>> ^arvana:

The half-life of the transverse waves propagated from that slap indicate a damping factor of: FIRM.


You said exactly what I was going to post! So, instead...

In this new video being created by our highly skilled graduates; the camera speed will be slightly slower at 1000 FPS @1920x1080 (or higher if intended for use with IMAX or a screen over two meters) with a secondary stream containing a duplicate, but separate feed set proportionately two-centimeters apart from the other feed. Then slightly zoomed out at around a 5.7% overall frame increase in size and a slight 2° shift from the vertical, counter-clockwise. Then combine the two feeds to one feed, except beforehand, polarize the frames (or frame frequencies) 90° from the other (relatively). Hand out polarized glasses--that of course have a film matched to the polarized frequency. Then increase the overall playback time, matching with the framerate speed, to give a new perceived 30 minute length (20 seconds is ridiculous).

Then some 1960's or 1970's music can be added in (the beat of the music must match the wave speed; some "human intercourse" period film pieces may have the required music) to further increase the relation of wave propagation seen in the video demonstration. This will help add to the overall immersion and enjoyment of the experience.

Then, we suggest the use of lubrication (Group 5, with a Viscosity of 800cSt is recommended) and then use some transformational waves (many options are available) at a decent amplitude and frequency. One traditional method used is caused by simple human mechanical kinetic manipulation (flexing muscle groups) in a rhythmic horizontal/vertical oppositional motion spread out over a chosen time span. Speed, duration, and intensity are decided by the user or a human/non-human counterpart. Typically, this will propagate a strand of flagellates into a D-glucose polysaccharide chains in a combined structure for simple discontinuation and cleanup; then quickly proceeding on to the web browser and watching the next "sift*".

If "flagellate" reaction is not noticed or possible for you, please follow the yellow strip on the floor. On your way out you may participate in our free clinical study looking for medical problems. You will need to put on a special garment for the study, and you will receive a complimentary lollipop! Do not be disturbed if this reaction is not noticed as it is a well known and documented myth created by the sub-species that is the focus of our demonstration video. Do not be disturbed if you think you look like as said sub-species.

Thank you for watching our dissertation on wave propagation.
We look forward to our next project on fluid dynamics!


*sift, definition below

sift (sift)
verb. sift·ed, sift·ing, sifts
v.tr.
1. To put (flour, for example) through a sieve or other straining device in order to separate the fine from the coarse particles.
2. To distinguish as if separating with a sieve: sifted the candidates for the job.
3. To apply by scattering with or as if with a sieve: sift sugar on a dessert.
4. To examine and sort carefully: sift the evidence.
v.intr.
1. To make use of a sieve.
2. To pass through or as if through a sieve: a meal that sifts easily.
3. To make a careful examination: sifted through back issues of the magazine.

sift (suhifft)
noun. sift·ed, sift·ing, sifts, spelunking
n.wtf.
1. A video on the website called "Videosift™"; sometimes amusing.
2. A video not on the website called "Videosift™", fought over in a mating like ritual to become a sift.

Its been a while since I roasted someone, so I maybe a bit rusty...

You know something, that hasn't been talked of yet is the channel that Mr. Fisk is in charged of, Controversy...

We all know that Mr. Fisk can be off his rocker at times, but what drives a man to be in charge of something like controversy? From what we can deciper from what Mr. Dotdude shared, I picked some of my favorite quotes from his 500 acceptance speech...

1) And to think, I was nearly permanently banned my first month here:
Meaning that this guy shouldn't be here in the first place? Not even one month on videosift and people were already trying to get rid of this guy... I mean seriously, compared to what he has gone through when he first started, this roast is pretty much a cakewalk...

2) Next up, I'd like to thank the rest of y'all suave mofos, for watching, upvoting, and appreciating my twisted sense of humor. And finally, I'd like to thank myself. It wasn't as easy as I made it look, pinpointing the greatest underground rap videos (often foregoing the luxury of thumbnails), locating full episodes and movies (the internet is public domain, so far as I'm concerned), posting political videos that I disagreed with but refused to ignore (how many did I take from you, qm and billo?), and of course, the controversy:
Can you believe that this was only three sentences? Besides writing an extra long sentence at the end that a grammar teacher would frown on (not like I have anything going myself with my three periods...), He acknowledge people as "Suave Mofos." Congrats people, when he hit 500 he complimented and insulted you at the same time and not many people can do that... He then goes off by saying reasons why he should have been banned, by confessing how he uses Licensed Underground Rap videos, full episodes and movies, political videos that discredit people, "and of course, the controversy." How is this man Ranked 39!?! He admitted that he lied, cheated, and stoled to get to where he is today!

