0.1 Abstract
A dissertation regarding the topic of ‘flashcarding’, which, contextually is concerning the act that a skid (ref. ‘fundamental theorem of skid psychology’ for definition of a skid) could majorly perform in order to sustain their egotistic personality.
keywords: flashcarding, skid, egotistic
0.2 Contents
0.1: Abstract
0.2: Table of contents
0.3: Foreword
pt. 1: Flashcarding Theory
1.0: Preface/introductory statement regarding the dissertation
Def. 1.0.1: Implicit flashcarding
Def. 1.0.2: Explicit flashcarding
Def. 1.0.3: Superfluous flashcarding
1.1: Motivation behind the dissertation
pt. 2: Case Studies
2.1: Luminous
2.2: Zakaria
2.3: Allan
pt. 3: Post-theoretical Analysis
3.0: Hierarchy of Flashcarding
3.1: Trivial flashcards
Def. 3.1.1: Trivial flashcard
3.2: Atrivial flashcards
Def. 3.2.1: Atrivial flashcard
3.3: Bitrivial flashcards
Def. 3.3.1: Bitrivial flashcard
3.4: Quasi-bitrivial flashcards
Def. 3.4.1: Buzzword
Def. 3.4.2: Quasi-bitrivial flashcards
Corr. 3.4.2a: Quasi-trivial flashcard
Corr. 3.4.2b: Quasi-atrivial flashcard
3.5: Semi-bitrivial flashcards
Def. 3.5.1: Semi-bitrivial flashcards
Corr. 3.5.1a: Semi-trivial flashcard
Corr. 3.5.1b: Semi-atrivial flashcard
3.6: Innocuous bitrivial flashcards
Def. 3.6.1: Innocuous
Def. 3.6.2: Innocuous bitrivial flashcards
Corr. 3.6.2a: Innocuous trivial flashcard
Corr. 3.6.2b: Innocuous atrivial flashcard
3.7: Inable quasi-bitrivial flashcards
Def. 3.7.1: Inable quasi-bitrivial flashcards
Corr. 3.7.1a: Inable quasi-trivial flashcard
Corr. 3.7.1b: Inable quasi-atrivial flashcard
0.3 Foreword
this dissertation namedrops a few skids so if you’re angry bc i clowned tf out of you feel free to email me @ unazed@protonmail.com and we can clear up why i think you’re retarded but you’re not getting off this list LOL! feel free to also email any civil suits to the same email.
join our discord here as well: https://discord.gg/VsPqCZG
<3 - unazed
pt. 1: Flashcarding Theory
1.0 Preface
A natural branch from skid psychology is found within the actions perceived by the skid, that is, (more frequently) found within the action of “flashcarding”; this action is one that benefits the skid by approving their ego, and being able to both gauge the skill-level of the person with whom they are frustrated with. It is a heavily mutable mechanism, and so because of this, it has infinite variance. In this dissertation we will describe these types of flashcarding:
- implicit flashcarding
- explicit flashcarding
- superfluous flashcarding
Superfluous flashcarding may fall under both implicit and explicit flashcarding, so we distinguish it as a separate form, since it is variable, and so it has a clear distinct property that we should recognize.
Definition 1.0.1: Implicit flashcarding is a categorization of flashcarding which is subtle and implied, it is (obviously) less obvious than explicit flashcarding and it is harder to construct, it is typically found portrayed higher up in the skid hierarchy.
Definition 1.0.2: Explicit flashcarding is a categorization of flashcarding which is much more frequently seen amongst all levels of skids, and it is easiest to construct, it is to the point and it is irrefutable.
Definition 1.0.3: Superfluous flashcarding is the final categorization of flashcarding which pertains to flashcards that are presumably not expected to have a response, because they are moreso intended as a poke at the person being flashcarded, since they convey authority.
1.1 Motivation
You may wonder, what is the motivation behind wasting so much time writing about theory behind “flashcarding”? Such a specialized field of study, if even of study, and not just of interest, must have so little content to it? To these questions I must explain that flashcarding is the epitome of egotism, it is the declaration by the skid to the person of interest that the skid is frustrated, their ego is challenged, and they want to prove it to themselves with relativity to their own knowledge, that they are better and the person of interest is not. And so, why is it not so obviously interesting to delve into pure concentrated egotism? It is the theory of egotism.
