About Us
Contact Us

--- Search
|-  -|
Prove Us Wrong Number 6

The Van Gogh-Goghs are ill. We just be. So when we be getting our truths on, we know it is going to be the fly, dope-ass bizomb. And then some punk MC be fronting, coming on and dissing our truth and saying it ain't so. What is up with that? Step off, fool, we be saying. But then the brutha or sista be saying some shiznit that we know deep down in the heart is got to be the real shiznit, dig? And then we be feeling stone wack and we do not be knowing nothing no more! Damn. And that is when we be bugging the hell out of there. Peace.

RESOLVED: The interjections "hooray" and "yahoo" are completely equivalent terms. (And we are not talking about the popular Internet search engine, so don't even try that.)

Date: Monday, September 27, 1999 6:28:18 PM
From: doneycat@(deleted)

While hooray and yahoo are both interjections of joy I would think that there are slight almost imperceptible differences between the two. I think that when hooray is used, it conveys pleasure over something good that just happened, such as when the visiting team scores a touchdown and a visiting team's fan exclaims in the midst of the angry home team section, "Hooray! I'm for the other team!" (See Schoolhouse Rock circa 1977) (Note: a comma could be used after "Hooray" when the feeling is not as strong.) Yahoo on the other hand is more often used while in the act of doing something stimulating, like riding an atomic bomb a la Slim Pickens, or performing a really high jump or maneuver if you are Super Mario. Hope this helps. And where's the new Furniture Porn?


To Rebut:
So your position is "hooray" is primarily passive, used for the exclamation of approval of an observed act, while "yahoo" is primarily active, used for the exultation of one's own act. Hmmm. Well, that makes a lot of sense on the face of it, but while an interesting theory, it ...um...hmmm. Well, but you see ...uh...Ah Darn! Darn, you've proved us wrong. And you cited Schoolhouse Rock! How can we dispute a reference work like that?

But get off our back about the Furniture Porn! How much Furniture Porn do you perverts need?!

just a line

Date: Saturday, October 2, 1999 10:54:27 AM
From: altuni@(deleted)

"Hooray" (hurrah, huzzah, etc) are exclamations of approval of something or somebody else.

"Yahoo" (Yeehaw, Whooo, etc.) are equivalent to kids continuously chanting, "Daddy, watch me. Daddy! Daddy, look at me!" before leaping into the pool and/or performing some really lame stunt for the umpteenth time.

Both terms were last used in the 1850s so you guys should either stop watching all of those old Westerns on TV or get a new time machine.

Yours Truly,


To Rebut:
So your position is "hooray" is primarily passive, used for the exclamation of approval of an observed act, while "yahoo" is primarily active, used for the exultation of one's own act. Hmmm, just like the last person. Well, nuts, you've proved us wrong as well. But you lose points for facts, cause I'm sure "hooray" was used well into the end of the Victoria era.

And our time machine works just fine, thank you very much.

just a line

Date: Tuesday, October 5, 1999 10:27:07 PM
From: DremrOfLit@(deleted)

Hey to da strange little men that read this crap

When was the last time you heard anybody use the words "Hooray" and "Yahoo"?!? "Yay", maybe. But "Hooray" and "Yahoo"? Heck no. (and I ain't talking about the search engine either)

Hooray and Yahoo are not completely equivalent. Hooray is Yahoo scrambled with an "R" thrown in. See?!? One more letter! HAH! Bet u guys u didn't think about that. :oP* %7ETbbbtthhhhh*

Hey, I can't think of anything better, ok? G'z. You're the ones who are making up the stupid topics. Get a life. ¡¡¡¡¡Loooooooooooser!!!!!

To Rebut:
Look, you disrespectful lout, we are not debating the timeliness of the expressions. And personally I hope "hooray" and "yahoo" are being used well after you and your ilk are complaining to confused nurses at the home about your "wack" catheter.

Fine, "hooray" has an "r" in it and "yahoo" doesn't. They're nothing alike. You're right and we're wrong. Fine. You know, I had hoped, dreamed even, that one day all words would be judged on the content of their meaning and not on the letters in their composition. That little short words and big long words could play together without fear and hate. I have a dream!

