|
|
|
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
|
|
|
| Version 1.0 | 23-November-1989 | |
| Version 1.10 | 7-May-1996 |
| Authors: |
donahue@resourcesforbears.com (Bob Donahue = BBC) |
jls2@bearclan.com (Jeff Stoner) |
Because "Bears" mean so many things to different people, because bears come in all shapes and sizes and have different sexual proclivities, because classified ad prices are SOOOOOO expensive, we (while eating lunch at a Boulder, Colorado, Wendy's on Thanksgiving weekend, 1989) came up with this incredibly-scientific system to describe bears and bear-like men.
Since we both have interests in astronomy, we are well-versed in star and galaxy classification systems, which use prototypes to set the standards for describing things. Rather than just saying something is of "Type I" or "Type II" (etc.), it is better to use natural features to describe an object, in particular as a continuum of a range of features. Such is the case with bears.
Want to reproduce the NBCS on your site? Click here.
Automatically generate your own personal Bear Code!!
1 - (VERY slight beard) This is the kind of beard that people have who want to have a beard, but can't grow one. Or someone who is contantly at the 1-week phase.
2 - (Slight beard) A beard kept VERY short at all times, or thinned out.
3 - (Thin beard) A beard in all respects but kept thin and short.
4 - (Mostly full) A beard that is full except for a few noticable bald spots, or kept trimmed.
5 - (Full beard) A full beard not generally trimmed, though not generally bushy. May have a few bald spots on inspection. Usually full and roundish beards fall into this category.
6 - (Very full) A full beard, not trimmed. May be slightly bushy but very full. Thick, full beards (moreso than B5's) are B6's. B6's beards also generally are higher up on the cheeks than B5's.
7 - (Longish/bushy beards) A full beard or slightly thin beard with longish fur. This beard is not trimmed and does come away from the chin.
8 - (Very Long Beards) These beards are usually very bushy and haven't seen clippers for a very long time.
9 - (Belt-buckle-grazing long beards) The prototype is ZZ Top. Need we say more?
Ok... Using this scheme, it shouldn't be hard to narrow a person down to within 1 sub-class, although occasionally people may fall between two classes, and then the end result is left up to the person classifying, or one may use a hybrid designation (for example: B7/4) for those who vary across time (in the given range they spend more time near the first number).
While beards can be an observable trait of bears, there are other things that different people take into consideration as to "what makes up a bear", and things that people like in their bears. So, bearing that in mind (pun intended) there are other criteria that can/should optionally follow the "B" designation.
N.B. It is not necessary to have a "grade" for each of these traits! For each there is a "neutral" value, which basically describes someone who is "average" or "unknown" within that trait. These "neutral" values are given below, but would not be reported --- treat them as either "default" or "assumed".
m++ Arnold Schwartzineger is that you?
m+ definitely works out or is a ranchhand
m some definition/blue collar
(none) muscle neutral
e++ gets complete respect even from straight men
e+ gets attention
e noteworthy
(none) endowment neutral
h behr (moustache no beard)
h+ Definite BEHR (moustache no beard)
h- no beard OR moustache! (very rare but still cave dwelling)
ADDITIONAL PUNCTUATION
| v | for variable, said trait is not very rigid, may change with time or with individual interaction (e.g. some guys who are generally REAL daddies, may turn into REAL cubs occasionally, etc.) |
| ? | for traits where there is no HARD information available and the value is completely guessed at: eg. a picture of a hot bear that LOOKS like a rugged outdoorsman, r+? but in reality could be a 3-piece suit bear. |
| : | for traits which are observed but uncertain, eg. a guy who is wearing a lot of clothes, so you can't be SURE he's an f+, but his forearms REALLY suggest that he is, hence f+: |
| ! | for cases where the trait is as close to a prototype as possible, or an exemplary case of a specfic trait... eg. the ultimate f++! |
| () | for indicating "cross-overs" or ranges. A guy who goes from k to k++ depending on the situation (ie mostly "k") could use k(++) |
You can make the punctuation as detailed as desired, although the best ones to read are the ones which are the most clear and simple to understand.
NOTE: None of the classification materials in any way suggests a ranking or value judgement, in terms of what constitutes a "better" bear. Every person has their own favorite type!
The authors:
| Bob Donahue | B5 c+ f s-: w t- r k? |
| Jeff Stoner | B6 f+ w sv w r+ k(+?) |
Added note: We're still working on this... Some bears have asked that we extend the system to include "beard parameters like thickness, length, kemptnmess, etc...., so inevitably "VERSION 2" will be done... I have run across a bear or two that for me defied "good classification", mostly because of the beard. So... we'll see.
Have fun!
BBC
This file is the canonical copy of the most current version the NBCS (Bearcode) and appears with permission of the authors.
The Natural Bears Classification System (Bearcode) is Copyright © 1989-1999 by the authors. No reproduction of this file in any medium is permitted without permission of the authors.
|
|
Text and images are Copyright © 1994-2010 by Resources for Bears
and their respective owners. All rights reserved.