A Word of Advice... on the slutcom survey

By Joshua O'Connell
Posted Monday, September 3, 2007

It’s Labor Day, and I don’t feel like working. However, the column must go on, so I’ll let all of you do the talking. It’s been awhile since I’ve put any feedback on the page, and some of it’s been rotting way in the inbox. As part of the late-summer flushing I’ve been doing lately, let’s dive into the feedback. Of course, as this column’s become notorious for unleashing the Slutcom survey, that’s where the feedback has been coming from, as you’ll see below:

This is your reference to your Slutcom litmus test. And some ADVICE for you.

1st. If you’re referring to defcon as in "DEFense CONdition" the system that "ranks" our current ballistic missile defense condition. You've mistaken COM for CON...

2nd. If you were implying that the "dangerous" and more "risque" person was the high alert danger then you've got it backwards again. When shit hits the fan in the US we are at Defcon 1. It goes like this:

DEFCON 5 Normal peacetime readiness

DEFCON 4 Normal, increased intelligence and strengthened security measures

DEFCON 3 Increase in force readiness above normal readiness

DEFCON 2 Further Increase in force readiness, but less than maximum readiness

DEFCON 1 Maximum force readiness.

There is some advice for you. When you go to the trouble of making a quiz... You should make it make sense.

--Accuracy is important!

Of course, I replied to him via E-mail:

Hello,

Thanks for your note.

I appreciate your deep knowledgeable expertise in presenting with me an argument about how inaccurate my quiz is when compared to DEFCON.

But please keep this in mind: it's just a stupid quiz designed to let people have fun.

If I was aiming for accuracy, I would have used 1-5, not 0-4. Slutcom > sounds better to my ear than slutcon, which makes a person sound like a whore and a convicted felon. Slutcom sounds like a really dirty Web site, but that's the lesser of two evils.

And the scale counts up because it works better that way when talking about it. Everyone always thinks of things like being on a scale of 1-10, with 10 always being the most extreme. It makes it easier.

You have to play off of peoples' ignorance. How many people do you really think know that DEFCON counts backwards? Over a half million people have taken the survey since its launch almost two years ago; you're the only one to write in.

In essence, much ado about nothing. But thanks for the note. Your advice is duly noted, if a bit extreme over a stupid 30-second quiz.

--Josh

He responded back:

Wow, I’m surprised to get a reply, most people I antagonize won't give me the time of day; unless they want money, advice, or programming. I don't fault you in this matter. You are right the masses of people are stupid. I can't help but wonder if a quiz that was more stimulating and thought provoking (whether it be 30 seconds or 30 minutes) would be a better step; for yourself and the mass population. It just seems that you're adding to peoples’ ignorance instead of encouraging people to defeat it. I may be an idealist but I saw the "slutcom" on a friends blog (who is an intelligent well rounded biology student) and had to rip her on it. I have no problem with the idea or application; all I can say is 'smart people use the internet too'.

This was all written back in 2005, the last time the column was full-throttle, and frankly, I hope he hasn’t lost his mind with the proliferation of YouTube, Twitter, et al. For those who wonder if I didn’t do defcon research prior to the survey, the answer is: nope. Frankly, slutcom was chosen because it sounded a bit like defcon, and the scale was just a late night rambling back and forth between me and a couple of friends. Nothing sinister here.

More slutcom feedback:

I just took the "slutcom litmus test" and was curious why the youngest age for lost virginity is 13-14? I lost mine at 12 so it doesn't even go low enough for myself and most of the people I was with were 1-4 years younger than I was. It seems odd to have the lowest age as already a teenager.

I really was naïve enough during the creation of the test to assume that 13ish would be a reasonable starting point. The survey was made relatively early into the creation of the column, so I’ve seen a lot more than I have today.

What scares me with this letter though is the reference to “1-4 years younger.” If you were 12, that makes certain people you were with 8 years old. Kids, stay away from the “naughty regions” until you at least have some puberty pulses running through your veins… 8 year olds having sex is the most creepy thought I’ve had in a really long time. The survey has been updated, but I’m shuddering as I type this.

Good luck, and thanks for asking.

 E-mail this page
 Printer-friendly page