@calvinhobbesliker:
@JamesAleman:
Big Bang Theory
About the “quadrilateral parallelogram,”: a parallelogram is already a quadrilateral. Additionally, a box is 3 dimensional, while a quadrilateral is 2 dimensional
Its true a parallelogram is also a quadrilateral, just as a square is also one. Maybe it is as redundant as calling a rhombus a square, that just shows your familiarity with the terminology. Congratulations. For easy of use, I linked some Google definitions below.
Quadrilateral is a four-sided polygon.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=xr2&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&defl=en&q=define:quadrilateral&sa=X&ei=ACShTOu6JIq5ngf-9biKDQ&ved=0CBIQkAE
Parallelogram is a four-sided 2D shape with opposite sides parallel.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=JG3&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&defl=en&q=define:parallelogram&sa=X&ei=5imhTKDfL9SpngfJ5onCDQ&ved=0CBoQkAE
A box can also be defined as: a rectangular drawing; “the flowchart contained many boxes”
See link below, 5th bullet point.
http://www.google.com/search?hl=en&client=firefox-a&hs=bw2&rls=org.mozilla:en-US:official&defl=en&q=define:box&sa=X&ei=ICWhTInBE8n_nQe72KSTDQ&ved=0CBIQkAE
A box sometimes commonly refers to a 2 dimension shape on a piece of paper, think of the expression, “check the box that best refers to your answer”
Thank you for reading my signature. I was referring to my wife thinking that shirt was appropriate for me in terms of my geekyness. It also refers to my resistance to conventional thinking about common perceptions, including Axis and Allies strategies. I once used this philosophy to lead a Dart Team to a League Trophy by playing the game of Cricket opposite to the normal practice everyone else embraced. Weaker teams are “expected” to out “point” a more skilled opponent on a number. I argued that we should close the numbers quickly and catch up points on extra bulls-eyes. This put people off their “game” as the better players did not have their comfortable point lead or buffer, while we raced to close numbers, they felt increased “pressure” which had the desired effect of reducing their accuracy. Think of the expression “choked”. We kept the points low, so we typically only had to throw 1-3 more additional bulls-eyes than normal. Hence the success, a weaker team blew out stronger teams all season to come in first and win the play offs.
The same can be said for how classic axis and allies was played in some tournaments before my friends and I arrived at Gen Con in '93 (Milwaukee). [Remember the internet wasn’t invented by Al Gore that early, so forums were not as readily used to learn the game.] Nobody built air craft carriers with Britain or even used transport fleets to attack Europe, they just built planes/bombers to stack in Russia, with giant stacks of units sitting on the German/Russian border. The following year, people had embraced the idea of transport fleets….Go figure.
Or its like my ridiculous strategy called “Operation Hollywood” developed in 2004 that called for an America first strategy in AA revised, that later proved viable although not preferred in tournaments under the name “Canadian Shield”.
Thinking outside the 2 dimensional box sometimes brings forth success, many times it leads to failures, but we learn from each.
