# You get good grades in university by making things simple



## Cheesypoof (Sep 22, 2007)

Thats my contention.


----------



## London Boy (Sep 22, 2007)

What do you mean by that?

What are you studying?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 22, 2007)

London Boy said:
			
		

> What do you mean by that?
> 
> What are you studying?



i cant say sorry. 

i base the OP on my university experience.


----------



## milesy (Sep 22, 2007)

what, like making your lecturer a simple tea, like bangers and mash?


----------



## Groucho (Sep 22, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i cant say sorry.
> 
> ....



You can if you try.

Acually making things simple is quite a skill and should be applauded.


----------



## milesy (Sep 22, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i cant say sorry.



why not? is it some secret of national importance?


----------



## purves grundy (Sep 22, 2007)

Clear writing, you mean?


----------



## Detroit City (Sep 22, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> Thats my contention.


you weren't sleeping with your professors were you?


----------



## Groucho (Sep 22, 2007)

purves grundy said:
			
		

> Clear writing, you mean?



No, I reckon she means oversimplifying complex ideas and ignoring the complications in favour of basic assumptions. But I could be wrong....


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 22, 2007)

Cheesy, cheesy, cheesy.

I thought you'd stopped making these posts.

Come one, at least expand one your post a bit.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 22, 2007)

She's right.

I got a First in mathematics at Cambridge once I had convinced them that in my native religion all non-integers and numbers larger than three do not exist.

Kept things simple, got me a good degree, lovely job.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 22, 2007)

8ball said:
			
		

> She's right.
> 
> I got a First in mathematics at Cambridge once I had convinced them that in my native religion all non-integers and numbers larger than three do not exist.
> 
> Kept things simple, got me a good degree, lovely job.



But maths is just a memory thing and was divised by people who want to classify everything in to neat little packages. It is the perfect example of oversimplification. Mostly it is just not real at all. Numbers are like Hobbits. Only duller.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 22, 2007)

milesy said:
			
		

> what, like making your lecturer a simple tea, like bangers and mash?



yes. with your work though


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 22, 2007)

equationgirl said:
			
		

> Cheesy, cheesy, cheesy.
> 
> I thought you'd stopped making these posts.
> 
> Come one, at least expand one your post a bit.



i think if you break down your thoughts in uni, and put it in simple english you can get a 2:1 is what i mean.

to do better, it requires a bit of originality too though, still put in simple terms.,


----------



## 8ball (Sep 22, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> But maths is just a memory thing and was divised by people who want to classify everything in to neat little packages. It is the perfect example of oversimplification. Mostly it is just not real at all. Numbers are like Hobbits. Only duller.



Yes.  But I only had to remember three, whereas everyone else on the course had to remember 4,983,434 numbers, which was thought at the time to be the biggest number possible, but was just the biggest number anyone had got to before losing count.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 22, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i think if you break down your thoughts in uni, and put it in simple english you can get a 2:1 is what i mean.
> 
> to do better, it requires a bit of originality too though, still put in simple terms.,



Ah, well expression of complex ideas in a simple way that people can easily grasp is a worthwhile skill to develop. So that's a good thing then?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 22, 2007)

Ah yes, those people who can say very complicated things and make them sound simple and compelling are in great demand.

Politicians, I think they call them.


----------



## Shippou-Sensei (Sep 22, 2007)

not really 

showing a clear demonstration of your knowledge is required  but that does not directly correspond to making things simple...

indeed i would presume a dissertation on cellular chemistry would need to be on a certain level of un-simpleness  ...  it would be near impossible to talk about many scientific an engineering subjects with out the requirement of a shared level of knowledge


----------



## LDR (Sep 22, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i think if you break down your thoughts in uni, and put it in simple english you can get a 2:1 is what i mean.


I think a lot of getting good grades at Uni is just a matter of being able to write a good essay which is an academic skill in itself.

I've received good marks for essays on subjects where I really haven't had any depth of knowledge whatsoever.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 22, 2007)

8ball said:
			
		

> Ah yes, those people who can say very complicated things and make them sound simple and compelling are in great demand.
> 
> Politicians, I think they call them.



No, I really don't think most politicians do that, I don't think they carry or convey complex ideas at all, simply or otherwise.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 22, 2007)

LD Rudeboy said:
			
		

> I think a lot of getting good grades at Uni is just a matter of being able to write a good essay which is an academic skill in itself.
> 
> I've received good marks for essays on subjects where I really haven't had any depth of knowledge whatsoever.



i got a double first in my under grad, and plan to do the same with my masters. I got the first because i did eventually find an original idea, but i feel to get a first boils down to putting it in simple terms, to make that breakthrough.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 22, 2007)

Being able to communicate complex ideas so that people with no prior knowledge of the subject can follow and understand them is always a good skill to have.

However, this does not equate to making things simple.

Also, it's not just a matter of rephrasing things in a simplictic manner to get a 2:1. You'd have to show some degree of original thoughts, ideas and opinions as well as a grasp of complex aspects of the subject area.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 22, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> No, I really don't think most politicians do that, I don't think they carry or convey complex ideas at all, simply or otherwise.



They take very complex _subjects_ and make simple pronouncments about them is what I meant to say.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 22, 2007)

8ball said:
			
		

> They take very complex _subjects_ and make simple pronouncments about them is what I meant to say.



Yes, they do do that.

There's little skill in that.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 22, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> There's little skill in that.



There's probably some skill in getting people to fall for it.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 22, 2007)

The basics of charm and hypnotism, perhaps?


----------



## Groucho (Sep 22, 2007)

equationgirl said:
			
		

> The basics of charm and hypnotism, perhaps?



Was that your degree subject?


----------



## 8ball (Sep 22, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> Was that your degree subject?



I imagine it was probably something to do with basic memory tricks . . .


----------



## N_igma (Sep 22, 2007)

Depends on the subject.

If you're doing a humanities course then yeh, getting your point acxross coherently and efficiently is necessary as well as displaying acquired knowledge. 

That's all great but there are other subjects where it's impossible to be simple!


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 22, 2007)

8ball said:
			
		

> Yes.  But I only had to remember three, whereas everyone else on the course had to remember 4,983,434 numbers, which was thought at the time to be the biggest number possible, but was just the biggest number anyone had got to before losing count.


You forgot one


----------



## twistedAM (Sep 22, 2007)

equationgirl said:
			
		

> Cheesy, cheesy, cheesy.
> 
> I thought you'd stopped making these posts.
> 
> Come one, at least expand one your post a bit.



See how that was brushed over.

I'd hazard a guess that she's writing a "back to college" article for some magazine or other.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 22, 2007)

IN appropriate response to the OP:

"Baws".

I grade this post a double first at PhD of God level.

You may all employ me for basquillions of readies now, ty.

I shall be awaiting teh offaaahz in my inbox.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 22, 2007)

equationgirl said:
			
		

> Being able to communicate complex ideas so that people with no prior knowledge of the subject can follow and understand them is always a good skill to have.
> 
> However, this does not equate to making things simple.
> 
> Also, it's not just a matter of rephrasing things in a simplictic manner to get a 2:1. You'd have to show some degree of original thoughts, ideas and opinions as well as a grasp of complex aspects of the subject area.



well a 2:1 isnt that good is it?


----------



## trashpony (Sep 22, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> well a 2:1 isnt that good is it?



Don't tell me you got a first

*falls off chair*


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 22, 2007)

twisted said:
			
		

> See how that was brushed over.
> 
> I'd hazard a guess that she's writing a "back to college" article for some magazine or other.



no chance. Your style most definitely and i pity you for saying it.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 22, 2007)

trashpony said:
			
		

> Don't tell me you got a first
> 
> *falls off chair*



i did, but no big deal. i have never thought it anything special.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 22, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> well a 2:1 isnt that good is it?






			
				Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i did, but no big deal. i have never thought it anything special.


Aiming for a super-duper-double-starred-shiny-gold-with-squillions-of-sparkly-hundreds-and-thousands-triple-quadruple-quintiple first then, cheesy? Instead of one of those ornery firsts the like of which you is so privileged to acknowledge is, well, it aren't nowt special is it, like. 

But it's even less not-special than a 2:1, eh?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 22, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> Aiming for a super-duper-double-starred-shiny-gold-with-squillions-of-sparkly-hundreds-and-thousands-triple-quadruple-quintiple first then, cheesy? Instead of one of those ornery firsts the like of which you is so privileged to acknowledge is, well, it aren't nowt special is it, like.
> 
> But it's even less not-special than a 2:1, eh?



i would always want a first sorry.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 22, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> Aiming for a super-duper-double-starred-shiny-gold-with-squillions-of-sparkly-hundreds-and-thousands-triple-quadruple-quintiple first then, cheesy? Instead of one of those ornery firsts the like of which you is so privileged to acknowledge is, well, it aren't nowt special is it, like. But it's even less not-special than a 2:1?



Yes, I met a few people in a cobwebbed corner of London who said they'd be happy with a 'Desmond'*.


* 2:2 apparently**


** you know, as in Tutu.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 22, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i would always want a first sorry.



Why?

What for?


----------



## Guruchelles (Sep 22, 2007)




----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 22, 2007)

Guruchelles said:
			
		

>



WELL.

It's simple.

You get a double first! 

With kittens! 

And a simple piglet called trevor:


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 22, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> Why?
> 
> What for?



high achiever i suppose.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 22, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> WELL.
> 
> It's simple.
> 
> ...



oh quaody they NEVER gave me one of them!


----------



## Guruchelles (Sep 22, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> WELL.
> 
> It's simple.
> 
> ...



Thank you Quoad. Trevor made me feel a lot better.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 22, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> high achiever i suppose.


There's a difference between being a high achiever, and being able to rightly and fairly recognise one's own (and others') achievements... 

'High achiever' _can_ be an excuse for never letting yaself be good enough. Always needing to do better. 

Which can be quite a sad place to be, IMO. And IME. Driven but... Going nowhere. Because IME for a long time the best I could do was what I *should* be doing. So wasn't owt to be proud of / wasn't anything special.

"Better a pig (called Trevor) and happy, than Socrates and unhappy" innit 

Someone who's happy with a 2:2 / third is - IMO - better off than someone who's got a first but isn't proud of it / happy with it.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 22, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> Was that your degree subject?



No, mechanical engineering with energy resource engineering (1st) - but if I'd got a 2:1 I'd have been pleased.

I just did the best I could, because I didn't want to leave uni thinking I could have worked harder.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 22, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> There's a difference between being a high achiever, and being able to rightly and fairly recognise one's own (and others') achievements...
> 
> 'High achiever' _can_ be an excuse for never letting yaself be good enough. Always needing to do better.
> 
> ...



nah, i was always disappointed with a 2:1. its really simple with me. its like my journalism, i want the front cover, or my story is still good, but not great. Same with my study ambitions i suppose.