And, hey, sure we make up stupid topics! The better to goad jackaninnies like you into making complete goobers of yourselves. Works pretty well, don't you think?

just a line

Date: Monday, October 11, 1999 10:03:36 AM From: nstgeorge@(deleted)

"Hooray", as defined in the Webster's English Dictionary, IS equivalent to the word "hurrah", of Danish or Swedish origin, meaning an exclamation of joy, approval, or exultation. The word "yahoo", however, comes from Swift's Gulliver's Travels and is defined as "a race of brutes having the form and all the degrading passions of man", in other words, a crude, ill-mannered, brutish person, or a bumpkin. Example: I used to be familiar with a young group of yahoos in Chapel Hill who would actually get on stage and charge people to watch their crude and vulgar so-called "comedy sketches". Get it?

-your biggest fan in Dillon, Montana

To Rebut:
Look, when the hell is "yahoo" a noun, you stupid yahoo! Oh wait. Heh. Never mind. You proved us wrong. "Yahoo" has a secondary meaning that "hooray" does not. You know we must be getting a better class of idle, argumentative person here, 'cause usually you people don't have dictionaries. Anyway, congratulations. Ya lousy yahoo.

just a line

Date: Saturday, October 16, 1999 9:36:04 AM
From: dozic@(deleted)

"hooray" is a term used to convey joy or rapturous sentiment, and is quasi-cultural. "yahoo" is only applicable to inbread white trash Ricki Lake show kinda bumkins and can most often be heard at the welfare office on the first of the month.
I realize this is a old issue, but I'm compelled to set the record straight.
Much love,
P.S. Let's rotate some time ;D

To Rebut:
So your position is "Yahoo" has a secondary meaning that "hooray" does not. Hmmm, just like the last person. Well, nuts, you've proved us wrong as well. But you lose points for not having a dictionary.

And there will be no rotating. We don't do that stuff any more. It rots your brain, man! Now please leave or we'll have to call the cops.

just a line

Date: Sunday, October 17, 1999 7:34:42 PM From: MGouldINS@(deleted)

Quite basically, 'Hooray' would be a positive reaction to a witnessed event, while 'Yahoo' would be a positive reaction to an event one is in the process of experiencing.

For example, in the movie, "Dr. Strangelove," Slim Pickens would most likely NOT ride the falling nuke bomb screaming, "Hooray."

Further, when Canada invades France and totally humilates those smelly and rude French, most likely I would stand as witness and utter a hearty, "Hooray."

However, the Homer Simpson, "Woohoo" can apparently be correctly substituted for either 'Hooray,' or 'Yahoo.'


To Rebut:
Again with the Slim Pickins! And again with the "hooray" -is-primarily-passive,-used-for-the-exclamation-of-approval-of-an-observed-act,-while- "yahoo" -is-primarily-active,-used-for-the-exultation-of-one's-own-act position. Man, just like those other people. Well, nuts, you've proved us wrong as well. But you lose points for the illogical fallacy of Canada invading France when everybody knows that wimpy Canada can't even keep its own smelly and rude French Quebecoís in line.

just a line

Date: Wednesday, November 3, 1999 1:08:45 AM
From: ddigital@(deleted)

ok, try this, your giving a speech and some on einterjects with the word YAHOO, that means your in texas and that is bad, belive me i live there, but if someone says hooray, that means you have a good idea or something, and if anybody ever said Hooray aound me id be afraid because nobody ever says that word, EVER, which means that the world has gone terribly wrong, but at least its no tin texas which is still good

so to reiterrate yahoo- your in texas

hooray- the world has ceased to exist (but at least you not in texas)

point made

To Rebut:
Drugs are fun, aren't they?

Please stop by again when you're done.

just a line

Date: Monday, November 8, 1999 6:38:18 AM
From: jhunter2@(deleted)

Dear VGG's,

Let's bring this to a new level of insanity. When I first read this I was going to simply state that Hooray is reserved for a victory of a group or team, while Yahoo was reserved for personal victory or excitement. I found through my education, that mathematics can be applied to normal life to seek solutions. Since I am an Engineer in training, I am attemting to explain why Yahoo and Hooray are not equivalent using a mathematical solution.

Assume that each letter in the words "hooray" and "yahoo" are variables. If you claim they are equal then,

hooray = yahoo

When you combine the "o"s on both sides to o^2 and factor, then you notice a possible inequality.

r*(a*h*y)*o^2 = (a*h*y)*o^2

This equality assumes the value of r = 1, otherwise the equation is incorrect. Realizing just what r is though can be found through eliminating the equalities on both sides. For instance, when in any situation, the duration of yell depends on the length of the o-squared term. Assumimg the duration is the same, then the power depends on the length of time.

i.e. Yahoooooooooooo! or Hooooooooooooray!