Further through this dissertation we will explore the different sorts of flashcarding, and expand applicatively-wise unto the topic of flashcarding, through examples, and explanations. In the following sections we will discover more about the three types of flashcarding.
pt. 2: Case Studies
2.1 Luminous
Luminous is quite the character, he often surveys boards such as V3rmillion in order to sustain his huge god-complex, as any cultured person would know that the average IQ on V3rmillion is 95 with a standard deviation of 50 points (pre-Unazed, the average was 75 with a standard deviation of 25). As for his interaction with people in real-time, he uses Discord–before we continue, it must be stated that Luminous has accrued his egotistic personality because of his age and his social interactions with people on the internet, although realistically he is intelligent for his age, the egotism lies in the superiority complex to all people that he meets. He often takes hiatuses from Discord, only to come back on V3rmillion hustling with the knowledge he had acquired from studying through the interim, and calling everyone ‘retarded’ because of his minute increase in knowledge; and then eventually coming back on Discord only to get schooled by moreover intellectual people, and finally restarting the cycle of leaving.
For a case-study with respect to the topic being discussed, we have several examples:
[7:30 PM] r0lan on the beat: meanwhile u read 5 mins of linux binary analysis
[7:30 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: i was reading
[7:30 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: the actual
[7:30 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: source code
[7:30 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: of linux?
[7:31 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: whereas u
[7:31 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: fork it
[7:31 PM] r0lan on the beat: 5.5atm to kpa @мовлкю %еах, %рах 3 secs
[7:31 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: & never read it
[7:31 PM] r0lan on the beat: 2 secs
[7:31 PM] r0lan on the beat: i'll give u
[7:31 PM] r0lan on the beat: bonus time
[7:31 PM] r0lan on the beat: 5 + sces
[7:31 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: Omg its cute r u trying to flashcard me
[7:31 PM] r0lan on the beat: times up
[7:32 PM] r0lan on the beat: ?
Luminous is r0lan on the beat and I am мовлкю %еах, %рах, in this particular subcase we can see that we were talking about Linux to begin with, whereupon Luminous suddenly mentions me with a flashcard that has no relation to the context and requires knowledge in physics opposed to about Linux. This is an example of superfluous flashcarding purely because of the fact that Luminous was not attempting to ascertain any certain superiority over me, rather just attempting to put me in my place regarding physics although there was no clear reason as to why he would need to do so. Another reason is within the time control given, as Luminous ranged from 3 seconds to 8 seconds which was not a humanly time-frame to begin with, which is thereupon condescended by the fact Luminous knows I cannot convert two arbitrary units of measure by him attempting to seem as if he is being generous by giving extra-time to think.
[7:22 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: probably busy maintaining his gpa
[7:22 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: whereas ur busy
[7:22 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: proving
[7:22 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: ur gpa should be 2.0
[7:22 PM] r0lan on the beat: -fno-alias what does this do
[7:22 PM] r0lan on the beat: 2 secs
[7:22 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: no pointer aliasing
[7:22 PM] r0lan on the beat: wrong
[7:22 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: similar to applying the
[7:22 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: restrict keyword
[7:23 PM] r0lan on the beat: wrong
[7:23 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: over all variables ?
[7:23 PM] мовлкю %еах, %рах: retard ?
[7:23 PM] r0lan on the beat: false
Here, we may see another case of superfluous flashcarding, but in this case Luminous flashcarded me on a subject on which I knew more than him and it was exemplified in his constant denial that I was right and he could not beat me, but also exemplified his intolerance of being wrong. -fno-alias is a compiler option set to assume globally that no pointers alias one another, allowing optimization to be done at a global scale, effectively setting restrict under every pointer declaration.
But, this is superfluous flashcarding for the fact that it was a 2 second time-control given, which had I taken time to think about I would’ve been scolded, although I may have necessarily found out the answer by thinking.