----------



## Funky_monks (Sep 22, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> nah, i was always disappointed with a 2:1. its really simple with me. its like my journalism, i want the front cover, or my story is still good, but not great. Same with my study ambitions i suppose.



It is a strange university indeed which awards first class degrees to someone who appears unaware that sentences start with a capital letter and end with a full stop.


----------



## spanglechick (Sep 23, 2007)

Funky_monks said:
			
		

> It is a strange university indeed which awards first class degrees to someone who appears unaware that sentences start with a capital letter and end with a full stop.


I don't think cheesy's degree was in English, iirc - which might explain it. It may have been a non-essay-type subject.


----------



## Funky_monks (Sep 23, 2007)

spanglechick said:
			
		

> I don't think cheesy's degree was in English, iirc - which might explain it. It may have been a non-essay-type subject.



You mean English is not the language the course was given in?

My degree wasn't in an "essay subject" either, assuming that that covers most of the arts.


----------



## spanglechick (Sep 23, 2007)

Funky_monks said:
			
		

> You mean English is not the language the course was given in?
> 
> My degree wasn't in an "essay subject" either, assuming that that covers most of the arts.


No, I meant English as an academic subject.

My point was that if her degree was in, say, Art, she may not have had to do a lot of writing, or the standards may not have been so rigorous.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 23, 2007)

spanglechick said:
			
		

> No, I meant English as an academic subject.
> 
> My point was that if her degree was in, say, Art, she may not have had to do a lot of writing, or the standards may not have been so rigorous.



You're basically implying she did one of the 'green crayon' degrees, aren't you?


----------



## Funky_monks (Sep 23, 2007)

spanglechick said:
			
		

> No, I meant English as an academic subject.
> 
> My point was that if her degree was in, say, Art, she may not have had to do a lot of writing, or the standards may not have been so rigorous.



You mean that if she did, say art or......ooh.....surf studies at the University of Newquay, she may well have been unaware that sentences begin with a capital and end with a full stop?


----------



## Red Faction (Sep 23, 2007)

occam's razor innit


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 23, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> Thats my contention.



I got good grades at university by ensuring that I understood what it was that they were teaching me, then being able to explain it back in a satisfactory manner.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 23, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I got good grades at university by ensuring that I understood what it was that they were teaching me, then being able to explain it back in a satisfactory manner.



exactly, mr cannuck, thats what i am talking about


----------



## moonsi til (Sep 23, 2007)

.....


----------



## The Groke (Sep 23, 2007)

milesy said:
			
		

> why not? is it some secret of national importance?




No, it's because she has a speech impediment and it comes out "thowwy"


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> But maths is just a memory thing and was divised by people who want to classify everything in to neat little packages. It is the perfect example of oversimplification. Mostly it is just not real at all. Numbers are like Hobbits. Only duller.


Maths is axiomatically correct in every established respect - that is it's obsession. The beauty of it is that the obsession has given us the most precise, beautiful and unfathomably complex language known to man. It is not the language of science, it is the language of nature - which is why it is sometimes the only way to accurately express scientific ideas.

It is not oversimplification. From the tiny number of axioms, an enormous field has developed, frequently with brand new scientific fields finding that old and presumed useless abstract concepts were exactly what they needed to solve a real world problem.

Complexity can come from simplicity. It's the same principle behind Haiku - restrict the options and release some incredible creativity as a result.


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> You forgot one


Zero was the last number to be discovered, before we had to resort to imaginary numbers.

You definitely don't want to have to think about zero in a simple maths course.


----------



## Guruchelles (Sep 23, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> nah, i was always disappointed with a 2:1. its really simple with me. its like my journalism, i want the front cover, or my story is still good, but not great. Same with my study ambitions i suppose.



I think it's great that you got a first. And I appreciate that you set yourself your own high standard. I do it too. But by saying "a 2:1 is not that good" you belittle the achievements of people who work hard to get that grade.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Zero was the last number to be discovered, before we had to resort to imaginary numbers.


I disagree!

There are _bound_ to be an absolute tonne of numbers that haven't _actually_ been discovered yet!

OK, they're theoretically there. But I bet they haven't _actually_ been proved to reallyreally be there atheoretically. Yet. By being written down an ting.


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> I disagree!
> 
> There are _bound_ to be an absolute tonne of numbers that haven't _actually_ been discovered yet!
> 
> OK, they're theoretically there. But I bet they haven't _actually_ been proved to reallyreally be there atheoretically. Yet. By being written down an ting.


Discovered honey, discovered.  

You're dead right though - tip of the iceberg. It's the language of nature and we're on day 1 slowly repeating vocab lists.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 23, 2007)

Guruchelles said:
			
		

> I think it's great that you got a first. And I appreciate that you set yourself your own high standard. I do it too. But by saying "a 2:1 is not that good" you belittle the achievements of people who work hard to get that grade.



And of people who haven't got a first like Cheesy claims she has, but have gone on to much better things than she ever will.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Discovered honey, discovered.
> 
> You're dead right though - tip of the iceberg. It's the language of nature and we're on day 1 slowly repeating vocab lists.


I would not be surprised if (repetitive though it is) this is not the first time that this number has been written:

104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479104479454352375098725409873205974230574307509327509452435549943658236742657236547826570845023450872634508763245073642508762340856324086508743265083462087563208756324087650832764508236535743267805634087563240876508437650873462087560342876538470560846508746508743620587623085603t548704652084762508783205082365480634865084326053625408763408563042865083476508732465876320

Ergo, prior to this post, it may only have been theoretically discovered. And no-one new atheoretically whether it existed.

Ergo, I are discover teh number


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> And of people who haven't got a first like Cheesy claims she has, but have gone on to much better things than she ever will.


Heh, so true. 

I had a mixed bunch in a workshop t'other day. The medics got all bristly when I pointed out at the beginning that medics weren't real scientists and that the research assistants didn't need meaningless bits of paper to be shit hot at the job.

Much bristling later, the research assistants wiped the floor with them in the practical - they had solved every query in a tough paper and got onto the deep interpretation. The medics were still trying to make up a theory to fit the results, and it wasn't even me who had to out them straight - one of the RAs was in there every time.

Their chief head honcho medic guy was there positively beaming at his minions. They better get a fuckin' pay rise.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Heh, so true.
> 
> I had a mixed bunch in a workshop t'other day. The medics got all bristly when I pointed out at the beginning that medics weren't real scientists and that the research assistants didn't need meaningless bits of paper to be shit hot at the job.


 Oh dear! 



> Much bristling later, the research assistants wiped the floor with them in the practical - they had solved every query in a tough paper and got onto the deep interpretation. The medics were still trying to make up a theory to fit the results, and it wasn't even me who had to out them straight - one of the RAs was in there every time.
> 
> Their chief head honcho medic guy was there positively beaming at his minions. They better get a fuckin' pay rise.


I don't have any animus against qualifications _per se_, just against the assumption that they somehow mean anything more than certain competences, and the gap between a first and an upper second can be and often is (especially in "soft science" and "humanities" subjects) a matter of presentation rather than of greater knowledge, insight or wisdom.
And, _apropos_ of the second part of your post, I'm totally unsurprised that the "coalface" workers triumphed, practical problem-solving "on the job" being a much more valuable attribute than the amount of alphabet soup after ones' name.


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

Precisement mon ami. They can actually think. To be fair, medical school is basically just learning lists off by heart - they are flummoxed when they get to me. "But, we need to think in this subject!" is an actual reason given why they hate it. But that's OK - good research is not done alone. Let people develop complementary skills - preferably at their own whim and interest. Good research can only be done by happy valued people. Fact! 

Fuckit, I have a few random bits of paper and only one is actually directly relevant and it still takes 3-5 years working in a focused research area to become professionally qualified just in that small niche. There are a handful of very senior academics with no formal qualifications at all, inc O' levels, because learning on the job is easily the most effective way to specialise.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> I don't have any animus against qualifications _per se_, just against the assumption that they somehow mean anything more than certain competences,
> 
> ...
> 
> And, _apropos_ of the second part of your post, I'm totally unsurprised that the "coalface" workers triumphed, practical problem-solving "on the job" being a much more valuable attribute than the amount of alphabet soup after ones' name.



This is the one aspect of going back to uni that I'm mildly apprehensive of. Particularly IME, there are so many competences that praxis can develop that pure research / theory / paper qualifications can just miss wholesale. Absolutely - paper qualifications / degrees &c can be a useful means of accessing skills and play a sizeable part in _reaching a goal_. But academia _qua_ academia for the sake of academia - these days - can leave me a bit cold. Particularly if it's hallowed as a sanctified / superior field of human endeavour rather than just a certain kind of knowledge / training.

Certainly for me, the last coupla years in practice was mindblowing. And had virtually fuck all to do with what I'd been learnt at uni. Which was useful and interesting... But very much on a different kind of level.



> and the gap between a first and an upper second can be and often is (especially in "soft science" and "humanities" subjects) a matter of presentation rather than of greater knowledge, insight or wisdom.



Bring in the GPA!!! Ha.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 23, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> high achiever i suppose.


You??

wheres the proof eh?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 23, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> You??
> 
> wheres the proof eh?



Cheesy speaks, we believe. 

Or not, as is more usual, particularly given her often-stated proviso that what she says is often (to paraphrase) a load of old bollocks of the top of her head.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 23, 2007)

*laughs at the mental image of cheesy with a pair of old bollocks on the top of her head*


----------



## Groucho (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Maths is axiomatically correct in every established respect - that is it's obsession. The beauty of it is that the obsession has given us the most precise, beautiful and unfathomably complex language known to man. It is not the language of science, it is the language of nature - which is why it is sometimes the only way to accurately express scientific ideas.
> 
> It is not oversimplification. From the tiny number of axioms, an enormous field has developed, frequently with brand new scientific fields finding that old and presumed useless abstract concepts were exactly what they needed to solve a real world problem.
> 
> Complexity can come from simplicity. It's the same principle behind Haiku - restrict the options and release some incredible creativity as a result.



Here's where we disagree and here's where, if I take forward an articulation of my position, I seem in danger of embracing some form of post-modernism if not mysticism. But any attempt to explain nature mathematically involves oversimplification and reduction. The random and the chaotic are not exceptions to some natural law that can be expressed in a formula; the random and chaotic are integral to nature's unfolding wonder. Theoretically, it has been articulated, the development of a leaf follows a simple pattern that can be expressed mathematically. But no-where in nature will ever be found a single leaf that adheres to any mathematical formula. 

Computer programs can be devised to mimic the randomness in nature, but these artificial creations exist within clearly defined parameters. It is as a miner bird mimicing human language.

The idea that somehow mathematics is a discovered code that lies at the centre of all of, well presumably that would be _creation_, is a fallacy. 

