This interesting taxonomy analyzes geeks by their attitudes towards other people. In my case, I evaluate the geek quotient by analyzing whether a person violates philosopher Paul Grice's famous conversational maxims. List is below--not my writing but an edited version of Grice's maxims from some webpage whose link I didn't copy down. In my opinion, geeks (I am one, on certain topics) most often violate the Maxims of Manner.

Grice’s Maxims

Maxims of Quantity:

1. “Make your contribution as informative as required.”
2. “Do not make your contribution more informative than is required.”

Maxims of Quality: Be truthful.

1. “Do not say what you believe to be false.”
2. “Do not say that for which you lack adequate evidence.”
 
Maxim of Relation:

“Be relevant.”

Maxims of Manner: “Be perspicuous.”

1. “Avoid obscurity of expression.”
2. “Avoid ambiguity.”
3. “Be brief (avoid unnecessary prolixity).”
4. “Be orderly.”
 
How to Violate Conversational Maxims

“Quietly and unostentatiously”

I ask, Do you love me? And you answer Yes.
(quietly violates maxim of quality; hence, a lie)

Overtly opting out of a maxim:

A colleague asks, How is the job search going? and I respond, Sorry, that’s confidential.

(explicit information that maxim of quantity cannot be satisfied, no additional implicature needed.)
 
Coping with a clash between maxims:

Another student asks you, Where does Professor Morgan live? and you answer, Somewhere in Providence.

(You know that the student wants to TP my house, but you don’t know exactly where I live. To avoid violating the maxim of quality – providing information you know to be untrue – you violate the maxim of quantity – providing less information than was asked for.)
 
Flouting a maxim in order to exploit it:

Unlike someone who is simply violating a maxim, someone who is flouting a maxim expects the listener to notice.

Flouting the second Maxim of Quantity:
A: What can you tell me about Catherine’s ability to concentrate on a task?
B: Catherine is a butterfly flitting from flower to flower.
(invites a metaphorical interpretation)
 
Flouting the first Maxim of Manner (obscurity):

A: What are you baking?
B: Be I are tea aitch dee ay wye see ay kay ee.

Flouting the third Maxim of Manner (prolixity):

A: I hear you went to the opera last night; how was the lead singer?
B: The singer produced a series of sounds corresponding closely to the score of an aria from '"Rigoletto."
 
Flouting the first Maxim of Quality (avoid falsehoods):

A: Tehran's in Turkey, isn't it?
B: And London's in Armenia, I suppose.

Flouting the Maxim of Relation (be relevant):

A: What on earth has happened to the roast beef?
B: The dog is looking very happy.

Fallacy #1 contradicts itself--if geeks hate ostracism, where on earth are the people who hassle and chase off newbies coming from? I don't believe it's refuse to ostracize at all, but an unwillingness to be the one to bell the cat. If geeks truly hated ostracism, they would be upset, not cheering, when somebody finally gets up the nerve to tell Cat Piss Man to crawl back under his rock. They just don't have gumption.

#4 is hilarious, but oddly I don't know any geeks who do this. I do know one non-geek, a natural social butterfly, who does.

Most of the socializing-with-geeks problems I've run into tend to be in the 'lack of social skills' and 'narrow interests' categories. It's hard to spend time around people who interrupt each other constantly and can't talk about anything other than the pros and cons of 3.5e.

Do you have an rss feed? best, mark http://markdilley.2ya.com