2.2 Zakaria
Zakaria is a prepubescent muslim, who was under the supervision of a mentor up until that mentor had to leave Discord due to some suspicious reasons, and thereafter this user has amassed a huge god-complex, to say less and to show more, here:
[12:43 AM] mov %eax, %r0: @zakaria give me the POSIX-compliant function to retrieve a system's page granularity and how you could use it in conjunction with aligned_alloc to optimise accesses to AVX-512 data types
[10:37 AM] zakaria: @charlatan 14
[10:37 AM] zakaria: @mov %eax, %r0 and ye i'm not always on
[10:41 AM] zakaria: hmm u want real world shit okey, first i dunno answer for ur question i think the specified function is mmap()
(1) [10:42 AM] zakaria: try implementing sha256 in 1 line in python @mov %eax, %r0 i've done it
[10:46 AM] zakaria: here is the proof:
[10:48 AM] zakaria: <image-of-jewed-code.png>
[10:55 AM] zakaria: nvmm forget this explain me whats a trigraph sequence
[...]
(2) [11:46 AM] zakaria: @~ :smile:
(3) [12:32 PM] mov %eax, %r0: you mean hyper made it for you if it's not even stolen from the internet
(4) [12:33 PM] zakaria: hyper is dead
(5) [12:33 PM] mov %eax, %r0: a trigraph sequence is a sequence of characters that allows you to enter character codes using no backslashes as the compiler will automatically detect it and convert
[12:33 PM] mov %eax, %r0: you said you talked to him
[12:33 PM] zakaria: he doesn't write in python
[12:33 PM] mov %eax, %r0: it's a less known part of c
[12:33 PM] mov %eax, %r0: yes he does
[12:33 PM] zakaria: ok
[12:33 PM] zakaria: stfu skid i know hyper better than u
[12:33 PM] mov %eax, %r0: no you don't
(6) [12:38 PM] zakaria: conver this into trigraph form; suppose u got a container with overloaded operator[], also size(), and u got this syntax return (Array[Array.size()] == Array[*(&Array + 1)-Array]) ? 1337: "dogshit skid";
(7) [12:45 PM] mov %eax, %r0: i'm confused on whether you know what a trigraph is or whether hyper didn't explain to you well enough what it is
[12:45 PM] zakaria: lol u don't know shit a bout trigraphs
[12:45 PM] zakaria: XD
(8) [12:45 PM] zakaria: u know only their concept
(9)[12:45 PM] mov %eax, %r0: explain to me and give me two examples of digraphs and trigraphs
[12:47 PM] zakaria: sure
[12:47 PM] zakaria: digraphs is a token consisting of two character set and the digraph process is occured during the tokenization process
This message is a combination of flashcards from both sides, myself being mov %eax, %r0 and obviously Zakaria being zakaria. Through the first 5 messages we can see that Zakaria is pretentious, in response to not knowing the answer to a flashcard he responds with another question as if to defend his ego, two in fact. Message (1) is an example of an implicit flashcard, as if it were alone without any subsequence of messages, zakaria would expect me to actually produce this program which he himself has most likely not made without assistance (nobody can exactly memorize the SHA-256 specification).
We can note zakaria has no life as the gap between (2) and (3) is 46 minutes, but the gap between (3) and (4) is 1 minute even though I hadn’t even mentioned him to alert him I had responded.
I answer his flashcard in (5) which he implicitly ignores, and rather talks about hyper (his mentor) which he quickly backs down from talkign about after I calmly respond to his angered messages, but he does recount the topic of trigraph sequences in (6) where he tries to apply the idea of trigraphs incorrectly (incorrect as far as I know, since a trigraph sequence is any consecutive sequence of three characters) into a flashcard, which I mention in (7).
He attempts to explain my ‘lack of knowledge’ (as it appears to him) in (8) which I counter by a flashcard, whereby I ask him to explain the core concept of an n-graph (sequence) which he answers with a nonsensical answer clearly alluding to his lack of knowledge regarding the concepts behind lexing/parsing. Or just English.
[11:19 PM] Ezíó: what's the difference between
#define new_type char*
typedef char* new_type
[11:19 PM] Ezíó: ok
[11:21 PM] zakaria: this is trivial bro THO
[11:21 PM] zakaria: i'll give 2 differences
[11:22 PM] zakaria: #define is evaluated at preprocessing time specially (macro expansion) and #define will just copy-paste the definition values at the point of use, while typedef is actual definition of a new type
[11:22 PM] zakaria: typedef is evaluated at compile time
[11:22 PM] Ezíó: give one example where this is crucial
[11:22 PM] zakaria: define crucial
[11:23 PM] Ezíó: like how can this help in one case but lead to a nasty bug in a different one
[...]
