Home · Maps · About
Home > SubChat

[ Post a New Response | Return to the Index ]

(1640841)

view threaded

The Darwin Award Revisited

Posted by Train Dude on Sat Apr 19 16:35:46 2025

For as long as I can recall, self appointed arbitters of the Darwin Award have "ruled" that persons who have their life cut short via their own actions near trains, are not elligable for a Darwin Award. In Probing to find out why, I found the following which seems to incluse railroad suicides and stupidity based accidents. : 

"The term "Darwin Award" is a humorously used term that refers to individuals who remove themselves from the human gene pool through their own actions, often described as reckless or foolish. In the context of trains, it's often used in situations where someone crosses a train track in front of a moving train and is hit, essentially "selecting themselves out" of the gene pool.
Here's a more detailed explanation:
The Darwin Awards:

These awards are a tongue-in-cheek way to acknowledge individuals who have supposedly contributed to human evolution by removing themselves from the gene pool. The idea is that their actions, often dangerous or foolish, result in their death or sterilization, thus preventing them from passing on their genes.
Train Accidents and Darwin Awards:

The term is frequently used in the context of train accidents where individuals are struck by trains while crossing tracks. This is because the individual's choice to cross in front of a moving train is seen as a highly risky and ultimately fatal act, leading to their removal from the gene pool.
Example:

A person walking or running in front of an oncoming train, despite clear warnings and visibility, could be described as potentially earning a Darwin Award, especially if they are fatally injured. "

Based on the above, I suggest a change in Darwin Award protocols for subchat. Can I get a ruling?

Post a New Response

(1640842)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 19 17:00:42 2025, in response to The Darwin Award Revisited, posted by Train Dude on Sat Apr 19 16:35:46 2025.

A person walking or running in front of an oncoming train, despite clear warnings and visibility, could be described as potentially earning a Darwin Award, especially if they are fatally injured.
What AI bot generated this? Train self-deletions are too common (disqualifier), and a Darwin winner has to not endanger others and doesn't have to die—just be removed from the general pool.

Post a New Response

(1640846)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 19 21:53:46 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 19 17:00:42 2025.

That's gene pool. And I didn't even mean to use any word suggestions.

Post a New Response

(Sponsored)

iPhone 6 (4.7 Inch) Premium PU Leather Wallet Case - Red w/ Floral Interior - by Notch-It

(1640847)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by TRAIN DUDE on Sat Apr 19 22:02:41 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?, posted by Olog-hai on Sat Apr 19 21:53:46 2025.

We still need a definitive citation.

Post a New Response

(1640857)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by Olog-hai on Mon Apr 21 08:27:14 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?, posted by TRAIN DUDE on Sat Apr 19 22:02:41 2025.

Well, there are the rules as set up by Wendy Northcutt, the creator of the Darwin Awards (and the creator of the DarwinAwards.com website).

Post a New Response

(1640858)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by TRAIN DUDE on Mon Apr 21 09:12:58 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?, posted by Olog-hai on Mon Apr 21 08:27:14 2025.

I don't wish to belabor the point but I found no specific citation that mentioned death by train. The only thing I saw was that the death needed to be unusual and stupid. Are we suggesting that falling from the roof of a moving train is too common to be included?

Post a New Response

(1640872)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by terRAPIN station on Mon Apr 21 22:45:53 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?, posted by TRAIN DUDE on Mon Apr 21 09:12:58 2025.

No, it IS on the official website. Took a bit of work but I verified it before I made this post:

http://www.subchat.com/read.asp?Id=1640816

Because, as you know, I do my research before making statements of fact so that I minimize how many times I say things that are wrong.

Post a New Response

(1640875)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by Train Dude on Tue Apr 22 00:23:57 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?, posted by terRAPIN station on Mon Apr 21 22:45:53 2025.

Alas, perhaps in this case, you did not do your usual due dilligance. It the post on which this thread was based, we were not speaking of an intividual who was hit by a train but rather one who while surfing at 3:15 Am, fell from the roof of a moving train. Your post does not address that circumstance nor does it provide the original citation on which your claim is based.

Post a New Response

(1640884)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by terRAPIN station on Tue Apr 22 08:56:44 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?, posted by Train Dude on Tue Apr 22 00:23:57 2025.

I addressed that in my response. I said that getting hit by train normally disqualifies you, but the circumstances by which you were hit could bring you back into contention.

Post a New Response

(1640886)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by TRAIN DUDE on Tue Apr 22 09:12:03 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?, posted by terRAPIN station on Tue Apr 22 08:56:44 2025.

Again, this person was not struggling k by a train.

Post a New Response

(1640921)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by terRAPIN station on Tue Apr 22 21:18:20 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?, posted by TRAIN DUDE on Tue Apr 22 09:12:03 2025.

Really? No part of the train struck him?

Post a New Response

(1640926)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by TRAIN DUDE on Tue Apr 22 21:49:18 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?, posted by terRAPIN station on Tue Apr 22 21:18:20 2025.

He was found hanging upside down from an unspecified part of the train between cars. It sounded like he struck his head when he fell but that's my interpretation.

Post a New Response

(1640937)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by terRAPIN station on Wed Apr 23 08:23:15 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?, posted by TRAIN DUDE on Tue Apr 22 21:49:18 2025.

Exactly. He was in a place he shouldn’t be in the path of a train. I fully consider that within the general realm of being struck by a train.

Post a New Response

(1640945)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?

Posted by TRAIN DUDE on Wed Apr 23 14:19:30 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited?, posted by terRAPIN station on Wed Apr 23 08:23:15 2025.

LOL I guess I can't argue against that sort of logic.

Post a New Response

(1641029)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited

Posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon Apr 28 14:45:01 2025, in response to The Darwin Award Revisited, posted by Train Dude on Sat Apr 19 16:35:46 2025.

My understanding for decades has been an individual can only be granted a Darwin if they should have known better/were given warning to not do whatever it was that caused the unfortunate situation and have not yet produced offspring. If they already have repro'd they are not eligible for a Darwin.

Post a New Response

(1641030)

view threaded

Re: The Darwin Award Revisited

Posted by Train Dude on Mon Apr 28 15:13:26 2025, in response to Re: The Darwin Award Revisited, posted by Dupont Circle Station on Mon Apr 28 14:45:01 2025.

Hard to say in this case as the victim was 30 years old. He has, however permanently removed himself from the gene pool.

Post a New Response


[ Return to the Message Index ]