The mathematically defined universe does not exist, thankfully, because it is as dull and pointless as a universe inhabited by Hobbits and protected by Ghandalf.

We live amidst the turmoil of a random chaotic explosion of life.  A great strength of the human mind is the conscious ability to act upon the World around us; that requires interpretation and a collective understanding. It involves measurement originally of the length of the seasons, it certainly involves the seeking out of patterns to inform our understanding. 

Mathematics is therefore an obvious development in human construction of a myth to help understand the World around us. Just as the Gods were devised to explain and inform behaviour patterns. At the core of this understanding are elements of indisputable truth and elements of fabricated myth.

The scientific method utilisises mathematics as a tool. It is a valuable tool, but it involves oversimplification and the constraining of a perceived reality into patterns that often aren't actually there. Mathematics - a tool - cannot be permitted to take a dominant place over the method. Mathematics, logic of a sort, rationality of a kind, are starting to take on the formation of new dieties. The fact is that the human brain remains tiny as against the universe and always will. Numbers are part of our way of parcelling things up into neat little packages just as an ant can feel a blade of grass but can't understand the totality of a garden.

*Numbers are crap. Words are beautiful.* The vague and complex shared meanings we associate with configerations of symbols and sounds we call words allow confused articulation of such things as emotion and feelings - things that numbers can never begin to comprehend the minutist beginnings of the merest possibility of getting their tiny little heads around.


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> This is the one aspect of going back to uni that I'm mildly apprehensive of. Particularly IME, there are so many competences that praxis can develop that pure research / theory / paper qualifications can just miss wholesale. Absolutely - paper qualifications / degrees &c can be a useful means of accessing skills and play a sizeable part in _reaching a goal_. But academia _qua_ academia for the sake of academia - these days - can leave me a bit cold. Particularly if it's hallowed as a sanctified / superior field of human endeavour rather than just a certain kind of knowledge / training.
> 
> Certainly for me, the last coupla years in practice was mindblowing. And had virtually fuck all to do with what I'd been learnt at uni. Which was useful and interesting... But very much on a different kind of level.
> 
> ...


 Dead on IMO. Learning to enhance your skills in the job you're in, with real live examples that you understand inside out from an operational perspective. It doesn't just add value to the learning, it adds value to the student because it is interesting and not a slog. 

18/19 year olds going straight to uni often seem to be more like overgrown school children when they get out. I certainly didn't feel employable when I left and I suspect most didn't unless they wanted to do the law/accountancy/management consultancy route.

It just tends to churn out identikit workers qualified for virtually nothing except starting in a position they're probably not yet ready for.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 23, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> Here's where we disagree and here's where, if I take forward an articulation of my position, I seem in danger of embracing some form of post-modernism if not mysticism. But any attempt to explain nature mathematically involves oversimplification and reduction. The random and the chaotic are not exceptions to some natural law that can be expressed in a formula; the random and chaotic are integral to nature's unfolding wonder. Theoretically, it has been articulated, the development of a leaf follows a simple pattern that can be expressed mathematically. But no-where in nature will ever be found a single leaf that adheres to any mathematical formula.
> 
> Computer programs can be devised to mimic the randomness in nature, but these artificial creations exist within clearly defined parameters. It is as a miner bird mimicing human language.
> 
> ...


0110001001100001011011000110110001110011


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 23, 2007)

FridgeMagnet said:
			
		

> 0110001001100001011011000110110001110011



 Really, is there any call for that kind of rudeness?


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

But Groucho, that is the beauty of it! It can only get us so close, with maybe a tantalising glimpse into what might be out there, but what's amazing is that equations and ideas developed centuries ago and long gathering dust turn out to exactly describe a situation in nature.

Numbers aren't about categorising and counting. Not real numbers - mathematics, not arithmetic. I'm not a good enough mathematician to explain, but just a glimpse of what this language might mean is incredible.

Mathematics gave us chaos and quantum theory; the knowledge that we cannot predict the future so those miserable Determinists can fuck right off because we have Free Will. FACT! 

Serious scientists are arguing about parallel universes and actual time travel; they've already cracked teleportation! It's Dr Who in the fuckin' lab! And it's beautiful because we can use it in practical ways but we don't have a clue what it means or how it works! 

And I love that scientists finally have to really acknowledge that they're just kids staring up in wonder at the vastness of everything there is that we will never know, but never stop wanting to understand.

Tell me this isn't beautiful.

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=Pfs4Rd5f_IQ&mode=related&search=

Do you really care whether or not it can be described mathematically? It can, as can any leaf or any tree. It doesn't matter - it doesn't replace the object, it just gives us ideas for Really Cool Things to do with those same techniques.

And scientists love words - you'll never find a decent one claiming to be proud never to read or to despise the theatre. We fight fiercely over meaning and ambiguity and elegance and flow. Lord knows why artists think it's cool to be comtemptuous of science. Why would anyone settle for half an education? 

Basically, we're just kids in a sandpit havin' fun.


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 23, 2007)

For those of you with something to say about mathematics. 

I approached it from a philosopher's/philosophy grad's PoV. 

A New Kind of Science


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

FridgeMagnet said:
			
		

> balls



011100110110110101100001011100100111010001100001011100100111001101100101


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 23, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> 011100110110110101100001011100100111010001100001011100100111001101100101



7564641

A fine number. But not as good as

10000100011111101010101011110011100011001110011110011010101011101100001111000101010101011111011110111011101101

[8683178]


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

lightsoutlondon said:
			
		

> 7564641
> 
> A fine number. But not as good as
> 
> ...





> Error: Malformed binary. Your binary code is must be divisible by 8.
> 
> or
> 
> 0100010101110010011100100110111101110010001110100010000001001101011000010110110001100110011011110111001001101101011001010110010000100000011000100110100101101110011000010111001001111001001011100010000001011001011011110111010101110010001000000110001001101001011011100110000101110010011110010010000001100011011011110110010001100101001000000110100101110011001000000110110101110101011100110111010000100000011000100110010100100000011001000110100101110110011010010111001101101001011000100110110001100101001000000110001001111001001000000011100000101110


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 23, 2007)

I thought cheesy said she had a 2:1?


----------



## Groucho (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> But Groucho, that is the beauty of it! It can only get us so close, with maybe a tantalising glimpse into what might be out there, but what's amazing is that equations and ideas developed centuries ago and long gathering dust turn out to exactly describe a situation in nature.
> 
> Numbers aren't about categorising and counting. Not real numbers - mathematics, not arithmetic. I'm not a good enough mathematician to explain, but just a glimpse of what this language might mean is incredible.
> 
> ...



I don't think that mathematics really gave us chaos theory; I think it was a theory devised to account for the inability of mathematical reductions to in anyway match reality. Nor do I think that mathematics can describe a tree. 

Nor do I think that it is generally true that artists are contemptuous of science. 

I favour the scientific method based on evidence. Theories, mathematical or otherwise are speculative attempts at explanations that then need testing in practice as against the evidence. I get the impression that some current mathematically based speculation has run away with itself...


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 23, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> I get the impression that some current mathematically based speculation has run away with itself...



string theory


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 23, 2007)

equationgirl said:
			
		

> I thought cheesy said she had a 2:1?



It's the inflationary pressure of the credit crunch...


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 23, 2007)

equationgirl said:
			
		

> I thought cheesy said she had a 2:1?



So did I.


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> I don't think that mathematics really gave us chaos theory; I think it was a theory devised to account for the inability of mathematical reductions to in anyway match reality. Nor do I think that mathematics can describe a tree.
> 
> Nor do I think that it is generally true that artists are contemptuous of science.
> 
> I favour the scientific method based on evidence. Theories, mathematical or otherwise are speculative attempts at explanations that then need testing in practice as against the evidence. I get the impression that some current mathematically based speculation has run away with itself...


Statistics is not mathematics. It borrows the language and it is beautiful in it's own very precise way, but it's not mathematics. And maths cannot be tested - if a theorem is proven it is axiomatically true. It is not subject to empirical proof.

Pure maths is where the beauty is. No application required. I've got no hope of ever understanding it, being a mere statto, obv, but it's still beautiful. 

And yeah - anything Physics does these days requires very advanced mathematics. You'd typically get a team working to be able have all the skills at a high enough level.

I hope you are right about changing attitudes in the arts (not artists, who are often very keen on science). I was stealing a fairly uncontroversial observation which resonates with some experiences I have had; Peter Medawar (The Case of the Spotted Mice, IIRC). But academics are a weird lot; unlikely to be representative of just about anything.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> So did I.


Nope:




			
				Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> sorry for being a c**t but to any smug pleb who got a 2:1 and thinks they coulda gotten a first dont make me laugh
> *
> for most degreees you cant get a first in your degree just by working hard.*
> 
> ...





Don't think I've ever seen cheesy claim a 2:1.


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 23, 2007)

> when i went back to the professors after getting 74 per cent in my degree they explained that i had come up with a brand new theory in industrial relations



Continuing our series of _Cpoof Conquerors the Universe_, our Irish heroine cures cancer, AIDS and found something useful and tasty to do with the bits that fall off of lepers.

Next week - Cpoof:Corporate Raider - _how Cpoof Saved Northern Rock_

Had away an shite, yer arse.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

lightsoutlondon said:
			
		

> Had away an shite, yer arse.


Or in binary, 01001000011000010110010000100000011000010111011101100001011110010010000001100001011011100010000001110011011010000110100101110100011001010010110000100000011110010110010101110010001000000110000101110010011100110110010100101110


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 23, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> Or in binary, 01001000011000010110010000100000011000010111011101100001011110010010000001100001011011100010000001110011011010000110100101110100011001010010110000100000011110010110010101110010001000000110000101110010011100110110010100101110



lmao


----------



## Xanadu (Sep 23, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> Nor do I think that it is generally true that artists are contemptuous of science.



I seem to remember a few artists (well they claimed to be artists) being contemptuous of scientists writing/performing music.  But they were probably just being cunts.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 23, 2007)

lightsoutlondon said:
			
		

> Continuing our series of _Cpoof Conquerors the Universe_, our Irish heroine cures cancer, AIDS and found something useful and tasty to do with the bits that fall off of lepers.
> 
> Next week - Cpoof:Corporate Raider - _how Cpoof Saved Northern Rock_
> 
> Had away an shite, yer arse.



what about cheesy admits utter bullshit?

If she got a 1st in anything Im the Dalai Llamma, it certainly wasnt in english nor journalism was it?


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 23, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> what about cheesy admits utter bullshit?
> 
> If she got a 1st in anything Im the Dalai Llamma, it certainly wasnt in english nor journalism was it?



I'm still looking forward to her tasty leper stew.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 23, 2007)

Ive got it now, Shes just got the words in the thread title a little mixed up.
She thinks people who are simple can easily get 1sts.. we're all too complex, thats all


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 23, 2007)

Tasty - _every_ pack comes with a double first helping of cream!