[11:28 PM] zakaria: hmm
[11:28 PM] zakaria: #define is good for making aliasing and typedef for symboling and for ur example hmm
[11:30 PM] zakaria:
#define new_type char*
typedef char* _new_type
int main(){
new_type c1, c2; // c1 (type: char*), c2(type: just a char)
_new_type c3, c4; //c3, c4 both of type char*
}
[11:30 PM] Ezíó: yeah
[11:30 PM] zakaria: as i told u this is trivial lemme give u some good shit
(1) [11:31 PM] zakaria: give me an equation that satisfy calloc
Ezio here humbly questions zakaria regarding the differences between typedefs and macros, and zakaria calls it “trivial” (derived from the average mathematical textbook) which is a sign of immediate skiddiness as it implies zakaria is not mature enough as an intellectual to be able to not feel challenged whenever he is approached with a question. Note (1) is a pathetic attempt to flashcard Ezio with a nonsensical question (and the recurrence of the adjective, ‘trivial’). Both of these flashcarding attempts are categorized under explicit flashcarding, as the flashcard is obviously stated under an egotistic pretense, purely to benefit his ego and not to answer anything unknown. It’s sad as fuck.
2.3 Allan
From the 5 seconds I took to overview what I thought of Allan, the immediate adjective came to mind, pseudo-intellectual. He is a skid in late development with ability to recognize potentially skiddy behaviour, but too clear and obvious motives which can be dismissed by somebody with more experience (myself, viz. below).
[9:23 AM] allan: @mov %eax, %r0 holy shit you must be a special snowflake if you are a coder :flushed:
[9:24 AM] allan: damn man i respect you
[9:24 AM] mov %eax, %r0: you're a skid don't @ me
[9:24 AM] allan: :heart_exclamation: damnnn
[9:24 AM] allan: and you are not
[9:24 AM] allan: cause you tha real coder
[9:24 AM] allan: :sunglasses:
[9:24 AM] allan: :flushed:
[9:25 AM] mov %eax, %r0: since clearly you're a funny quirky memer that has a hidden agenda of flexing on niggas
[9:25 AM] mov %eax, %r0: take a read https://unazed.github.io/14-applied-flashcarding-theory/
[9:26 AM] allan: no im not gonna read that
[9:26 AM] allan: smArtAss
[9:26 AM] allan: @mov %eax, %r0 you must be the superior intellectual :spy:
[9:27 AM] mov %eax, %r0: sounds like a plan
[9:27 AM] allan: nigger cattle
[9:28 AM] allan: you even shove it in ur name to let everyone know you are the big deal :sunglasses:
[9:28 AM] mov %eax, %r0: who r u
[9:28 AM] mov %eax, %r0: don't u have school to be attending or smth to get on with in life
[9:29 AM] allan: i am in school
[9:29 AM] allan: what productive do you do mister
(1) [9:29 AM] allan: let everyone know you code and call them a skid :sunglasses: ?
[9:30 AM] allan: thats a stereotypical nigger cattle man
[9:30 AM] mov %eax, %r0: idk man i just flex on niggas unwittingly since i don't have anything to show for it bro
[9:32 AM] allan: dont u have any interesting talents
It seems that my setting of my name to a pseudo-x86/ARM instruction has invoked a lot of skids to comment on it, because assembly is the pinnacle of knowledge according to the majority of skids and seeing such a name beheld by somebody they don’t know is an insult and rises for instant gratification. This is an example of implicit flashcarding, a subset of the comments following through to the flashcards are indicative of the fact that he is trying to implicitly frustrate me, or ride my dick, both of which I acknowledge as skiddy behaviour, and because of this recognition he appears less compelled to start flashcarding outright. His flashcards stay at a bare minimum, profane while sarcastic, obviously intending to get somewhere with his light questions. (1) is the message that perfectly describes what he thinks of me, a baseless assumption made by the skid which he builds his thought and conceptions off. Nonetheless, the flashcarding is implicit because it is not so obviously with intent to gratify the ego of the asker.