3) What I found (Videosift), was a galaxy of videos, which have entertained, educated, appalled, and bored the fuck out of me:
I love how he puts "bored the fuck out of me" at the end since this indicates that while he was, "entertained, and educated" he was really "appalled" by videos he has seen and overall bored of what some people attempt to post... Mr. Fisk is saying that doesn't like you or the videos that you post people... Only a few things amuse him, but overall, he just, BORED!

4) Yes, I've been controversial in the past, it's in my blood, you see? But I think the community, as a whole, is able to realize that I'm more of a civil-siftdisobedient than an outright siftarchist. I'm delighted to earn this meaningless achievement:
And we reach the end where he finishes his confession. He is a controversial man, he enriches his heritage of causing problems for other and is a disobedient troublemaker who embraced a honor by saying it is meaningless... Truly you are someone who sets a good example... An example of how to be an evil mastermind trying to throw people off by confusing and angering others...

O and did I forget to mention that he I peddles cigarettes and booze for a living... I went ahead to look up the definition of peddle and here it is...

ped·dle/ˈpedl/Verb
1. Try to sell (something, esp. small goods) by going from house to house or place to place.
2. Sell (an illegal drug or stolen item).

That's right people, he sells illegal cigarettes and booze from place to place!! You make me sick and I hope to get in on that action once you are found and brought to justice... Keep up the good work so that when you are finally arrested, you will have so much evidence against you even your lawyer will try and find you guilty... Thank you!

((In all seriousness though, Mr. Fisk, keep up the great job, the videos you find are great to watch and if you haven't posted the controversy channel, videosift still be brainwashed moron with no direction to go... Thank you and I hope you didn't get offended, but then again that is how roasts works right?))

@xxovercastxx

True, but the "i before e" thing has been around since the 1800s, so I'd bet there were fewer loaner words at the time.

@robbersdog49

Yes, I share most of his views. There's a difference between knowing and not caring and using words incorrectly out of ignorance. As someone (possibly on sift) said recently, these conventions are the difference between saying stuff like, "I helped my uncle Jack off a horse" and "I helped my uncle jack off a horse". One capital letter is all you need to get wrong to possibly confuse the hell out of someone. Did you help your uncle kill or masturbate a horse? Possibly important info.

I saw a sign today that said "Welcome hockey fan's!" Hockey fan's what?

Taco Bell is full of signs that say "WHY PAY MORE!". That sentence is a question.

These are things done out of ignorance/laziness. They're understandable and forgivable. I notice them being wrong, so it's slightly annoying and I'd fix it if I had the chance, but whatever. Purposely enjoying and playing with language is highly enjoyable. I change nouns into verbs all the time. On the other hand, sounding like an idiot in an email can cost you a job, etc. It's usually obvious which is the case (ignorance or being playful) and I always prefer the action done from a position of knowledge rather than ignorance.

"Redistribution of wealth to the upper 2%". He's right, but he needs to qualify it with the following Verb: "Facilitating redistribution of wealth to the upper 2%". Difference being that it's the private sector that over-rewards management, and apparently the GOP is fine with that since they are willing to whore themselves out for the eager-to-finance ultra rich.

That said, all three people on this segment weren't exactly the sort that I'd back. Too much stepping on each other here.

some nice enviroment moalling there especially given what looks like some prity tight texture and polygon budgets.

I feel sorry for the artists that work on games like this. Its pretty much a given that the end product as a whole will be a pile of shit. ( even a company like blizzard churns out core game play in its MMO's that when compared to single player games is a buggy shit feast. (and even then they are doing a huge achievement keeping things even mildly working and ballenced).

I bet that the actual game play in this DC universe game bares absaluty nothing to the verbs that would be found within the comics this is about as analgouse to being immersed in the world as playing a DC Card game.

In fact I would prefer a card game over some shitty MMO as a card game allows the players mind to fill in the blanks where as a MMO like this will likely be crammed full of utterly shit grind game play ,generic combat shoe horned together to work with latency issues ,pore animation and terrible story deliverd in the most artificial and detrimental way possible for commic book style narrative.