----------



## moomoo (Sep 23, 2007)

I've been reading this thread and I knew it reminded me of something!

When I had a proper job at the Head Office of a major retailer they used to take on graduates for certain positions.  I asked once if I could be considered for one of these positions but was told 'no, we only employ graduates at this level'.  

I used to have to help train them up (even though I wasn't good enough for the job  ) and fuck me, they were a bunch of brainless idiots on the whole.   

They might have had a degree but they had no common sense whatsoever!  It was so frustrating.

Not generalising of course, but that is my experience of university graduates with their firsts and 2.1's and big words.  

Feel free to beat me with your mortar boards and gowns.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 23, 2007)

I have a 2:2, personally, but then I _am_ a thick idle cunt.

Not as bad as you fucking proles with no degree at all though! Go on, fuck off the lot of you, don't deserve to read my binary.


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 23, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Feel free to beat me with your mortar boards and gowns.



Hmm. Kinky . Not tried that particular game before...


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 23, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i would always want a first sorry.



What constitutes a first?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 23, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> And of people who haven't got a first like Cheesy claims she has, but have gone on to much better things than she ever will.


Why the venom?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Heh, so true.
> 
> I had a mixed bunch in a workshop t'other day. The medics got all bristly when I pointed out at the beginning that medics weren't real scientists and that the research assistants didn't need meaningless bits of paper to be shit hot at the job.:



In other words, you're one of those people stuck in a teaching job, who takes it out on the hapless students who find themselves sitting in a room with you.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Precisement mon ami. They can actually think. To be fair, medical school is basically just learning lists off by heart - they are flummoxed when they get to me. .



Too bad that if you ever need quadruple bypass surgery, it'll be a doctor performing it, and not a research assistant.

Hope you'll be ok!


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 23, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> What constitutes a first?



Its what Cheesy wanted but couldnt ever hope to get..


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 23, 2007)

I graduated in the top 10% of my postgrad degree. Would that be a first?


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 23, 2007)

probably yes so long as you werent in an awful cohort


----------



## Gromit (Sep 23, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> Thats my contention.


 
I'll make my answer simple:

Rubbish OP.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 23, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> probably yes so long as you werent in an awful cohort



You edited. No, the cohort seemed competent.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> What constitutes a first?


Hiya, Johnny 

In short answer - for all degrees that I'm aware of, a first is constituted by - yep - as a VERY broad baseline something approximating the top 10% of students.

English universities mark on a % scale - _most_ of those I'm aware of give 
70%+ = a first
60-70% = a 2:1
50-60% = a 2:2
40-50% = a pass / 'third class' degree.

There's obviously some leeway in there, so - for example - my BSc was marked on the basis of the second and third years; 6 modules in each year (so a total of twelve modules counting towards my final mark); year 2 = 33.3333% of my final mark, year 3 = 66.6666% of my final mark. 

IME, the individual assignment marks (as above) were averaged out to give the module marks which were totaled up and averaged out to give the year marks which were then weighted appropriately  So everything's in there somewhere.

It's possible to balance out a few dodgy marks with a few good uns - if your final mark's over 70% you'll get a first. If it's - e.g. 69% then it's a 2:1.

IMO there's a wee bit more finesse to the American GPA system (and no doubt numerous other systems) - which at least represents people's marks in a slightly more.... graduated / reflective / continuous manner.

I believe that's a fairly common way of doing it, though some unis - I believe - mark the 2:1 / 2:2 cutoff at 65% rather than 60.


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> I've been reading this thread and I knew it reminded me of something!
> 
> When I had a proper job at the Head Office of a major retailer they used to take on graduates for certain positions. I asked once if I could be considered for one of these positions but was told 'no, we only employ graduates at this level'.
> 
> ...


This is the most cretinously stupid and depressingly common thing. I got hell off my first ever boss because she felt threatened by me because I could get promoted above her. Once I reassured her I had no intention of going beyond my 6 month contract with that shitty company, she relaxed.

Why waste all that talent and hurt workplace relationships just so you can employ some spotty kid with no experience who will fuck off to another job in a couple of years.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> This is the most cretinously stupid and depressingly common thing. I got hell off my first ever boss because she felt threatened by me because I could get promoted above her. Once I reassured her I had no intention of going beyond my 6 month contract with that shitty company, she relaxed.
> 
> Why waste all that talent and hurt workplace relationships just so you can employ some spotty kid with no experience who will fuck off to another job in a couple of years.


Yep.

This is the reason that not so long ago, I posited that the _most_ philosophy anyone should be able to study is 50% of a BSc. With the other 50% constituting _real_ work with spanners / microwaves / heroin addicts / engines / derangement / blood / pus / gore / teeth / knives / sheep.


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> In other words, you're one of those people stuck in a teaching job, who takes it out on the hapless students who find themselves sitting in a room with you.


Yes Johnny. Being an academic is just like being a school teacher.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> teacher.


I've just noticed that teacher is nearly an anagram of 'rachet'. Which is one 't' short of 'ratchet'.

Who was mrs ratchet?


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Too bad that if you ever need quadruple bypass surgery, it'll be a doctor performing it, and not a research assistant.
> 
> Hope you'll be ok!


Heh. I'd rather have a doctor treat my ailments, but I'd want a statistician to assess the evidence. 

Being a doctor is not like being a researcher, Johnny.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 23, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> I've just noticed that teacher is nearly an anagram of 'rachet'. Which is one 't' short of 'ratchet'.
> 
> Who was mrs ratchet?



Are you thinking of Nurse Ratched?


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 23, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> I've just noticed that teacher is nearly an anagram of 'rachet'. Which is one 't' short of 'ratchet'.
> 
> Who was mrs ratchet?



Nurse Ratchet (sp?) was in One Flew Over the Cuckoo's Nest.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

8ball said:
			
		

> Are you thinking of Nurse Ratched?


Get in! 

Thank you 

It struck me I might've been thinking of Bob Cratchett too - but it wasn't ringing  the right conceptual bells. Nurse Ratched - spot on.


----------



## Guruchelles (Sep 23, 2007)

If your final grade is on the 2:1/1st borderline they're able to, in effect, bump you up to a first by looking at your past work etc.

I don't know what a double first is though.


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 23, 2007)

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_undergraduate_degree_classification#First-Class_Honours


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

Guruchelles said:
			
		

> If your final grade is on the 2:1/1st borderline they're able to, in effect, bump you up to a first by looking at your past work etc.
> 
> I don't know what a double first is though.


I *think* it can be one of two things.

1) joint honours (eg philosophy & politics) with a 1st in both subjects

2) single honours (eg history) with a 1st in preliminary (first year?) exams and a first in finals


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 23, 2007)

Sounds great.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

Guruchelles said:
			
		

> I don't know what a double first is though.


I was reading up on that recently, but tbh the wiki page says it all 



> A "Double First" can refer to First-Class Honours in two separate subjects, e.g., Classics and Mathematics, or alternatively to First-Class Honours in the same subject in subsequent examinations, such as subsequent Parts of the Tripos at the University of Cambridge. At Oxford, this term normally refers to a First in both Honour Moderations and the Final Honour School.
> 
> A Cambridge "Double First" originally referred to a first in two different Triposes. The phrase "Double First" originally referred to people who got firsts in both the classical and mathematical Triposes ("double men"). The two-Tripos criterion for a "double first", even in vaguely related subjects as English and History, constitutes a far higher hurdle than simply repeating the same performance in competition with the same students in a Part II of the same Tripos; it is harder because the subject matter is different, and the candidate has to reach a mark of excellence in competition with people who would have been studying the subject for longer at university level. However, this usage is less and less common in recent years and the term is now more frequently used in the ordinary sense of obtaining a first in subsequent examinations in the same subject, rather than simultaneous examinations in different subjects.
> 
> At Cambridge it is possible to obtain a Double Starred First (noted recipients being Quentin Skinner, Alain de Botton, Enoch Powell, Lee Kuan Yew and Orlando Figes), or, in extremely rare cases such as Maurice Zinkin[1] and Abba Eban, a Triple-Starred First.



I guess it's an individual university thing. My degree's in two separate subjects; but my university (ex-polytechnic ) certainly didn't deign to grace one with a double first 

I guess some institutions choose to award them, some don't, and there seems to be remarkably little consistency in the criteria for their award


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> I *think* it can be one of two things.
> 
> 1) joint honours (eg philosophy & politics) with a 1st in both subjects
> 
> 2) single honours (eg history) with a 1st in preliminary (first year?) exams and a first in finals


In a nutshell, I believe that's what wiki says 

Though my reading of 1) was that... Uh... tbh, I'm not sure. Because if it was just _joint_ honours I'd expect e.g. PPE to be potentially open for a triple first... Which does not exist so far as I'm aware. I'd presume it's a double workload in effect? No? 

I'd _guess _path 2) would be 2nd and 3rd year...?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Yes Johnny. Being an academic is just like being a school teacher.



'Academic', is what post secondary teachers, call themselves.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Heh. I'd rather have a doctor treat my ailments, but I'd want a statistician to assess the evidence.
> 
> Being a doctor is not like being a researcher, Johnny.



No shit?


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

Bolton Institute awards double firsts 

http://www.bolton.ac.uk/News/News-Articles/2004/july2004-2.aspx

Though I think that might just be shoddy journalism


----------



## Guruchelles (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> I *think* it can be one of two things.
> 
> 1) joint honours (eg philosophy & politics) with a 1st in both subjects
> 
> 2) single honours (eg history) with a 1st in preliminary (first year?) exams and a first in finals



It might be because it's late but that is confusing me. So if I got over 70% in both the English and sociology parts of my degree it would be a "double first" even though I'd have studied for the same number of points as somebody taking pure English?


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> 'Academic', is what post secondary teachers, call themselves.


Yes Johnny.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 23, 2007)

Don't get me wrong.  I am still impressed when anyone is clever enough to go to university as (obviously) it was never a path I took.  

But the graduates used to swan about as if they owned the place.  I remember one telling me to make the tea once.  Oh, how we laughed.   

I showed him how the kettle worked, he got the hang of it eventually.


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> In a nutshell, I believe that's what wiki says
> 
> Though my reading of 1) was that... Uh... tbh, I'm not sure. Because if it was just _joint_ honours I'd expect e.g. PPE to be potentially open for a triple first... Which does not exist so far as I'm aware. I'd presume it's a double workload in effect? No?
> 
> I'd _guess _path 2) would be 2nd and 3rd year...?


Triple honours are rare.

PPE most people drop one after the first year. People who continue all three have to do a bit more of two of them (because there aren't enough options with 8 papers to do all three equally). I think it's more likely that you would get a double first, but PPE is weird so anything is possible.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 23, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Yes Johnny.



Good: at least you recognize it yourself. 

