Introducing the Anti-Fat Comment Score
Introducing (sorta) the Anti-Fat Comment Score!
This idea was kicked around a while back, and I wanted to revitalize it. How does it work? Simple: a blog post, or any thing on the internet allowing comments, can have an Anti-Fat Comment Score. It's simply the number of comments it takes for a post to veer into fat hating territory.
The lowest possible score is 1, which indicates that the first comment is anti-fat. As an example, this post at Consumerist I read earlier would score a 1 (first comment = anti-fat). Since the post has an anti-fat edge to it, too, it would earn a bonus asterisk - thus, the Anti-Fat Comment Score for that post is 1*.
The challenge? To find fat-related posts on the web that are not within the fatosphere that have Anti-Fat Comment Scores of 0. (An even bigger challenge would be a post with a score of 0*, indicating that the post itself is anti-fat but there are no anti-fat comments. Woo!)
BigLiberty gives a more thorough scoring breakdown in the comments.
Don't delay, play today!
Help Us Raise Funds for the Think Tank! | We're #2!
Posted by paul on May 1, 2008
This might sound dumb but i'm a little confused... If 0 means there are no anti-fat comments, then how is 1 the worst with the first comment being anti fat? I think it's an interesting concept but i'm a little confused on how exactly it works...
You can either hold yourself up to the unrealistic standards of others, or ignore them and concentrate on being happy with yourself as you are. ~Jeph Jacques
Well, it's all for fun, so the rules are, uh, malleable! That's it!
I think a score of 1* (first comment = anti-fat, and post = anti-fat) trumps a score of 0, or even a 0* score.
Ugh, what's even sadder about that comment is it's self-loathing anti-fat.
Self-loathing anti-fat should get its own tick. Like 1*~
I think this is a great idea, Paul. It's a nice sociological experiment, and fun for us logical mathie-types, too.
It would be interesting to rate the sites as a whole, too: add up the scores from the various articles, and then the site with the lowest total is the most anti-fat. lol
I'm sure there'll be plenty of 1*s but I'm not gonna believe in a 0* until I see one
As to the consumerist thing - I remember when Healthy Choice came out and I would swear to it that it wasn't about losing weight. The point was that it had less salt, less highly processed food, less sugar, and was sometimes lower in fat. I remember the salt being the main point. There were already plenty of DIET frozen foods (like Lean Cuisine, which had the absolute best plates that we used for like EVER and were great for kids, and indestructible) but Healthy Choice was supposed to appeal to the "orthorexic" not the chronic dieter.
This just goes to show the degree to which fat has become synonymous with ill health.
Zero isn't a size, it's a warning sign. - Carson Kressley
The Kevin Pease Beer Fund Foundation - Won't Someone PLEASE think of the psychology students?
I like this game, it's fun!
Annie, I love your signature. "The Kevin Pease Beer Fund Foundation" Haha!
Ok, Still slightly confused, but I still want to play cuz it sounds fun. So there's only two scores so far? 0 = no anti fat, and 1 = anti-fat?
or is the game like a scale 1 through 5? I'm smart usually well smarter than this, It must be the weather... yup I'm blaming my "not getting my head around the scoring system" on the weather.
You can either hold yourself up to the unrealistic standards of others, or ignore them and concentrate on being happy with yourself as you are. ~Jeph Jacques
Kal, here's the scoring breakdown:
1 = the fat-related post/article was not blatantly anti-fat, but the first commenter was. This is a terrible score.
1* = the fat related post/article *was* blatantly anti-fat, and the first comment was, too. This is also pretty bad.
anything > 1 = the number of comments it takes for the non-blatantly anti-fat article/post to get an anti-fat comment. The higher the number, the less anti-fat (more fat accepting) the article/post (i.e., it takes a long time for people to start being ant-fat). Example: 5 = the fifth comment was the first anti-fat comment. That's a worse score than 10, since it took ten comments for things to turn anti-fat.
0 = The article/post was neither anti-fat, nor have there been any comments posted that are anti-fat. This is a highly idealized number, since one can never be sure if the next comment posted will be the first anti-fat comment.
0*= the article/post was anti-fat, but there are no anti-fat comments.
I agree the scoring doesn't lend itself to cumulative scoring. 0 is an idealized number...the article/post might only have 2 or 3 comments, after all, or be brand-new. Since good = higher score with the exception of zero, perhaps we award some large number of points to a 0 post that has gone for a reasonable amount of time, has a reasonable amount of comments, and the comments have been locked? Like 200 pts or something?
I hope what I've said just made sense. lol
Not only will I eat your baloney, I'll bust it, too.
That makes so much more sense!!! THANK you soooooo much BigLiberty!
This sounds even more fun now! So where do we put the score? In the comments of the article? or here in the forums?
You can either hold yourself up to the unrealistic standards of others, or ignore them and concentrate on being happy with yourself as you are. ~Jeph Jacques
Thanks waiting!
I like this game. It's going to be like the unicorn or something - you know that 0* doesn't exist, but you can't prove it, so...maybe it does
Zero isn't a size, it's a warning sign. - Carson Kressley
The Kevin Pease Beer Fund Foundation - Won't Someone PLEASE think of the psychology students?
So here's my question, how does you tube rate? What would be the rating system for say Joy Nash's video for Fat Acceptance, I'm really interested in knowing, (there's a lot of hate there). I thought this was cute. We need to come up with a rating system for Youtube and My Space, anyone have any ideas?
Jenny