Im sure enoughf people will buy this purely because of the visual context that it will justify them to keep doing this sort of shit.

On the other hand if in the 1 in a million chance it works and works well then that would be really cool. I would rather have a decent MMO around a differnt IP though ( Stargate ,StarWars, StarTreck, ) Ips that actual benefit and probably could only ever realy work properly from MMO game play.

I've never thought about what an odd word 'sanction' is. As a verb it is permission; as a noun it's punishment. English can be a very nonsensical language sometimes.

(googles furiously)

Words like this are called autoantonyms http://www.fun-with-words.com/nym_autoantonyms.html

bill - means both invoice and payment.
custom - means both normal and unique
faith - means both belief in something without evidence and belief that something will happen based on evidence.
impregnable - means both impossible to enter and able to impregnate.
strike - means to both miss hitting a ball and to hit a ball.


>> ^MarineGunrock:

Sanction = formal and explicit approval>> ^ldeadeyesl:
@ MarineGunrock
I have no respect for her, and I'm not sure if she knew or not, but saying we have to sanction the North's Actions is something that makes sense. Check the meaning of sanctions, it's not something you do to your allies.

Caitlin is a smart and intuitive cookie.

Likely train of thought:

1. There are 2 common contractions that are 3 letters long with 2 letters after the apostrophe: I'll and I've.

2. I'm going to pick L on the hunch that the first word is "I'll" for an easy 2 letters and potentially more in the rest of the puzzle.

3. Only 1 L showed up, implying the first word is I've.

4. The single letter (third word) is "a" since "I've _ _ _ I" will never[citation needed] make sense. The second word must be a verb of some kind since the first is a contraction of "I have," and "I have the a..." doesn't fit, nor does "I have" plus any noun (like "I have cat a...") will also not make sense. So word #2 must be a 3-letter verb of some kind.

5. "I've got a lovely bunch of coconuts" doesn't fit. Haha.

You're taking what I said wayyyyyyy out of context. I said it was typical of sensationalized Internet media to take something and make it far worse than it actually is/was. I do not and will not consider what happened in that video to be stomping on someones head, but as proven here, that can be argued. I do, however, feel it was out of line and the people responsible should be investigated.

This is why it's nearly impossible to have an intelligent conversation with people these days. You can say whatever you want, and that's that. Nothing is open for discussion or disagreement anymore.

Objective fact? She wasn't curb stomped nor was her head stomped on, at all. Saying so, and claiming that to be the case and calling it objective fact is a lie. I could agree with you if you said someone stepped on her neck, but stomped? No.

Objective judgment? Possibly. It is of my judgment that they went too far in what they did to her. That said, at least I'm honest about my objective judgment and am willing to admit that's what it is. I suppose others could say they didn't go far enough in what they did to her, which would make my opinion on this a judgment call.

In the end, what I said makes you mad? You got mad at me because you disagree with my opinion that I consider what actually went down versus how you titled it to be sensationalized? That's truly sad. I thought better of you, but I guess you're like the typical majority of Internet opinion makers -- if I disagree with you, you get mad at me for it. Oh well.

>> ^NetRunner:

@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/hPOD" title="member since August 6th, 2010" class="profilelink">hPOD ahh, so instead of titling it with objective fact, I should title it with subjective judgment?
@<a rel="nofollow" href="http://videosift.com/member/GeeSussFreeK" title="member since August 1st, 2008" class="profilelink">GeeSussFreeK, umm, my title should be funny? I think "roughs up" is inaccurate (I usually think of that as involving multiple strikes), I think "assaults" has a legal connotation, I think "pushes down" isn't what all the fuss is about, and you're the one bringing up crazy things that didn't happen (rape & murder).
To both of you, just google Lauren Valle, and look at the press headlines describing this event. Most include the word "stomp", including the current embed from the Associated Press. The ones that don't aren't really any less inflammatory. Many use the verb "attacked", one said "brutally attacked", another said "kicked in the head", and a student newspaper even called it "A Crack of the Skull 'Heard Around the World'".
The most mild I've seen is "stepped on" her head, but I'd say that implies that it was unintentional, and it clearly was no accident.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
With alllll that being said, what happened here was completely shitty. I almost hate that the title is so much of an issue more than what has actually happened.