It'll help keep you from putting on airs.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

Guruchelles said:
			
		

> It might be because it's late but that is confusing me. So if I got over 70% in both the English and sociology parts of my degree it would be a "double first" even though I'd have studied for the same number of points as somebody taking pure English?


I've been googling.

I, uh, can't find any institutions other than Oxbridge who award double firsts 

I've scouted Durham, Bristol, York, Manchester and a few others (v briefly, admittedly) to see if I can find any trace of double firsts... But it seems to be a concept that's indivisible (at least in mainstream usage) from Oxbridge tripos exams  Those institutions with search hits tend to be using it colloquially - e.g. husband and wife both get first class honours (St. Andrews) or twins (Durham)

Ah well. I've probably missed something, like


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 23, 2007)

What's that saying: 'those who can't do, teach'?


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Don't get me wrong. I am still impressed when anyone is clever enough to go to university as (obviously) it was never a path I took.
> 
> But the graduates used to swan about as if they owned the place. I remember one telling me to make the tea once. Oh, how we laughed.
> 
> I showed him how the kettle worked, he got the hang of it eventually.


 Stupid arrogant cunt. Everyone knows you're supposed to ingratiate yourself with the _real_ power base on day 1! Piss off the secretariat?


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 23, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> What's that saying: 'those who can't do, *google*'?


Corrected it for ya 

And it's "those who can, do. Those who can't, google." As I recall


----------



## Guruchelles (Sep 23, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> I've been googling.
> 
> I, uh, can't find any institutions other than Oxbridge who award double firsts
> 
> ...



Yeah, from Wiki it sounds like it's pretty much an oldschool Oxbridge thing, doesn't it. Lots of people take joint degrees but somehow saying "double first" implies twice the workload.

Oh well. I will be very very happy with a plain old simple single first. Or even a "not very good" 2:1.


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> Corrected it for ya
> 
> And it's "those who can, do. Those who can't, google." As I recall


Nah, the old ones are the best eh Quoady.


----------



## spanglechick (Sep 23, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> What's that saying: 'those who can't do, teach'?


fuck off, johnny - you make a terrible troll.


----------



## ymu (Sep 23, 2007)

spanglechick said:
			
		

> fuck off, johnny - you make a terrible troll.


 Leave him be. He has to get rid of those chips somehow. One day he might even feel that he's superior enough to display a little grace and courtesy to others, but he ain't there yet. My brother was the same, but he grew out of it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 24, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Why the venom?



What venom?

You need to stop projecting your prejudices, Johnny.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 24, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> 'Academic', is what post secondary teachers, call themselves.



Why the venom?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 24, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Don't get me wrong.  I am still impressed when anyone is clever enough to go to university as (obviously) it was never a path I took.


Nothing to do with being clever, a lot more to do with learning a new set of learning methods, then applying them, IMO.


> But the graduates used to swan about as if they owned the place.  I remember one telling me to make the tea once.  Oh, how we laughed.
> 
> I showed him how the kettle worked, he got the hang of it eventually.


A degree *does not* mean the recipient has an ounce of common-sense or courtesy.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 24, 2007)

Guruchelles said:
			
		

> Yeah, from Wiki it sounds like it's pretty much an oldschool Oxbridge thing, doesn't it. Lots of people take joint degrees but somehow saying "double first" implies twice the workload.
> 
> Oh well. I will be very very happy with a plain old simple single first. Or even a "not very good" 2:1.



The only people i know who actually set heir hearts on firsts were folk who wanted to enter _academe_, and saw a good bachelors' degree as a fitting _entree_ to post-grad study.


----------



## Chemical needs (Sep 24, 2007)

8ball said:
			
		

> Ah yes, those people who can say very complicated things and make them sound simple and compelling are in great demand.
> 
> Politicians, I think they call them.



Don't politicians have a tendency to take a simple question and give an overly verbose and complex answer, whilst at the same time not actually answering the very simple question?


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 24, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> The only people i know who actually set heir hearts on firsts were folk who wanted to enter _academe_, and saw a good bachelors' degree as a fitting _entree_ to post-grad study.


OR those seriously dysfunctional workaholics who, e.g., might be in their first year of sobriety, have just stopped being drunk every single day, are trying to not-shag-t'boss-because-I-know-that's-a-bad-idea-for-the-first-year and who haven't yet sublimated their addictive tendencies with an overwhelming froot-lust (obstlust?!) and / or compulsive deranged gym attendance 

*runs away to gym*

At the time I was doing my Bachelors, I had no intention of using it for a good ten years. And then only for a a counselling qualification at Cleethorpes secondary modern nightschool or some such similar. I went for a first because tbh I was a pathologically deranged addictive fruitloop unable to give myself credit for anything less than perfection, whilst sublimating my emotions and ongoing borderline-pathological mental carnage with a healthy whack of emotionless addictive studying


----------



## tufty79 (Sep 24, 2007)

my dad always told me that a 2:1 was 'the optimum degree'
can't remember his full explanation as to why though 

i managed to be on track for one, by ensuring i put the word 'homosexual' into every exam and piece of coursework that i did 

sadly i'm still a degree-less prole


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 24, 2007)

The only people I know who still willy wave about their degree classification _years _afterwards, are a bit sad.


----------



## ymu (Sep 24, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> The only people I know who still willy wave about their degree classification _years _afterwards, are a bit sad.


 It has to be said ... 

University in the UK is becoming much closer to the US system, where the undergraduate degree is more comparable to our A levels and vastly more people do a masters because it is equivalent to a graduate qualification here.

Even when academia was a more "blue skies" enterprise, the snobbery was not merited. It doesn't take any less time or effort to become a good secretary, mechanic or plumber. The output has no more value simply because an individual was the "brains" behind the operation. If pure brainpower was a productive force then there'd be more tangible outcomes of these pointless discussions we keep having on urban. 

Any honest academic will say that the "support staff" and the "admin staff", as the universities so divisively insist on calling them, are more important to the success of their work than any random academic elsewhere in the department.

But education is a privelege which can be bought. Those who can afford to buy it can also influence how it is rewarded. Hence it is rewarded. Those few who remain in academia don't get paid so much - they do bits on the side for industry for that - but they do get treated differently and have perks that just aren't available to other employees. And that's stupid - it damages morale and the ability to retain good people in all three groups, which prevents productivity and creativity.

Universities are so fucking corporate now. The bureaucracy, as always, invents systems to suit its own needs regardless of the priorities of the institution it is supposed to be supporting. So it ends up being destroyed, with a few fat lazy bureaucrats left on top of the pile surveying the destruction and still taking in a huge pay cheque for their marvellous achievement.

This is why I am a self-employed academic. I fucking hate bureaucracy and it hates me.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 24, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> A degree *does not* mean the recipient has an ounce of common-sense or courtesy.



If anything, it can guarantee the lack of either.


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 24, 2007)

Violent Panda said:
			
		

> The only people i know who actually set heir hearts on firsts were folk who wanted to enter academe, and saw a good bachelors' degree as a fitting entree to post-grad study.


I've set my heart on it, mostly to prove that i can after failing miserably at another course that i wasn't enjoying. One of my course mates will get it because she doesn't see a reason not to. Another coursemate pointed out that he could get a third this year, it doesn't matter because he'll already have applied for (and got) his PhD funding sorted by the time the exams come around...

Then again i've already had concern from a company i was applying to over my grades, apparently you're not supposed to get a 1st and have a social life at the same time.


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 24, 2007)

A first?

From a recruiter's PoV (and for the kind of people I headhunt, you must remember) -

if I'm doing* analysts *(on the trading floor), a first is of interest, as is an MA/Msc, CFA, MBA or Phd. But I need evidence of other things as well e.g. current affairs, some inter-personal skills, some evidence of a life beyond the college library.

if I'm recruiting _trading _staff, a 2:1 from a "traditional" uni with a reasonable and realistic list of social activities and two/three year deal sheet is sure to have me reaching for the phone.

Like it or lump it, the uni one goes to influences hiring decisions (in my market). A first in Meeja from the University of the Isle of Dogs (formerly Docklands Tech College) against say, a 2:2 in "Something Sensible", BSc, from a redbrick...no contest.

A first in anything is fine and dandy. Not a lot of use though if you can't communicate your ideas, argument or position in a coherent and understandable way to the less academically gifted.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 24, 2007)

lightsoutlondon said:
			
		

> A first in anything is fine and dandy. Not a lot of use though if you can't communicate your ideas, argument or position in a coherent and understandable way to the less academically gifted.



You surely aren't insinuating  that would apply to anyone on _this_ thread?


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 24, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> You surely aren't insinuating  that would apply to anyone on _this_ thread?


*Puts Chairman Meow on ignore for picking on him*

​


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 24, 2007)

Bob_the_lost said:
			
		

> *Puts Chairman Meow on ignore for picking on him*
> 
> ​



Aww, I wasn't talking about you mate.


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 24, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> You surely aren't insinuating  that would apply to anyone on _this_ thread?



 

Moi? Non! 

I guess I'm thinking about Cpoof and her posts and what she says she does for a living. Ideas are crucial in her business. Similarly, the people I work with handle ideas and concepts; some of them pretty complex with hard sums and lots of_ if's and maybe's and what if's_. 

What may be blindingly obvious to a Quant Analyst with a double first in maths and a Phd in Really Really Hard Sums is of no use to 'the business' if the Quant can't build an argument for a trade or market position etc, etc.

So - firsts in the City? A good thing, but one needs more in one's professional toolbox, so to speak. I'd guess it's the same in most professions.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 24, 2007)

spanglechick said:
			
		

> fuck off, johnny - you make a terrible troll.



Sorry, Teach.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 24, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Leave him be. He has to get rid of those chips somehow. One day he might even feel that he's superior enough to display a little grace and courtesy to others,)



Like you do to the 'meds' in your classroom?


----------



## moomoo (Sep 24, 2007)

Bob_the_lost said:
			
		

> *Puts Chairman Meow on ignore for picking on him*
> 
> ​




Nah, I reckon Chairman Meow was talking about me.  I'm 'less academically gifted'.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 24, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Why the venom?



Mine is an impersonal comment; yours was personal.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 24, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Nah, I reckon Chairman Meow was talking about me.  I'm 'less academically gifted'.



That's the last time I try to be subtle. You lot are obviously too thick to understand me.

*scarpers*


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 24, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> That's the last time I try to be subtle.




*resolves to be deliberately obtuse more often*


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 24, 2007)

lightsoutlondon said:
			
		

> What may be blindingly obvious to an Analyst with a double first in maths and a Phd in Really Really Hard Sums is of no use to 'the business' if the analyst can't build an argument for a trade or market position etc, etc.



oooh, you mean me, don't you  

BTW, Bob-the-lost, your mate should aim for a 2:2 as phd funding may be revoked (especially if its research council funded) if he gets a third. Most universities look for 2:2 minimum (usually 2:1 or 2:2+masters) although in exceptional circumstances phd funding may be obtained with a third (but generally not without a masters).


