Information for Members

The Club email List: The Parr Coefficient

This useful device is a measure of the verbosity and utter pointlessness of topics of discussion on the club e-mail list.

Original Treatise, by James Leake. 20th May, 1998

----- Original Message -----
From: "James Leake"
To: soc-rowing-trinity@lists.cam.ac.uk
Sent: 20 May 1998 13:00
Subject: Parr coefficient

In my splendid isolation as a wise-old sagacious figure I have endless hours to ponder the mysteries of boat-club socio-politics!

As a pseudo scientist I have longed to model the vagiaries of this matter. The rowing list has at last provided a quantitative method... if a number of rash assumptions are made.

The degree of politicisation can be assessed by applying the Parr coefficient. I have named it after this veteran boaty heavy(light)weight since when applyed to him he achieves the highest rating!(sorry Brad).It can of course apply to anybody.

The Parr Coefficient:

P = ln[ V a / t n (b + a + f)]

V = average verbosity (average word length of document submitted under categories b,a or f)
t = time (number of days over which data is collected)
n = total number of documents submitted during period
b = documents submitted by (Brad)
a = documents disagreeing with (Brad)
f = documents agreeing with (Brad)
P = Parr coefficient.... measured in "Brads"

(note that (Brad) can be exchanged for any name)

Here is an example of its application during a politically intense period:

V=50 words, t=1 day, n=30 documents, b=2 submissions by Brad, a=20 flood of disagreement + general patheticness and whingeing, f=3 documents of support riding on the rhetorical bandwagon.

P = natural log[ {(50*20)/(1*30)}*(b + a + f) ]

P = 6.7 Brads

(Notice that results are of similar magnitude to those readings on the Richter scale for earthquakes. A period of quiet political rumblings would have a figure of approx. 1-3 Brads).

It is clear therefore that a number of assumptions have been made here. I will explain the derivation.

1. That politicisation is proportional to verbosity.
2. That the rate of politicised comments is proporional to degree of politicisation (and that comments made by or in response to Brad constitute the entirety of what can be ontologically defined as political).
3. That degree of politicisation is proportional to the ratio of political (comments by or in response to Brad) to total communication on newsgroup.
4. That degree of politicisation is proportional to level of controversy of political comment, measured by the proportion of political discourse that is the flood of response to Brad's comment. **remember that this could be applied to ANYONE, Mr Parr is just a good example**

        1        2             3                4

P = ln[ V * (b + a + f) * (b + a + f)  *        a       ]
            ___________   ___________      ___________

                 t             n           (b + a + f)

P = ln [ Va / tn( b + a + f )]

ROW HARD AND I LOOK FORWARD TO SEEING YOU IN THE BUMPS.

Leakey xxxx

P.S. If you want to flame me or whatever (perhaps even shave?!) then my e-mail address is J.D.Leake@sussex.ac.uk, I am however on the newsgroup.