Here's what really makes me mad, at both you and hPOD, frankly. You are the ones making a federal case out of the word choice in my title, rather than focusing on the act itself.
You are the ones who feel you need to come and express concern for my immortal soul because of the horrors of my base and vile dishonesty -- in copying my fucking title from a professional news outlet that was being more fastidious about its facts than most.
Condemn the guy who stomped on the woman's head, not me for calling it a stomp.

@hPOD ahh, so instead of titling it with objective fact, I should title it with subjective judgment?

@GeeSussFreeK, umm, my title should be funny? I think "roughs up" is inaccurate (I usually think of that as involving multiple strikes), I think "assaults" has a legal connotation, I think "pushes down" isn't what all the fuss is about, and you're the one bringing up crazy things that didn't happen (rape & murder).

To both of you, just google Lauren Valle, and look at the press headlines describing this event. Most include the word "stomp", including the current embed from the Associated Press. The ones that don't aren't really any less inflammatory. Many use the verb "attacked", one said "brutally attacked", another said "kicked in the head", and a student newspaper even called it "A Crack of the Skull 'Heard Around the World'".

The most mild I've seen is "stepped on" her head, but I'd say that implies that it was unintentional, and it clearly was no accident.

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
With alllll that being said, what happened here was completely shitty. I almost hate that the title is so much of an issue more than what has actually happened.

Here's what really makes me mad, at both you and hPOD, frankly. You are the ones making a federal case out of the word choice in my title, rather than focusing on the act itself.

You are the ones who feel you need to come and express concern for my immortal soul because of the horrors of my base and vile dishonesty -- in copying my fucking title from a professional news outlet that was being more fastidious about its facts than most.

Condemn the guy who stomped on the woman's head, not me for calling it a stomp.

Now you play semantics to justify your sensationalized headline.

What's happening in that video is NOT someone getting their head stomped on, once again, stop trying to make it something it's not. The worst part is, what you are attempting to do with your attention grabbing headline isn't even necessary. What happened in the video is damning enough without you making it sound worse than it was. We SEE the video. We know YOU see the video. We know that it's not a stomp. So now you try to list general definitions of what a stomp/stamp is in order to justify the headline. It would be more genuine of you to say she was held down forcibly with someones foot than to say someone stomped on her head, which is an out right fabrication.

>> ^NetRunner:

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
Completely uncalled for, but not curb stomping to be sure. I was expecting a cut from American History X, glad I didn't get what I expected. In as much as the right calls Obama a socialist, this is a curb stomping. A return to sanity, unlikely.

>> ^hPOD:
Stop using the word stomp, because that's not what happened. I've watched the video, so have many others. Want to see a stomp, watch American History X...there is a difference between what's in that video and someones head/neck being stomped on about the size of the Grand Canyon.

I don't get you guys. Three men grab a woman, push her to the ground, hold her there and then stomp on her head, giving her a concussion. The Lexington Police has sent Tim Profitt a summons to appear in court so a judge can decide if criminal assault charges are warranted.
Sure, it didn't work like it did in American History X where they put the guy's teeth on concrete first. It also didn't work like in Gears of War where the victim's head explodes like a blood-filled watermelon.
So because it doesn't look like exaggerated Hollywood violence, it's not a stomp?
>> ^GeeSussFreeK:
In as much as the right calls Obama a socialist, this is a curb stomping. A return to sanity, unlikely.

So GeeSussFreeK, the real issue with sanity isn't that someone stomped on someone's head, it's that liberals like me called it a stomp? Seriously, what the fuck are you smoking?
>> ^hPOD:
It's hard to take you seriously when you sensationalize, and you're smarter/better than needing to resort to such extremes. The people involved were stupid, to be sure, but you're making them sound like attempted murderers, and this is disingenuous at best.
The only words I've used to characterize the content of the video is the title...
Original: Apparent Rand Paul Supporter Stomps on MoveOn Member's Head
Current: Rand Paul Co. Coordinator Stomps on MoveOn Member's Head
What's disingenuous or misleading about either? Lauren Valle is a member of MoveOn. When I didn't know whether the guy was affiliated with Rand Paul, I said so. Now that I know he's not just a supporter, but someone who's part of the campaign organization, I updated it.
I know, must be the word stomp. Dictionary.com redirects stomp to stamp, so here's the definition they give:
stamp
–verb (used with object)

1. to strike or beat with a forcible, downward thrust of the foot.
   
