tummajor Asked
QuestionSorry if question is redundant to you. So using "peer review" (aka popularity contest) as the final method to select the king, I noticed that the 9 nerds (same # as US Supreme court judges) selected the value of personal transformation and acceptance of self (Celeste) over leadership, well-roundedness, and hardworking (Genevieve). Nerd peers un-unanimously went for self-acceptance. Could you share your thoughts on why this value should be more favour than the other? Answer

Although I dispute the giving “hardworking” to Genevieve—I’d say Celeste and Genevieve were evenly matched on this front—this is very good question.

Genevieve had some problems burning social bridges (e.g. Danielle), and to a much lesser extent with me. Ultimately I’m not comfortable saying what “should” be more valued—that’s entirely up to the individual. Fittingly, I was very uncomfortable when the other contestants asked me who to vote for—I didn’t feel like I should impose my value system onto them. The determination was left to each individual, using whatever criteria he/she felt appropriate.

My personal criteria was, “Which story would have inspired little virgil when he was 12-16.” When I was younger I never had much problem with leadership or “well-roundedness”, but I did have notable problems with acceptance-of-self. As part for my criteria I was deciding which message I wanted to spread within the nerd community, and I choose acceptance-of-self because that was always a much bigger struggle with me when I was growing up.

I stand behind what I said in my commentary. I often thought of Genevieve as the stronger warrior, but Celeste as the better helm. Think of it like Genevieve as Lancelot and Celeste as King Arthur.

All of that said, I fully understand how other people would choose Genevieve. For example I thought Moo’s reasons for Genevieve were ever-so-solid. On the flipside, I felt Brandon’s voice for why he choose Celeste was likewise solid.

blog comments powered by Disqus
  1. virgilgr posted this