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 24, 2007)

lightsoutlondon said:
			
		

> So - firsts in the City? A good thing, but one needs more in one's professional toolbox, so to speak. I'd guess it's the same in most professions.


I want to earn tuppence ha'penny a week teaching three bewildered nearly-childers in a cold classroom in Chiddingfold, tyvmuch  About Things!

Oh! Yes! Another thing - one thing that helped me get my decently-graded (ex-poly ) degree was:

a) that 15/18ths of the students wanted to be policemen. It was their lifelong aspiration. I'm not saying that in an intentionally-disparaging way; but there weren't any high-reaching academic high-flyers. NB: The contrast between the students (and marking criteria) for the course I passed at an ex-poly; and the courses (plural) I failed at Warwick was extremely noticeable. 

b) I spent 7 years getting a BSc  By the time I finally fucking got one, writing the assignments wasn't the hard bit; remembering to turn up sober to uni was the challenge 

And the more qualified of you with PhDs in quantum mespannerics may well have mageniusised that that one point was in fact two 

You each win three gold stars, and that piglet called trevor.


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 24, 2007)

equationgirl said:
			
		

> oooh, you mean me, don't you
> 
> BTW, Bob-the-lost, your mate should aim for a 2:2 as phd funding may be revoked (especially if its research council funded) if he gets a third. Most universities look for 2:2 minimum (usually 2:1 or 2:2+masters) although in exceptional circumstances phd funding may be obtained with a third (but generally not without a masters).


To be honest i'm willing to stake serious amounts of money on him getting a first / top of the year. His project is being built with the express intention of continuation at PhD level. He scares me sometimes.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 24, 2007)

Don't worry.

He's destined for a life of tweed jackets with elbow patches.

You have much cooler clothes.


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 24, 2007)

equationgirl said:
			
		

> Don't worry.
> 
> He's destined for a life of tweed jackets with elbow patches.
> 
> You have much cooler clothes.



lmao

**checks elbows for patches**


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 24, 2007)

you think I jest?!


----------



## moomoo (Sep 24, 2007)

What was this thread all about?

Does anyone know?


----------



## lights.out.london (Sep 24, 2007)

^




			
				moomoo said:
			
		

> What was this thread all about?
> 
> Does anyone know?



I mean this in a sweet way - it was another opportunity for Cpoof to remind us she is who she is, has done what she has done and smiles down benevolently on us mortals.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 24, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> What was this thread all about?
> 
> Does anyone know?


Shhh.

Only people without degrees know. It's a secret to the arrogant bastards.

If you don't know, then you might have an invisible degree.

Shhhh.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 24, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> Shhh.
> 
> Only people without degrees know. It's a secret to the arrogant bastards.
> 
> ...



Does it come with an invisible Trevor?


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 24, 2007)

Can I make the trevorsty joke again?!?!?! :excited: canicanicani???



			
				Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Does it come with an invisible Trevor?



If it did, that would be a *TREVORSTY*

*bounces up and down wildly with excitement*


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 24, 2007)

You know, that's quite funny, mrs q


----------



## moomoo (Sep 24, 2007)

equationgirl said:
			
		

> You know, that's quite funny, mrs q




No.

Don't encourage him.

Please......................


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 24, 2007)

And you, moomoo, don't let catch you saying you're not intelligent again. else I'll be having words with you....


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 24, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> There's a difference between being a high achiever, and being able to rightly and fairly recognise one's own (and others') achievements...
> 
> 'High achiever' _can_ be an excuse for never letting yaself be good enough. Always needing to do better.
> 
> ...



i am proud of my first though, its the reason that got me lots of nice opportunities in life


----------



## ymu (Sep 24, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Like you do to the 'meds' in your classroom?


 You object to me making the people without highly paid jobs and degrees coming out of their ears feel comfortable in a room full of their bosses where their performance in the workshop might affect their job prospects? 

You don't even know the context - which was that none of the non-degree people had volunteered to speak when I invited people to say who they were and what they wanted to get out of the workshop. It was a drug company's annual conference for it's research staff; it's really important in a setting like that to make sure that people know they're not there just to make up the numbers, and to make sure those that think they know it all already don't try to dominate the discussion. As it worked out, the one "white is black" over-opinionated type in the room got roundly trounced by the RAs, much to the obvious satisfaction of his senior colleagues. 

But don't let the facts get in the way of a little glibness Johnny. Please God no! We'd be devastated if you stopped being a snipey little wanker and put more time into making those rare but excellent thoughtful posts of yours.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 24, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> You object to me making the people without highly paid jobs and degrees coming out of their ears feel comfortable in a room full of their bosses where their performance in the workshop might affect their job prospects?
> 
> You don't even know the context -



You didn't provide it. I responded to what you gave.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 24, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> You object to me making the people without highly paid jobs and degrees coming out of their ears feel comfortable in a room full of their bosses where their performance in the workshop might affect their job prospects?
> 
> You don't even know the context - which was that none of the non-degree people had volunteered to speak when I invited people to say who they were and what they wanted to get out of the workshop. It was a drug company's annual conference for it's research staff; it's really important in a setting like that to make sure that people know they're not there just to make up the numbers, and to make sure those that think they know it all already don't try to dominate the discussion. As it happens, the one "white is black" over-opinionated type in the room got roundly trounced by the RAs, much to the obvious satisfaction of his senior colleagues.
> 
> But don't let the facts get in the way of a little glibness Johnny. Please God no! We'd be devastated if you stopped being a snipey little wanker and put more time into making those rare but excellent thoughtful posts of yours.



wicked post.


----------



## ymu (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> You didn't provide it. I responded to what you gave.


Not until after several other attacks were unsuccessful and Mr Glib needed to go hunting back for more ammunition. You're such a saddo.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Not until after several other attacks were unsuccessful and Mr Glib needed to go hunting back for more ammunition. You're such a saddo.




I used to work with a guy named Gibby.

If they were unsuccessful, why did you feel the need to provide further explanation?


----------



## ymu (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I used to work with a guy named Gibby.
> 
> If they were unsuccessful, why did you feel the need to provide further explanation?


Touche. 

Douche too.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Touche.
> 
> Douche too.



You shouldn't have told me that you're female: it takes all the fun out of acting like a jerk.


----------



## ymu (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> You shouldn't have told me that you're female: it takes all the fun out of acting like a jerk.




I was a tomboy as a kid. Does that help?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> I was a tomboy as a kid. Does that help?



Not really. 

Actually, it should be ok. The content of your posts should enable me to rise to the occasion.


----------



## ymu (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Not really.
> 
> Actually, it should be ok. The content of your posts should enable me to rise to the occasion.


Now much as I enjoy the sparring Johnny, I'm not liking that sleazy tone at all. Please don't do that; it's very very unpleasant.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Now much as I enjoy the sparring Johnny, I'm not liking that sleazy tone at all. Please don't do that; it's very very unpleasant.



Any sleaziness gleaned from my words, exists in your head alone.

As we say over here in Canada, 'get your mind out of the gutter'.

Don't assume that my mind works the same way that yours does. As they say, when you assume, you make an ASS of U and ME...


----------



## ymu (Sep 25, 2007)

OK, you have the benefit of the doubt.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> OK, you have the benefit of the doubt.



But it's nice to know where your achilles heel is located.

Sexual innuendo.

Not that I'd ever resort to such a thing. It would be too glib...


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Your white lab coat will remain unstained with any attempt by me to make off-colour, 'below the belt' type comments...


----------



## ymu (Sep 25, 2007)

Statisticians use computers not lab benches.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Statisticians use computers not lab benches.



A good warrior can deflect barbs of any description; same goes for an intellectual warrior.

'White lab coat' was figurative, denoting more a state of mind than a state of dress.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Statisticians use computers not lab benches.



Don't get up again: just go to bed...


----------



## ymu (Sep 25, 2007)

Heh. My bloke's keeping that!  He has a helluva time getting me to go to bed (for reasons of sleep, obv).


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> He has a helluva time getting me to go to bed (*for reasons of sleep, obv*).



I would never have suspected anything else.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 25, 2007)

glad to see you guys are getting on  makes a change


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

frogwoman said:
			
		

> glad to see you guys are getting on  makes a change



We're not getting along: we're just catching our breath.


----------



## frogwoman (Sep 25, 2007)

i dont think you're being entirely truthful  

theres no shame in it you know, for eithre of you


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

frogwoman said:
			
		

> i dont think you're being entirely truthful
> 
> theres no shame in it you know, for eithre of you



Are you saying that the next thing on the agenda for me and ymu, is a virtual reality spit-swap?


----------



## ymu (Sep 25, 2007)

Fuck off Johnny.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ymu said:
			
		

> Fuck off Johnny.



I agree: the idea disgusts me, too.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 25, 2007)

Weirdos.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

8ball said:
			
		

> She's right.
> 
> I got a First in mathematics at Cambridge once I had convinced them that in my native religion all non-integers and numbers larger than three do not exist.
> 
> Kept things simple, got me a good degree, lovely job.



I got my first for explaining why anthony giddens belongs to the wrong school of thought, and is in fact, a philosopher not a sociologist like people thought. The other first i got in business was based on comparing Ireland to Russia, even though I was only asked to explain ireland.  

i hope to get a distinction in my masters....its really fucking hard though!


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 25, 2007)

My quadruple first with spangly shiny stars with frogs hanging off it and a gold balloon with added roman letters following the name - it was a BEngMscMpfilPhDBMedDEverythingDTheolDDDDDDDD - was in modesty with added humility and in Having A Nice Cup Of STFU.

Mrs Quoad's degree certificate:






I've got seventeen bazillion trillion million of them, for changing the world with miniature sheep and reinventing the wheel


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

So you got a first in Sociology and Business studies then Cheesy?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> So you got a first in Sociology and Business studies then Cheesy?



yes. from UCD in Dublin. best degree for journalism too IMO, because if you study those things i did your mind is trained to look for evidence all the time, which is vital for a good news story. The poems of edgar allen poe aint gonna help ya.

the first has opened doors i suppose and i am proud of it, and happy for anyone else who gets one too.

to get one, i think the student has to have a bit of imagination usually, cos they give you one if you come up with a new idea. I like to try, you dont have to learn every single thing on the course, using your head and having the balls to be brave is what its about.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

fight fair lads.


----------



## 8ball (Sep 25, 2007)

I knew it was green crayon degrees - I knew it was them!


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

I'm saying nowt.

*whistles innocently*


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> fight fair lads.




Ahh nice. Cheesy posts up a whole load of bollocks, then sits back and waits for the attention/fireworks. But she does tell us to play nice! How thoughtful!