2. to bring (the foot) down forcibly or smartly on the ground, floor, etc.
   
3. to extinguish, crush, etc., by striking with a forcible downward thrust of the foot (fol. by out): to stamp out a fire.
   
4. to suppress or quell (a rebellion, uprising, etc.) quickly through the use of overwhelming force (usually fol. by out).
   
5. to crush or pound with or as with a pestle.
   
6. to impress with a particular mark or device, as to indicate genuineness, approval, or ownership: to stamp a document with a seal.
   

(Further definitions become even less appropos)
I know what it is, he didn't beat her over the head with a pestle, so I must be engaging in unfair hyperbole!

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

Completely uncalled for, but not curb stomping to be sure. I was expecting a cut from American History X, glad I didn't get what I expected. In as much as the right calls Obama a socialist, this is a curb stomping. A return to sanity, unlikely.

>> ^hPOD:

Stop using the word stomp, because that's not what happened. I've watched the video, so have many others. Want to see a stomp, watch American History X...there is a difference between what's in that video and someones head/neck being stomped on about the size of the Grand Canyon.


I don't get you guys. Three men grab a woman, push her to the ground, hold her there and then stomp on her head, giving her a concussion. The Lexington Police has sent Tim Profitt a summons to appear in court so a judge can decide if criminal assault charges are warranted.

Sure, it didn't work like it did in American History X where they put the guy's teeth on concrete first. It also didn't work like in Gears of War where the victim's head explodes like a blood-filled watermelon.

So because it doesn't look like exaggerated Hollywood violence, it's not a stomp?

>> ^GeeSussFreeK:

In as much as the right calls Obama a socialist, this is a curb stomping. A return to sanity, unlikely.

So GeeSussFreeK, the real issue with sanity isn't that someone stomped on someone's head, it's that liberals like me called it a stomp? Seriously, what the fuck are you smoking?
>> ^hPOD:
It's hard to take you seriously when you sensationalize, and you're smarter/better than needing to resort to such extremes. The people involved were stupid, to be sure, but you're making them sound like attempted murderers, and this is disingenuous at best.

The only words I've used to characterize the content of the video is the title...

Original: Apparent Rand Paul Supporter Stomps on MoveOn Member's Head
Current: Rand Paul Co. Coordinator Stomps on MoveOn Member's Head

What's disingenuous or misleading about either? Lauren Valle is a member of MoveOn. When I didn't know whether the guy was affiliated with Rand Paul, I said so. Now that I know he's not just a supporter, but someone who's part of the campaign organization, I updated it.

I know, must be the word stomp. Dictionary.com redirects stomp to stamp, so here's the definition they give:

stamp
–verb (used with object)

1. to strike or beat with a forcible, downward thrust of the foot.
   
2. to bring (the foot) down forcibly or smartly on the ground, floor, etc.
   
3. to extinguish, crush, etc., by striking with a forcible downward thrust of the foot (fol. by out): to stamp out a fire.
   
4. to suppress or quell (a rebellion, uprising, etc.) quickly through the use of overwhelming force (usually fol. by out).
   
5. to crush or pound with or as with a pestle.
   
6. to impress with a particular mark or device, as to indicate genuineness, approval, or ownership: to stamp a document with a seal.
   

(Further definitions become even less appropos)

I know what it is, he didn't beat her over the head with a pestle, so I must be engaging in unfair hyperbole!

Urbandictionary defines a goober as...

"basically a goober is just a kindhearted, rather oblivious goofball. it's term of endearment really. it comes from the ancient scottish verb "to goub", which has to do with doing a dance and smiling sheepishly while doing so, exposing the goubs in one's teeth."

Hahaha I got that...>> ^Throbbin:

