X-From_: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net Tue Mar 31 16:21:50 2009
Return-Path: <folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net>
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <f826636f0903310552raa07cd4udfda1386af8f2fe4@mail.gmail.com>
References: <f826636f0903310443q7b3d368cv4b48fed0e932d726@mail.gmail.com>
	<929ed1ec0903310510g16034969t443f3815461a17c0@mail.gmail.com>
	<f826636f0903310552raa07cd4udfda1386af8f2fe4@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Tue, 31 Mar 2009 17:21:06 +0300
Message-ID: <929ed1ec0903310721r1e0bc432h9c133b4a50b9e952@mail.gmail.com>
From: Digwuren <digwuren@gmail.com>
To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
X-Spam_score: 1.0
X-Spam_score_int: 10
X-Spam_bar: +
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software,
	running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam. The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or
	label similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview: 2009/3/31 Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com> >
	This
	article is very confusing. It portrays the event as a Mr. Cowen's >
	mistake, but it was Mr. Obama's... Can you find the speech on youtube or
	> somewhere else, so that we can watch the whole enchilada? :) > I
	haven't found the video, but seeing the reports, my understanding is
	this: [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (1.0 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ----------------------
	--------------------------------------------------
	-2.6 BAYES_00 BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 0 to 1%
	[score: 0.0000]
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	1.4 HTML_10_20             BODY: Message is 10% to 20% HTML
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	0.5 AWL AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list
X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.1.7-deb (2006-10-05) on 
	pakkun.mirky.net
X-Spam-Level: **
X-Spam-Status: No, score=2.3 required=5.0 tests=AWL,BAYES_50,
	DNS_FROM_RFC_POST,HTML_10_20,HTML_MESSAGE autolearn=no 
	version=3.1.7-deb
Subject: Re: [WPM] question
X-BeenThere: folks@wikipedometer.net
X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.9
Precedence: list
Reply-To: Wikipedia statistics <folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Id: Wikipedia statistics <folks.wikipedometer.net>
List-Unsubscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=unsubscribe>
List-Archive: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/private/folks>
List-Post: <mailto:folks@wikipedometer.net>
List-Help: <mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=help>
List-Subscribe: <http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks>,
	<mailto:folks-request@wikipedometer.net?subject=subscribe>
Content-Type: multipart/mixed; boundary="===============4198727397831390173=="
Mime-version: 1.0
Sender: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
Errors-To: folks-bounces@wikipedometer.net
X-Spam_score: 2.3
X-Spam_score_int: 23
X-Spam_bar: ++
X-Spam_report: Spam detection software, running on the system "pakkun.mirky.net", has
	identified this incoming email as possible spam.  The original message
	has been attached to this so you can view it (if it isn't spam) or label
	similar future email.  If you have any questions, see
	the administrator of that system for details.
	Content preview:  2009/3/31 Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com> > This
	article is very confusing. It portrays the event as a Mr. Cowen's >
	mistake, but it was Mr. Obama's... Can you find the speech on youtube or
	> somewhere else, so that we can watch the whole enchilada? :) > I
	haven't found the video, but seeing the reports, my understanding is
	this: [...] 
	Content analysis details:   (2.3 points, 5.0 required)
	pts rule name              description
	---- ---------------------- --------------------------------------------------
	0.0 HTML_MESSAGE           BODY: HTML included in message
	0.0 BAYES_50               BODY: Bayesian spam probability is 40 to 60%
	[score: 0.5000]
	1.4 HTML_10_20             BODY: Message is 10% to 20% HTML
	1.7 DNS_FROM_RFC_POST      RBL: Envelope sender in
	postmaster.rfc-ignorant.org
	-0.8 AWL                    AWL: From: address is in the auto white-list

--===============4198727397831390173==
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636c5a92be2081a04666ae8d7

--001636c5a92be2081a04666ae8d7
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

2009/3/31 Dorin Cheptea <dorin.cheptea@gmail.com>

> This article is very confusing. It portrays the event as a Mr. Cowen's
> mistake, but it was Mr. Obama's...  Can you find the speech on youtube or
> somewhere else, so that we can watch the whole enchilada? :)
>
I haven't found the video, but seeing the reports, my understanding is this:

* First scheduled speech was Obama's.  Obama read it, using the
teleprompter.
* Second scheduled speech was Irish PM's.  For reasons I don't entirely
understand but which seem to be have been some sort of simple mistake on a
teleprompter operator's part, or possibly a technical malfunction, the
teleprompter fed Obama's speech to Irish PM, too.
* Irish PM started with the speech, then realised it was a wrong one.
* Hilarity ensued.
* For some reason -- perhaps because he felt the Irish PM couldn't continue
with the right speech, either due to embarrassment or due to fits of
laughter -- Obama proceeded to read the Irish PM's speech, off the
teleprompter.

Teleprompters are supposed to be 'hidden', sort of like a modern taboo.  In
this case, a teleprompter became rather obvious to the participants.
 Revelation of taboo is cognitively painful; it might have hampered their
capability to reasonably respond.  This kind of things happen.

As far as I can tell, the blogosphere is mainly echoing Rush Limbaugh's long
diatribe, which essentially claimed that because Obama thanked himself in
the end of Irish PM's speech which he read, he must be stupid.  It's a silly
argument, but what else is new?  Limbaugh makes a very comfortable living
making such silly arguments.