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Ahh nice. Cheesy posts up a whole load of bollocks, then sits back and waits for the attention/fireworks. But she does tell us to play nice! How thoughtful!




Better do as you are told then.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Ahh nice. Cheesy posts up a whole load of bollocks, then sits back and waits for the attention/fireworks. But she does tell us to play nice! How thoughtful!



your 'point' is bollox. i am the one with the first though. I know exactly why and was rewarded for it. I have nothing to prove to you. Ask anyone who got one and they will say something similar to the above. And its not bollocks, i have proof.

 

oh and on the journalism thing i have proof too, about 400 magazines full of it.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> your 'point' is bollox. i am the one with the first though. I know exactly why and was rewarded for it. I have nothing to prove to you. Ask anyone who got one and they will say something similar to the above. And its not bollocks, i have proof.
> 
> 
> 
> oh and on the journalism thing i have proof too, about 400 magazines full of it.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

>



exactly. the way some idiots try to piss on the parade of others is pitiful. Not worth entertaining really. 

I got no problem with anyone doing well, or having any kind of good fortune. Fairplay to you if you do, if you dont dont get bitter


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> your 'point' is bollox. i am the one with the first though. I know exactly why and was rewarded for it. I have nothing to prove to you. Ask anyone who got one and they will say something similar to the above. And its not bollocks, i have proof.
> 
> 
> 
> oh and on the journalism thing i have proof too, about 400 magazines full of it.




That's lovely for you. Your mum must be very proud Why  _did_ you ask us to play fair though, when absolutely no-one had responded to your previous post?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> That's lovely for you. Your mum must be very proud Why  _did_ you ask us to play fair though, when absolutely no-one had responded to your previous post?



excuse me? i was talking to ymu and johnny cannuck you nutter.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> excuse me? i was talking to ymu and johnny cannuck you nutter.




Yeah, sure you were Cheesy.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Yeah, sure you were Cheesy.



i was indeed. Look back at their spat, i think you'll find ymu was crossing some harsh territory with cannuck, she said it was being sleazy, i am not so sure he was actually,  he handled it very well though!


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> oh and on the journalism thing i have proof too, about 400 magazines full of it.


Youve been posting the 'anti' proof here for months. How do we know you dont pay your flatmate to write your stuff for you?


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> I got my first
> 
> ...
> 
> The other first






			
				Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i am the one with *the *first though. I know exactly why and was rewarded for *it*.



I'm lost.

One first or two?

One minute it's 'The other first', the next it's 'the first' and 'it'?


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

You'd think someone with a first in Journalism would be able to clearly communicate that information to the masses....


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> You'd think someone with a first in Journalism would be able to clearly communicate that information to the masses....



Its not in Journalism though, its in Sociology and Business Studies. Unless Cheesy has*another* first?


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> You'd think someone with a first in Journalism would be able to clearly communicate that information to the masses....




You would wouldn't you.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Its not in Journalism though, its in Sociology and Business Studies. Unless Cheesy has*another* first?




In bullshit perhaps?


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Its not in Journalism though, its in Sociology and Business Studies. Unless Cheesy has*another* first?



weeeeeeeeelllllllllllllllllllllllllll as yet its rather unclear 'which' first shes talking about. Her first in sociology or 'the other one' in journalism....

I agree with Moomoo, theres a slight stench of bullshit here.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> I agree with Moomoo, theres a slight stench of bullshit here.



A masterful piece of restraint there LiLMiss!


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Jealous idiots.  

  x 100,000,000,000


----------



## untethered (Sep 25, 2007)

Simplicity is just an absence of unnecessary complexity.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> Jealous idiots.
> 
> x 100,000,000,000




Busted.  

You are right of course.  It's pure and simple jealousy.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> Jealous idiots.
> 
> x 100,000,000,000



Fuck off Cheesy, there's nowt to be jealous of, as I've said to you before. And it's very tedious of you to shout 'Jealous' _every_ time someone takes the piss out of you - can't you think of something else?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Busted.
> 
> You are right of course.  It's pure and simple jealousy.



i know. you shouldnt be jealous though, i am a blagger is all. Thats how i have done well in exams. I am in my third uni now too. I am reasonably clever but definitely not afraid to speak my mind, especially where exams are concerned. Thats the difference, thats how i did it.

you dont have to study really hard to get good grades at uni anyway, getting good grades is based on a bit of study and a lot of imagination. Most people have imagination I believe, but arent brave enough to use it.

and attempting to piss on someones parade who has done alright for themselves makes _you _look like the bitter twat who is bitter cos of what they perceive as their own failures. Dont project it onto others. Be happy for them


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> Simplicity is just an absence of unnecessary complexity.



agree completely with that.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

You really have no sense of irony whatsover.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> You really have no sense of irony whatsover.



i do, but without sniping. it doesnt matter though, u been muzzled now  


going back to the OP, i would be facinated to hear what the proposals were from the urbans who got firsts or are doing doctorates though, and i bet each of them showed a bit of imagination with their ideas. Thats what students who excel at uni seem to have, regardless of their degree subject. Even with maths you seem to need to be original, and unafraid to have faith in yourself. 

Unless you have some ideas about how they do it yourself, and you arent afraid to express them, without a hint of irony?


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> And it's very tedious of you to shout 'Jealous' _every_ time someone takes the piss out of you - can't you think of something else?


It's one of the most common and tiresome tropes of our age, I'd say.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

I'm saying nowt.

It takes a lot of effort to be a bitter twat you know.   

And all this being jealous of Cheesy is just eating me up inside.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> It's one of the most common and tiresome tropes of our age, I'd say.


Up there with "the politics of envy".


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i do, but without sniping. it doesnt matter though, u been muzzled now
> 
> 
> going back to the OP, i would be facinated to hear what the proposals were from the urbans who got firsts or are doing doctorates though, and i bet each of them showed a bit of imagination with their ideas. Thats what students who excel at uni seem to have, regardless of their degree subject. Even with maths you seem to need to be original, and unafraid to have faith in yourself.
> ...



I've noticed that your threads always encourage others to share with you, while you keep your own sharing to a minimum. Is there any reason for this one-sidedness?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

all the trolls here can get fucked, honestly!  

i am shaking with terror, surrounded by enemies. 

why you would want to join em moomoo, i will never know. I thought you were one of the nice ones


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> I'm saying nowt.
> 
> It takes a lot of effort to be a bitter twat you know.
> 
> And all this being jealous of Cheesy is just eating me up inside.




What are you jealous about, moomoo?

Is it her looks, her wit, her way with words, her intellect, or all of that?


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> I'm saying nowt.
> 
> It takes a lot of effort to be a bitter twat you know.
> 
> And all this being jealous of Cheesy is just eating me up inside.



*breaks down and sobs*

Oh god, you're right. Where is my beautiful Syd Barrett collection? Where is my beautiful ability to smell colours? *How did I get here?*


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> I've noticed that your threads always encourage others to share with you, while you keep your own sharing to a minimum. Is there any reason for this one-sidedness?



excuse me? i did share already. The problem, which I imagine you would fail to understand, is that it can be summarised very succintly because concepts can be made simple - thats the whole key. You either get it or you dont. You cant 'learn' it can you.

i have been rewarded anyway, any attempts to piss on my parade makes you look like you have failed at stuff in your own life, its a reflection of your own self, and your own life, and all the crap in it that you project out from you.

I notice with your posts you attempt to hound people, and never make admissions of your own failures when you attempt to take away from the successes of others. Can you ever step away from this VP?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> *breaks down and sobs*
> 
> Oh god, you're right. Where is my beautiful Syd Barrett collection? Where is my beautiful ability to smell colours? *How did I get here?*



appreciation for the non-vanilla things in life and being born a certain way are blessings chairman that make me a very happy girl, i can assure you


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> all the trolls here can get fucked, honestly!
> 
> i am shaking with terror, surrounded by enemies.
> 
> why you would want to join em moomoo, i will never know. I thought you were one of the nice ones



perhaps if you didn't make such anile statements as "...i bet each of them showed a bit of imagination with their ideas. Thats what students who excel at uni seem to have, regardless of their degree subject." (after all, I suspect any of the Urbs who've been to uni can think of examples which prove *and* disprove your contention) then people wouldn't pick the scabs, would they?

nd really, trotting out the old jealousy line would be fine if you knew the individual circumstances, education etc of those you accuse, but you don't, so your accusation reads as pettiness.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> *breaks down and sobs*
> 
> Oh god, you're right. Where is my beautiful Syd Barrett collection? Where is my beautiful ability to smell colours? *How did I get here?*



Apparently, a long birthing combined with oxygen deprivation pre-emergence can contribute, at least it did in Scriabins' case.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> perhaps if you didn't make such anile statements as "...i bet each of them showed a bit of imagination with their ideas. Thats what students who excel at uni seem to have, regardless of their degree subject." (after all, I suspect any of the Urbs who've been to uni can think of examples which prove *and* disprove your contention) then people wouldn't pick the scabs, would they?
> 
> nd really, trotting out the old jealousy line would be fine if you knew the individual circumstances, education etc of those you accuse, but you don't, so your accusation reads as pettiness.



No, no VP. My life is, and always has been so _vanilla_, compared to the divine Cheesy. Fucks sake, honestly!


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Enemies ?

It's words on a screen !


If anyone doesn't like people commenting on what they say, well then don't post........


it aint rocket science !



(that's quite simple aint it)


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> perhaps if you didn't make such anile statements as "...i bet each of them showed a bit of imagination with their ideas. Thats what students who excel at uni seem to have, regardless of their degree subject." (after all, I suspect any of the Urbs who've been to uni can think of examples which prove *and* disprove your contention) then people wouldn't pick the scabs, would they?
> 
> nd really, trotting out the old jealousy line would be fine if you knew the individual circumstances, education etc of those you accuse, but you don't, so your accusation reads as pettiness.



why anyone on earth feels an impulse to stamp down on anothers happiness, success or good fortune suggests an inkling of either jealousy, or bitterness over ones own perceived failures, thus projected on to others. Those who made the posts are the ones like that give off that impression, because its a reflection of how you feel about you.


----------



## untethered (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> The problem, which I imagine you would fail to understand, is that it can be summarised very succintly because concepts can be made simple - thats the whole key. You either get it or you dont. You cant 'learn' it can you.



I don't follow you.

Things are as complex as they are. If you make them any simpler, that's being simplistic and you lose some fidelity. If you make it any more complex, then that's being obtuse and you also lose some fidelity.

However, knowing how to find the point at which your presentation is just right is very difficult. It's necessary, but not sufficient, to understand the point you're trying to convey fully.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> excuse me? i did share already. The problem, which I imagine you would fail to understand, is that it can be summarised very succintly because concepts can be made simple - thats the whole key. You either get it or you dont. You cant 'learn' it can you.