Your a hero of the grammar!>> ^JiggaJonson:
Are you asking about the sentence in quotations? Yes it's correct grammatically.
Most people understand that you need a "noun and a verb" in every sentence. It's a bit more helpful to think of what you need in a sentence as a subject and a predicate in my opinion. The reason for this is that, while it's true that nouns and verbs are usually present in a sentence, frequently words that would usually function as verbs can be used as nouns and vice versa because you have to consider all other words that modify those words. For example:
Running = something that you do
but, when it's modified by another word like "his" to form a sentence like
"His running sped up."
^In this case, the word "running" is actually the subject of the sentence. So, you could say, because the word "running" is performing the functions of a noun, and is being modified by the predicate or the action in this sentence, running is a noun.
Now for the sentence above, the subject is being modified a lot
values is the simple subject modified by 'of the figure of merit shown (mdn (min, max))'
then you have your predicate, the Be verb 'are'
The subject and the predicate for the meatier part of the sentence is all good, one subject and one predicate and no out of place modifiers.
The only tricky part of understanding this sentence is the list at the end. All the "n=whatever" listed here would fall into a category of what's called the predicate nominative or in other words, whet the predicate, or word functioning as a verb, is naming.
You probably see these frequently and don't realize it: "When the plot to kidnap Westy is discovered, Gwiz will be a suspect." For each case, if the verb descibes a state of being, like 'am' as in 'I am,' look for what that state is. So for the aforementioned sentence, 'plot' is being modified by 'is' and the state of being in that case is 'discovered.' For the second part (abbreviated) "Gwiz" mod by "will" state of being is "suspect."
Alllll of that being said, the list at the end is all a part of that same predicate nominative (albeit a long one) and the individual groups of values are separated by semicolons correctly. The reason semicolons are used as opposed to commas is because semicolons function as a sort of 'trump' for a regular comma. In the case of this list, commas are used frequently to separate smaller segments of the number values. Because of this comma use, semicolons are needed to keep things from getting confusing.
Here's an example:
I've traveled to London, England; Paris, France; and Rome, Italy.
as opposed to
I've traveled to London, England, Paris, France, and Rome, Italy.
^and that probably doesn't look incorrect but that's only because you know of the cities I listed here. If I were to pluck out some countries/cities from a dense part of Africa like this:
I've traveled to Libreville, Gabon, Parakou, Benin, Lome, Togo, and Cuassola, Angola.
^Here it becomes difficult to categorize the city/country name because of their unfamiliarity.
But if you get some help from semicolons...
I've traveled to Libreville, Gabon; Parakou, Benin; Lome, Togo; and Cuassola, Angola.
It's much easier to categorize everything, as is the way with the correctly punctuated sentence you presented.
For more on semicolon use I strongly suggest you check out this link http://theoatmeal.com/comics/semicolon . It's both hilarious and informative.
Finally, I asked at the beginning of this post "Are you asking about the sentence in quotations?" because what you said "I hate this sentence is it right" is not correct. You need a comma to separate the independent clauses "I hate this sentence," and "is it right."
Corrected: I hate this sentence, is it right?
Grammar Nazi awaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!!!

Your a hero of the grammar!>> ^JiggaJonson:

Are you asking about the sentence in quotations? Yes it's correct grammatically.
Most people understand that you need a "noun and a verb" in every sentence. It's a bit more helpful to think of what you need in a sentence as a subject and a predicate in my opinion. The reason for this is that, while it's true that nouns and verbs are usually present in a sentence, frequently words that would usually function as verbs can be used as nouns and vice versa because you have to consider all other words that modify those words. For example:
Running = something that you do
but, when it's modified by another word like "his" to form a sentence like
"His running sped up."
^In this case, the word "running" is actually the subject of the sentence. So, you could say, because the word "running" is performing the functions of a noun, and is being modified by the predicate or the action in this sentence, running is a noun.
Now for the sentence above, the subject is being modified a lot
values is the simple subject modified by 'of the figure of merit shown (mdn (min, max))'
then you have your predicate, the Be verb 'are'
The subject and the predicate for the meatier part of the sentence is all good, one subject and one predicate and no out of place modifiers.
The only tricky part of understanding this sentence is the list at the end. All the "n=whatever" listed here would fall into a category of what's called the predicate nominative or in other words, whet the predicate, or word functioning as a verb, is naming.
You probably see these frequently and don't realize it: "When the plot to kidnap Westy is discovered, Gwiz will be a suspect." For each case, if the verb descibes a state of being, like 'am' as in 'I am,' look for what that state is. So for the aforementioned sentence, 'plot' is being modified by 'is' and the state of being in that case is 'discovered.' For the second part (abbreviated) "Gwiz" mod by "will" state of being is "suspect."
Alllll of that being said, the list at the end is all a part of that same predicate nominative (albeit a long one) and the individual groups of values are separated by semicolons correctly. The reason semicolons are used as opposed to commas is because semicolons function as a sort of 'trump' for a regular comma. In the case of this list, commas are used frequently to separate smaller segments of the number values. Because of this comma use, semicolons are needed to keep things from getting confusing.
Here's an example:
I've traveled to London, England; Paris, France; and Rome, Italy.
as opposed to
I've traveled to London, England, Paris, France, and Rome, Italy.
^and that probably doesn't look incorrect but that's only because you know of the cities I listed here. If I were to pluck out some countries/cities from a dense part of Africa like this:
I've traveled to Libreville, Gabon, Parakou, Benin, Lome, Togo, and Cuassola, Angola.
^Here it becomes difficult to categorize the city/country name because of their unfamiliarity.
But if you get some help from semicolons...
I've traveled to Libreville, Gabon; Parakou, Benin; Lome, Togo; and Cuassola, Angola.
It's much easier to categorize everything, as is the way with the correctly punctuated sentence you presented.
For more on semicolon use I strongly suggest you check out this link http://theoatmeal.com/comics/semicolon . It's both hilarious and informative.
Finally, I asked at the beginning of this post "Are you asking about the sentence in quotations?" because what you said "I hate this sentence is it right" is not correct. You need a comma to separate the independent clauses "I hate this sentence," and "is it right."
Corrected: I hate this sentence, is it right?
Grammar Nazi awaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!!!