I'm presuming the blunder just isn't available in video.  The reasons do not
necessarily have to do with censorship.  If I understand properly, the event
was repeated twice that day, because not all participants could fit into the
room at once.  In such a case, it's very plausible that the press taped one
of the two copies, and the blunder happened on the other one.

Normally, most video clips of celebrities or politicians getting embarrassed
end up on Youtube pretty fast.  If this didn't, then it's likely it's
because the video was not made, for some reason.  If it had been censored,
some sort of paparazzi-specialised newspaper or website would have put a
bounty on it, and we'd heard of *that*, if not the leaked video.  Things
like this have also happened before.

If you're looking for Big Brother, you might want to consider: why wouldn't
any onlooker have a cameraphone for recording the blunder?  I don't know,
but I can think of at least two reasons:
* it's considered faux pas to tape the president by a cameraphone on a
formal meeting;
* the Secret Service (whose main raison d'etre is securing the president)
prohibited onlookers from carrying phones or cameraphones to the event, as
some sort of weird security measure.

-- 
Andres Soolo

--001636c5a92be2081a04666ae8d7
Content-Type: text/html; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

<div class=3D"gmail_quote">2009/3/31 Dorin Cheptea <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a=
 href=3D"mailto:dorin.cheptea@gmail.com">dorin.cheptea@gmail.com</a>&gt;</s=
pan><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border=
-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex;">
<p>This article is very confusing. It portrays the event as a Mr. Cowen&#39=
;s mistake, but it was Mr. Obama&#39;s...=C2=A0 Can you find the speech on =
youtube or somewhere else, so that we can watch the whole enchilada? :)</p>=
</blockquote>
<div>I haven&#39;t found the video, but seeing the reports, my understandin=
g is this:</div><div><br></div><div>* First scheduled speech was Obama&#39;=
s. =C2=A0Obama read it, using the teleprompter.</div><div>* Second schedule=
d speech was Irish PM&#39;s. =C2=A0For reasons I don&#39;t entirely underst=
and but which seem to be have been some sort of simple mistake on a telepro=
mpter operator&#39;s part, or possibly a technical malfunction, the telepro=
mpter fed Obama&#39;s speech to Irish PM, too.</div>
<div>* Irish PM started with the speech, then realised it was a wrong one.<=
/div><div>* Hilarity ensued.</div><div>* For some reason -- perhaps because=
 he felt the Irish PM couldn&#39;t continue with the right speech, either d=
ue to embarrassment or due to fits of laughter -- Obama proceeded to read t=
he Irish PM&#39;s speech, off the teleprompter.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Teleprompters are supposed to be &#39;hidden&#39;, sort=
 of like a modern taboo. =C2=A0In this case, a teleprompter became rather o=
bvious to the participants. =C2=A0Revelation of taboo is cognitively painfu=
l; it might have hampered their capability to reasonably respond. =C2=A0Thi=
s kind of things happen.<br>
</div><div><br></div><div>As far as I can tell, the blogosphere is mainly e=
choing Rush Limbaugh&#39;s long diatribe, which essentially claimed that be=
cause Obama thanked himself in the end of Irish PM&#39;s speech which he re=
ad, he must be stupid. =C2=A0It&#39;s a silly argument, but what else is ne=
w? =C2=A0Limbaugh makes a very comfortable living making such silly argumen=
ts.</div>
<div><br></div><div>I&#39;m presuming the blunder just isn&#39;t available =
in video. =C2=A0The reasons do not necessarily have to do with censorship. =
=C2=A0If I understand properly, the event was repeated twice that day, beca=
use not all participants could fit into the room at once. =C2=A0In such a c=
ase, it&#39;s very plausible that the press taped one of the two copies, an=
d the blunder happened on the other one.</div>
<div><br></div><div>Normally, most video clips of celebrities or politician=
s getting embarrassed end up on Youtube pretty fast. =C2=A0If this didn&#39=
;t, then it&#39;s likely it&#39;s because the video was not made, for some =
reason. =C2=A0If it had been censored, some sort of paparazzi-specialised n=
ewspaper or website would have put a bounty on it, and we&#39;d heard of *t=
hat*, if not the leaked video. =C2=A0Things like this have also happened be=
fore.</div>
<div><br></div><div>If you&#39;re looking for Big Brother, you might want t=
o consider: why wouldn&#39;t any onlooker have a cameraphone for recording =
the blunder? =C2=A0I don&#39;t know, but I can think of at least two reason=
s:</div>
<div>* it&#39;s considered <span class=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-s=
tyle: italic;">faux pas</span>=C2=A0to tape the president by a cameraphone =
on a formal meeting;</div><div>* the Secret Service (whose main <span class=
=3D"Apple-style-span" style=3D"font-style: italic;">raison d&#39;etre</span=
>=C2=A0is securing the president) prohibited onlookers from carrying phones=
 or cameraphones to the event, as some sort of weird security measure.</div=
>
<div><br></div><div>--=C2=A0<br></div></div>Andres Soolo<br>

--001636c5a92be2081a04666ae8d7--


--===============4198727397831390173==
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Content-Disposition: inline

_______________________________________________
Wikipedia statistics discussion list
folks@wikipedometer.net
http://wikipedometer.net/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/folks

--===============4198727397831390173==--


