Identity Crises: Questioning the Legitimacy of my Geekiness

I have recently been rejected. Not by a potential lover or by a street dancing crew, but by a large conglomerate. Looking for a place on the editorial team of The EIU I was given a sub editing test which I promptly and effectively failed. I was extremely concise in my mistakes which ensured that I got everything absolutely wrong and now I will have to suffer the throes of a punctured self-esteem and the embarrassing sound of a quickly deflating head. There is something slightly revealing about being refused entry to an Intelligence Unit; you have an undeniable confirmation that you belong to another unit.

Worse than any of these thing however is the fact that I now have to question my own geekiness. Indeed when told that I would have to be refused entry to the building if I attempted to show up again, it was suggested that the person who would eventually attain the coveted position would have to be "geeky" about editing. "But that's me!" I screamed, tears falling down my ruddy face and a fine layer of mucus manifesting itself just around my nostrils. Obviously though, it's not. If I were the geek for the job I would have gained a savant like result on the test and then written a commentary in the extra twenty minutes at the end.

So the big questions come up. I'm definitely obsessive- there's no doubt about it- but I'm not obsessive enough to be useful. So readers I ask you, The Intelligence Unit has given it's decree and suggested that perhaps I am not a geek. What do you think constitutes a geek? Please know that this question is delivered on nothing but pure faith because I know that we don't have a giant readership.