Are you asking about the sentence in quotations? Yes it's correct grammatically.

Most people understand that you need a "noun and a verb" in every sentence. It's a bit more helpful to think of what you need in a sentence as a subject and a predicate in my opinion. The reason for this is that, while it's true that nouns and verbs are usually present in a sentence, frequently words that would usually function as verbs can be used as nouns and vice versa because you have to consider all other words that modify those words. For example:

Running = something that you do
but, when it's modified by another word like "his" to form a sentence like
"His running sped up."
^In this case, the word "running" is actually the subject of the sentence. So, you could say, because the word "running" is performing the functions of a noun, and is being modified by the predicate or the action in this sentence, running is a noun.

Now for the sentence above, the subject is being modified a lot
values is the simple subject modified by 'of the figure of merit shown (mdn (min, max))'
then you have your predicate, the Be verb 'are'
The subject and the predicate for the meatier part of the sentence is all good, one subject and one predicate and no out of place modifiers.

The only tricky part of understanding this sentence is the list at the end. All the "n=whatever" listed here would fall into a category of what's called the predicate nominative or in other words, whet the predicate, or word functioning as a verb, is naming.

You probably see these frequently and don't realize it: "When the plot to kidnap Westy is discovered, Gwiz will be a suspect." For each case, if the verb descibes a state of being, like 'am' as in 'I am,' look for what that state is. So for the aforementioned sentence, 'plot' is being modified by 'is' and the state of being in that case is 'discovered.' For the second part (abbreviated) "Gwiz" mod by "will" state of being is "suspect."

Alllll of that being said, the list at the end is all a part of that same predicate nominative (albeit a long one) and the individual groups of values are separated by semicolons correctly. The reason semicolons are used as opposed to commas is because semicolons function as a sort of 'trump' for a regular comma. In the case of this list, commas are used frequently to separate smaller segments of the number values. Because of this comma use, semicolons are needed to keep things from getting confusing.
Here's an example:
I've traveled to London, England; Paris, France; and Rome, Italy.
as opposed to
I've traveled to London, England, Paris, France, and Rome, Italy.

^and that probably doesn't look incorrect but that's only because you know of the cities I listed here. If I were to pluck out some countries/cities from a dense part of Africa like this:
I've traveled to Libreville, Gabon, Parakou, Benin, Lome, Togo, and Cuassola, Angola.
^Here it becomes difficult to categorize the city/country name because of their unfamiliarity.

But if you get some help from semicolons...
I've traveled to Libreville, Gabon; Parakou, Benin; Lome, Togo; and Cuassola, Angola.
It's much easier to categorize everything, as is the way with the correctly punctuated sentence you presented.

For more on semicolon use I strongly suggest you check out this link http://theoatmeal.com/comics/semicolon . It's both hilarious and informative.

Finally, I asked at the beginning of this post "Are you asking about the sentence in quotations?" because what you said "I hate this sentence is it right" is not correct. You need a comma to separate the independent clauses "I hate this sentence," and "is it right."

Corrected: I hate this sentence, is it right?

Grammar Nazi awaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaaay!!!