Since we are eliminating this variable then the o-squared term is irrelivant to the difference. Next, since Yahoo and Hooray are claimed to be equal, then the (a*h*y) term must contain the necissary value to express excitement or victory. The illusion to Hooray and Yahoo being so similar is the (a*h*y) expression. The o variable alone denoted duration, and I suspect a*y is actually the magnitude of the expression and h being the victory level, but we are unable to prove this without other words.
The problem here is what happens as the expression (a*h*y) appoaches 0. To remove that term, it requires division of the to term (a*h*y) by it's self. Try dividing 0 by 0 on a calculator. Luckily a rule was developed called L'Hôpital's Rule which says:

lim P(x) = 0 = P'(x)
x->0 Q(x) 0 Q'(x)

This says that the top and bottom parts must be the same, however, it isn't since the one of the terms contains our "r" variable in it. And since we can treat it as the dependant variable, We'll find that it will have an inequality.

r = - h * r'

As you can see, r equals the negative derivative multiplied by h. Since r' will never equal r unless it is the function e^x. Earlier we started though that r = 1 as assumed by the VGG staff. That means x = 0. That leaves h = -1 to make the equality which is a variable I stated as completly out of our ability to completly determine. However, since magnitude, and victory levels as possible explanations for the variables y, a, and h, we can not know which is which but one truth presents it's self. They are all variable for each instant. Yahoo is not only spoken at one volume. Hooray is not screamed with one force. There can be almost an infinate variety of values for the given variables. So h can equal any element of any number set possibly and will not be a constant in any number of times spoken. To say that h = -1 would go against the observation that people have choices over their vocal cords. It is possible that in one out of a certain number of times h = -1 but for the most part, h remains a variable. That means r = 1, but not in a general case. r is not 1 most of the time. That means obviously that:

Yahoo = Hooray, when h = -1, r = 1.

Your assumption that Yahoo and Hooray are equal woud be made from a case when you heard Hooray when one of you were expecting a Yahoo, or vice versa, and then tested the interchangablility by forcing the constraints on yourselves to make them interchangable. In observation of natural usage, you will find people will tend towards one more in certain situations. This can be shown in a poll. Go out on the streets and ask what people would say more, Yahoo or Hooray and you will find they will tilt more in favour of one instead of the other. Since one is prefered, then they are obviously not equal since one has more value.

In conculsion, The interjections "hooray" and "yahoo" are not completely equivalent terms. They are only equivalent in specific situations where equivalency can be constrained.

John Hunter, RCLCME
Engineering I
University of Western Ontario

To Rebut:
O dear God in heaven. You know, we've been proved wrong before, but never like this. So completely, utterly and mathematically.

just a line

Date: Tuesday, November 9, 1999 1:23:25 PM From: envoy@(deleted)

Oh my gosh this is JUST too easy.

Picture this: standard sucky movie cowboy, ridin' around in the rodeo, screaming, "Hooray!"

Case closed.

P.S. Yahoo! for me.

P. P. S. Fantastic site. Just found it today.

To Rebut:
Um. Yeah. Cowboys. What? Sorry, that last person- I just can't get it out of my head right now. Damn, he was impressive, wasn't he? Man.

just a line

Date: Tuesday, November 9, 1999 10:47:01 PM From: TFlaherty@(deleted)

They are not completely equivalent terms.
No one says "Hip hip, Yahoo!!". Try it at a football game. You'll probably get some weird looks, if not beat up.
Nor can you use hooray as a noun as in "Y'all are a bunch of yahoos." However this is streching it since you did say the interjections "hooray" and "yahoo" which the word is "yahoo" is not being used as in this example. Now if you said "wahoo" and "yahoo" were equivalent, I'd have to agree unless of course you are talking about Wahoo McDaniel.

To Rebut:
Look, I have to go lie down now. My head is simply swimming with numbers and mathematical functions. You people can just bicker amongst yourselves for right now. Just do it quietly. Oh, man!

just a line

Okay, okay, we're wrong! Ow! My head! Remind me not to yell at you people. Okay, Yahoo is not the same as Hooray for all kinds of good solid reasons. I'm not sure what we were thinking at the time. Now I want all of you people who try to prove us wrong to take a lesson from that engineering student. What that lesson is, I'm not real sure, but how about- don't neglect your studies? That works for me.

Thanks for playing. . .
Prove Us Wrong!

go back
Up to Main
Prove Us Wrong page.

© copyright 2000 The Van Gogh-Goghs