It is valuable to note that skid language often includes the words “LMFAO”, “ROFLMFAO”, “LOOOOOL”, “LOL”, and other variations of these words.
pt. 2: Post-theoretical Analysis
3.0 Hierarchy of Flashcarding
As is for skid psychology, the representation of skids at different levels with due respect to their development in their skid career, so exists the hierarchy of levels of flashcarding. I shall talk about the following forms of flashcards in detail:
- Trivial flashcards
- Atrivial flashcards
- Bitrivial flashcards
- Quasi-bitrivial flashcards
- Semi-bitrivial flashcards
- Innocuous bitrivial flashcards
- Inable quasi-bitrivial flashcards
You may think I’m just implicitly flashcarding you on your knowledge of English prefixes and word definitions, but fear not, for you can Google and that there is no time limit on reading this.
3.1 Trivial flashcards
Definition 3.1.1: Trivial flashcards are flashcards that can come in the three forms described priorly, i.e.: implicit, explicit and superfluous, generally, however, trivial flashcards are superfluous whenever you are talking to someone that you are familiar with, since it is assumed that you both have somewhat arbitrary gauges of each others’ abilities, hence trivial flashcards should only arise implicitly/explicitly as course of seriously frustrating the skid.
In essence, trivial flashcards are flashcards that take no genius understanding of a field to understand and be able to answer, questions with very slight relation to the topic tself that can be formulated as the result of a glimpse over the introductory pages of an introductory book into the field. Generally, the higher up the skid hierarchy that you go you will find higher usage of this method of flashcarding, because it is a harmless way to poke at each other.
In the three case studies above, an example of trivial flashcarding can be found with Zakaria, his questioning of finding an equation that satisfies calloc is a flashcard that has little relation to the memory allocation system itself besides being a question testing whether you understand the intrinsic differences between the malloc utility and why one would use calloc over it, that is, because it is more compatible with sequential data structures, and it automatically zeroes out the chunk in the heap. This is taught when you first learn the usage of the calloc utility because a beginner would wonder, “why use this over malloc?” to which is answered the same way as you would answer the flashcard. It is trivial.
Any skid can formulate trivial flashcards. It is an easy and shameless way of testing whether one is simply competent, or just posed as a way to annoy one another.
3.2 Atrivial flashcards
Definition 3.2.1: An atrivial flashcard is the opposite of a trivial flashcard, it is non-trivial (the a- prefix is fancier), it is a flashcard posed more frequently the succesively further up you climb in the skid hierarchy, it is a general term for a flashcard that requires specialized knowledge in the field itself opposed to a componenet of the field (as exemplified before, by Zakaria, ref. Trivial Flashcarding), for example, an atrivial flashcard may concern a question pertaining to the underpinnings of a certain theorem under a subfield such as calculus [mathematics], but a subsequent trivial flashcard would concern explaining the certain notations used in the theorem, a simple component which requires otherwardly knowledge of mathematics. Lower class skids may still formulate atrivial flashcards, which they are unable to understand themselves, ref. inable quasi-bitrivial flashcards.
An exemplification of atrivial flashcarding is not able to be found in any case studies (at the moment of writing, although more may be added), however I can generate the context to some examples: suppose a higher-tier skid was flashcarding on the field of graph theory, then an example atrivial flashcard would ask the flashcardee “minimally, how many edges would you need to add (allowing expansions) that if you took the complete graph with order the same as the order of the maximal clique under the tetrahedron, that you would end with a nonplanar graph”.
3.3 Bitrivial flashcards
Definition 3.3.1: Bitrivial flashcards are flashcards on topics which are specialized, but require a deep prerequisital knowledge to start to answer, these are the in-between classes of flashcards between trivial and atrivial, mostly because they are uniformly distributed across the skid hierarchy starting from fairly early at the bottom of the hierarchy, where intelligence starts to develop. For example, Zakaria’s talk about trigraph sequences is an inwardly view into parsing and compilation, it is a specialization of an n-graph sequence which in order to understand and not just have heard of, i.e. understand the motivation and usage, you must have built some forefrontal knowledge of topics describing the procedures of parsing, tokenization, lexemization, et cetera. Although not necessarily restricted to just this particular topic, as it is applicable to linguistics as a whole, but in order to explain trigraph sequences you will require either an understanding of linguistics, or have learned enough theory behind C to be able to explain its usage.
