May 31, 2007

Numbers I'm Least Likely To Use for Any Top n List

A list of the top 17 non-negative whole integers that I am least likely to use to make top ‘n’ lists. Brief explanations are provided as to why each number has such scant chances of becoming 'n'.

1. 48, too readily divisible, an absolute whore for factors, recently spotted trying to woo 7 away from its neighbor 49.

2. 31, too nakedly prime, many other primes at least put up a good front of potential divisibility.

3. 10, the Wal-Mart of top ‘n’ lists, overused, trite even.

4. 69, encourages snickering among frat boys and emotional toddlers.

5. 2468, too even / too appreciated.

6. -(-10), turns out this is just the same old greedy, hegemonic 10 wearing a shield front and back and holding a threatening spear.

7. 12teen, apparently not a number at all.

8. 6666, Satan's big brother, very mean, eats my candy, does not wash dishes.

9. 0, too Jean-Paul Sartre, might encourage black berets, smoking and / or bad poetry.

10. 77, leans too far to the right, not politically sensible.

11. 13, not savvy enough to shake negative image, might as well be negative as a result.

12. Blue, craftily rhymes itself with "two," leading scientists, however, now consider it to be a color.

13. 1, not comparative enough, ranks items insufficiently, a loner, too straight, too narrow, also embarrassingly Freudian.

14. That crosshatched symbol (#) that you get on most keyboards by hitting ‘shift+3’ and often indicates the word 'number', however, not a number itself.

15. 8,675,309, not serious enough to fulfill list duties, more concerned with taking phone calls for a good time, answers to "Jenny, Jenny".

16. All multiples of 180, too busy with extreme snowboarding, motocross, etc.

17. 2, very divisive, seems to be a factor in splitting up almost every other number, power hungry, relies on technicality to earn prime number status, doesn’t need any more glory.

No comments: