I am currently working on a video for a sculpture I’m selling. You can see my art-for-sale videos on my YouTube channel, YouTube.com/MichaelHanna. Sometime in the next few days I hope to post a video for a bronze recast of a “J. Moigniez” golden eagle sculpture. Whilst searching for pricing on similar pieces, I came across a Moigniez appraisal question on wiki.answers.com.
if you ask a stupid question…
(note my deft use of the “complete-the-idiom” technique)
The thing is, it wasn’t a stupid question. At least, the question I asked wasn’t stupid. The question that was answered…well, that’s a different story.
SPOILER ALERT! Harry Potter fans who are behind on their reading, beware: this answer contains information about Potter Progeny.
In case that image didn’t load, here’s the transcript:
What is the average appraisal price for Jules Moigniez racehorse sculpture?
Relevant answers:
Average price for average price of a airplane?
Harry Potter had three children by the names of Lily Potter, Albus Severus Potter, and James Potter, with the mother being Ginny Weasley.
Hmm. If this is the most “relevant” answer, I’d be interested to see some of the irrelevant ones. I can suggest two possible explanations, although I don’t have time to do any follow-up. At least not right now.
the law of averages of averages
The “Law of Averages” isn’t technically “on the books” anywhere. So maybe it’s more like “common law.” I don’t remember it from Law School. But then, I failed out after one year. So maybe that’s a 2L thing.
To paraphrase the Law of Averages: things tend to even out over time.
But this answer is to a question about the average of an average. Like the derivative of a derivative. That would be a second derivative. So maybe this is a second average. Of the “price of a airplane.” Sic.
I’d like to propose the “Law of Averages of Averages,” which would go something like this:
AVERAGE( AVERAGE( X ) ) = HARRY POTTER
Where X is pretty much anything. In our case, the “price of a airplane.” Sic.
infinite monkey theorem
According to a common variation of the famous “infinite monkey theorem,” the entire collected works of William Shakespeare could be reproduced with sufficient quantities of monkeys, typewriters, and time. For an in-depth look at the theorem, including simian simulations, check out Zoo World 3.04.
dactylographic [i.e. “typewriting”] chimp, ready to answer your toughest questions
I’m not sure how many monkeys it would take to reproduce the works of J.K. Rowling. Nor do I know how many monkeys are employed by wiki.answers.com. There is a decidedly random element to this answer, though. Dactylographic [i.e. “typewriting”] monkeys could be behind it all.
a good answer?
This particular question-and-answer exchange was pretty worthless to me in my Moigniez search, but that might not be the best way to evaluate its worth. After all, as a wiser person than me once said:
A good answer raises more questions than it answers.
Judging by that metric, I’d say this answer is pretty damn good.
(here’s a rotated version for pinterest…)
SPOILER ALERT! Harry Potter fans who are behind on their reading, beware: this answer contains information about Potter Progeny.