3.4 Quasi-bitrivial flashcards
You may wonder what this apparently confusing conjugation of prefixes means, but considering if you’ve understood the definition of a bitrivial flashcard as one between a trivial flashcard and an atrivial flashcard, then:
Definition 3.4.1: A buzzword is a word which is a formality in a specific field, it is generally used in more formal explanations of concepts, or whenever attempting to be rigorous about an explanation. In the skid trade, however, the buzzword has a more negative denotation as a word used to confuse people whom are not familiar with a field up to its nomenclature, rather only concepts and simple wordings behind the concepts.
Definition 3.4.2: Quasi-bitrivial flashcards are a classification of bitrivial flashcards (or, disjointly, trivial/atrivial flashcards) whereby the flashcards are made out to be much easier or much harder to answer than they actually are, generally quasi-flashcards are intended as trick flashcards, since a quasi-trivial flashcard would be one that a person would find generally easy to answer with quite elementary knowledge, but is considered wrong due to some intricacy, or inaccuracy or incompatibility. Conversely, a quasi-atrivial flashcard is one that tends to be lengthy and buzzword-infested, but ends up having a trivial explanation. By rough example, you can understand the idea of a quasi-trivial flashcard by the canonical flashcard of “how big is a dword”, which is generally impossible to get right within whatever allocated time-scope you are given, since a dword is a double-quantity of a word, and a word is the natural unit measurement of the CPU (the size which generally allows for atomic transfer operations between locations like registers and memory); and so, the issue with the flashcard is that it is ambiguous, generally all quasi-trivial flashcards are ambiguous, since word-sizes may differ across different instruction-set architectures. An example of a quasi-atrivial flashcard, would be the inverse of the prior quasi-trivial flashcard: “what is the bit-length of a double-word on an 8086 processor, running GNU/Linux+GrSec with no x87/x89 nor math coprocessors”, which is reducible to “what is the bit-size of a dword in the x86-16 ISA”, which’d consequently be 16 bits, hence a dword would be 32 bits.
3.5 Semi-bitrivial flashcards
The prefix semi-, with respect to the context, is intended to refer to the correctness and precision of the flashcard’s contents itself, and by that:
Definition 3.5.1: A semi-bitrivial flashcard is a flashcard whose precise nature is imprecise, causing inherent complication in the mind of the flashcardee and therefore prolonging the thought period and ego of the flashcarder. A flashcard that makes no sense is not really a flashcard, by category, it is a superfluous flashcard, which is still a flashcard but it is glossed over and irrelevant–so we can only have a classification for semi-bitrivial flashcards. For example, the example given for the quasi-trivial flashcard in the prior section is an example of a semi-atrivial flashcard, it is not correct etiquette to attempt to derive one’s capacity in a field by asking ambiguous questions and thereby being ignorant to the response asking for clarification as a method of prolonging their time.
3.6 Innocuous bitrivial flashcards
Definition 3.6.1: Innocuous refers to the property of being ineffective, harmless and with incapacity of invoking anything. In the skid trade, innocuity and harmlessness are synonymous, where harmless is generally used to describe a person whom is trying to inflict frustration and authority, but is unable to do anything physically, or affect the virtual presence (usually) of the skids flashcarding.
Definition 3.6.2: Innocuous bitrivial flashcards are therefore flashcards that cannot affect one’s authority, because they are deemed as hopeless attempts of gratification to the flashcarder wherein they have most likely been surprised by the fact that the flashcardee has answered their questions succinctly (probably due to a mistake of them failing to be a skid and making flashcards that are answerable unambiguously) and so are simply making flashcards that hold no fruit, because they are last resorts.
3.7 Inable quasi-bitrivial flashcards
Definition 3.7: An inable quasi-bitrivial flashcard is a flashcard that the asking-skid(s) themselves cannot answer (precisely), and are asked in order to lowerthe morals of the flashcardee, in hopes of attaining a reaction. Generally, this classification of flashcard follows a frequency function of a horizontally stretched upside-down U curve on a Cartesian plane, where the further down the x-axis the less skiddy the flashcardee becomes. Similar to innocuous bitrivial flashcards, inable quasi-bitrivial flashcards are generally asked as last resorts or used to prolong the time alwhilst the skid(s) think of more flashcards, or more ways to assert authority.
Thanks for reading.