't exist? I was thinking they were studies *of* language, not, you know *in a* language. The right answer is much less interesting, and I couldn't actually care less about the source language of what they studied. Maybe all the people with PMS were Italians. I've seen…

Completely unsurprisingly, this writeup is nothing like the one on Jez: http://jezebel.com/5952272/look-pms-makes-you-moody-not-completely-fucking-incompetent

I do not know which episode it's from. I wish it, or any other little, fleshing out comments could have been given to him. We don't need to see him at home, or anything (like Erica), but I'm sure there's space to swap out *one* of Finstock's ravings to give him...something.