No, Cheesy, I mean "share", not dribble out a few factoids to draw out info from other posters, I mean the fact that you refuse to even hint at your employer, but forever sound off about your job, for example.


> i have been rewarded anyway, any attempts to piss on my parade makes you look like you have failed at stuff in your own life, its a reflection of your own self, and your own life, and all the crap in it that you project out from you.
> 
> I notice with your posts you attempt to hound people, and never make admissions of your own failures when you attempt to take away from the successes of others. Can you ever step away from this VP?


And of course, you're just the kind of neutral observer to make such judgements, aren't you?  

BTW, nice attempt at _faux_-psychoanalysis which is marred only by the fact that you don't have a clue.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> No, no VP. My life is, and always has been so _vanilla_, compared to the divine Cheesy. Fucks sake, honestly!



what you said there is a reflection of how _you_ feel about you. I dont feel this way about you, thats how you feel about you, ie a projection of your own stuff with yourself, its about you.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> appreciation for the non-vanilla things in life and being born a certain way are blessings chairman that make me a very happy girl, i can assure you



There was me thinking that what makes you happy, on the evidence of your posts, is belittling anyone who doesn't buy the Cheesy myth.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> No, no VP. My life is, and always has been so _vanilla_, compared to the divine Cheesy. Fucks sake, honestly!



More vanilla than the sexually fastidious Cheesy?

Bloody hell, you must live a life of missionary position only!


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> No, Cheesy, I mean "share", not dribble out a few factoids to draw out info from other posters, I mean the fact that you refuse to even hint at your employer, but forever sound off about your job, for example.



sorry, i love my job very much and wouldnt dream of ever telling anyone on here where i work in a million years. Never. And you wont see me post on urban during the day much again either, I was for a while but i just dont have time, seriously. but in response, just to clear up,my anonymity stays here forever.  Or wouldnt you tell us where u work, also your name and address?  

seriously though, what do you do, cos why the fuck you so smug all the time and 'know-it-all' or are you just old?

no offence honestly!


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> There was me thinking that what makes you happy, on the evidence of your posts, is belittling anyone who doesn't buy the Cheesy myth.



You are very paranoid.

can we get back to the OP please by the way? Have you got an opinion, on how people get good grades in uni? a theory like? or do we have to read more of your self-depreciative thoughts about yourself, and your own perceived failures? i really would rather not, no offence, VP.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> You are very paranoid.
> 
> can we get back to the OP please by the way? Have you got an opinion, on how people get good grades in uni? a theory like? or do we have to read more of your self-depreciative thoughts about yourself, and your own perceived failures? i really would rather not, no offence, VP.


I think it would be best if you told us more about yourself, though. We can surely learn from your success. We _need_ role models.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> why anyone on earth feels an impulse to stamp down on anothers happiness, success or good fortune suggests an inkling of either jealousy, or bitterness over ones own perceived failures, thus projected on to others. Those who made the posts are the ones like that give off that impression, because its a reflection of how you feel about you.



I'm "stamping down" on your happiness? 
I'm jealous, bitter and have "perceived failures"?
I hate others because I hate myself?

Wow, that's insightful.

Totally inaccurate, but insightful. 

I've achieved every target I've ever set myself, I've got a fat portfolio of higher ed qualifications gained over the last quarter-century, and I'm married to the loveliest woman in the world. I'm happy as Larry, and unlike you I'm comfortable about it, so don't need to post threads surreptitiously bigging myself up.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> BTW, nice attempt at _faux_-psychoanalysis which is marred only by the fact that you don't have a clue.


Oi! She's got three firsts in that 

So it's journalism, sociology, business studies and counting 

Which are three separate firsts, but also only one! Depending on the sentence in which they're (it's) being referred to 

It's the holy trinity degree! Three-but-one-but-three 

That aren't sounding simple to me


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> I've achieved every target I've ever set myself


By contrast I have failed in every endeavour I have ever been involved in.

Except when I won the National DHSS chess championship in 1992, perhaps. That was the apex of my existence.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> I think it would be best if you told us more about yourself, though. We can surely learn from your success. We _need_ role models.




li know you are being ironic, but if you are going to have them, look up to really inspirational people like bjork for role models. High achievers arent role models necessarily IMO but i dont think we need role models anyway. I drink too much probably, which holds me back from success sometimes. I am addressing that by doing a masters right now, and sorry i cant say what its in cos its to do with work. Another point, is that I aint successful financially though, not yet


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> However, knowing how to find the point at which your presentation is just right is very difficult. It's necessary, but not sufficient, to understand the point you're trying to convey fully.



My supervisor had a good gauge for this, which was whether you could use your presentation to teach someone on a lower rung on the educational ladder about the subject of your presentation.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> li know you are being ironic, but if you are going to have them, look up to really inspirational people like bjork for role models.


Is this satire?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> Oi! She's got three firsts in that
> 
> So it's journalism, sociology, business studies and counting
> 
> ...



i already said i dont think it was a big deal, i am proud of it though.

and mrsquaod, you are always talking about academic stuff and your own academic achievements (for which I am very happy for you by the way, i mean that sincerely too)


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Is this satire?



I think it must be. Unless I'm too fick to understand.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Is this satire?



no, i dont know why you think this. you see if i read that people see things that way and then ask me this, i wonder if I _am_ a bit mad. I dont think I am, nor is it fashionable to be, I like normality. Too ambitious probably.


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Stop projecting CM........


jeebus


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

cheesy - have you ever had an unuttered thought in your fucking life?


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> no, i dont know why you think this. you see if i read that people see things that way and then ask me this, i wonder if I _am_ a bit mad. I dont think I am, nor is it fashionable to be, I like normality. Too ambitious probably.


Note: just because you write incoherently does _not_ mean that you are like Bjork.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 25, 2007)

*


----------



## untethered (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> My supervisor had a good gauge for this, which was whether you could use your presentation to teach someone on a lower rung on the educational ladder about the subject of your presentation.



That's a good one.

Another is take each element at a time and ask whether it could be left out and still convey the same meaning/functionality. If it could, then remove it.

Unfortunately, these ideas are often misapplied in aesthetics. Just because I like clear argument and simple tools doesn't mean I want to live in a decoration- and comfort-free white cube.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

we are all happy in our small contained worlds anyway. I think there is room in the world for all sorts, and its no big deal whatsoever


----------



## untethered (Sep 25, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> But maybe academia represents something you feel you've done really _well_. Whereas for someone else like VP it might be the marriage, etc, alongside all those other strengths. Or for moomoo her kids, relationships, and getting through one helluva tough time that I certainly doubt I would've been so resilient in. And thereby recognising what arseholes academics can be



I base my self-esteem around my popularity on this website.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 25, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> I base my self-esteem around my popularity on this website.


Mine comes almost exclusively from the size of my collection of bubble baths.

21 flavours at present


----------



## spanglechick (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesy - people aren't trying to make you unhappy, or stamp on the achievement of someone who did well in their education (little knocking of other academic types - equationgirl, quoady et al).

I think the problem is that people find it hard to believe that you are a professional and successful journalist, or someone academically gifted, because you show little sign in your posts of being someone who has those skills.

Fwiw - I can believe that someone *can* "switch on" their ability in writing coherant, informative and literate English, while writing habitually in a way that doesn't show those abilities (as you admit yourself that you do here).  It must take you ages to bring your professional writing up to scratch, because you aren't in the habit of communicating that way usually - but I have no reason to believe that this isn't what you do.  I don't have any reason to think you are lying Cheesy - but, as hard as it might be to accept, I wanted to explain why some people think your accounts of career and education aren't to be believed.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Is this satire?



I'm with Cheesy on this one - Bjork is a fine role model if we were to desire role models


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Is this satire?


Probably not, although I can understand people having "left-field" role-models as well as more conventional ones.

Bjork though, doesn't do it for me.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> I'm with Cheesy on this one - Bjork is a fine role model if we were to desire role models


Is that because she says "There's more to life than this"?


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)




----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> Just a thought, cheesy, but maybe having so many other struggles is why being so successful _academically_ is so important to you. Like.
> 
> Even using academia to fix a drinking problem... Which certainly isn't a conventional method, and all power to you with it. But maybe academia represents something you feel you've done really _well_. Whereas for someone else like VP it might be the marriage, etc, alongside all those other strengths. Or for moomoo her kids, relationships, and getting through one helluva tough time that I certainly doubt I would've been so resilient in. And thereby recognising what arseholes academics can be
> 
> I guess each of us have our strengths, and each of us *can* be prone to sanctifying ourselves with reference to our own particular strengths. Which is spot-on - just so long as it doesn't detract from others, and _their_ strengths. Even if they are 'thick c**t plebs'.



i am well aware of peoples talent in loads of areas, and happy for them. Emotional intelligence is more useful than academic intelligence anyway, because then you win the one thing that this academic cannot find: love.

but less tears on that one.  I think your post is great there. I dont think I am tolerant enough of people who dont think laterally or who think things are 'weird; just because they havent heard them before. There is hardly any real creativity in madness, but plenty of borderline madness in creativity. Thats why madness wouldnt apply to me. I can see where God gave me one thing to use, like blue eyes for seduction, and then denied me another, like money. I see how we get gifts which make up that kind of absent trinity. We are imperfect, we have free will, so there's not supposed to be one.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Bollocks. Some day I'll bother to read how to post an image. If I can.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> That's a good one.
> 
> Another is take each element at a time and ask whether it could be left out and still convey the same meaning/functionality. If it could, then remove it.
> 
> Unfortunately, these ideas are often misapplied in aesthetics. Just because I like clear argument and simple tools doesn't mean I want to live in a decoration- and comfort-free white cube.



Why *do* so many people conflate aestheticism and minimalism?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Is that because she says "There's more to life than this"?



oh no! theres a better one, much better, I read the lyrics today six times to get inspiration for an article! A stuffy business article unrelated to anything all i wanted was a flow of words, like listeninng to mozart before you play chess maybe? i think thats okay.

what you quoted there, thats a superb sentiment though. I would imagine she was referring to martians, rather than some overused statement about convention. Her new song. 'earth intruders' isnt about either of those things though.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Role model


----------



## invisibleplanet (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> seriously though, what do you do, cos why the fuck you so smug all the time and 'know-it-all' or are you just old?



what you said there is a reflection of how _you_ feel about you. 

no offence honestly!


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> oh no! theres a better one, much better, I read the lyrics today six times to get inspiration for an article.


Make it stop somebody




			
				Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> I would imagine she was referring to martians, rather than some overused statement about convention.


Please


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Why *do* so many people conflate aestheticism and minimalism?


Probably an overreaction against convention?


----------



## untethered (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Why *do* so many people conflate aestheticism and minimalism?



The problem isn't minimalism per se but the quasi-religious promotion of minimalism as the One True Way. A balanced world has space for minimalism but it would be incredibly tedious on its own.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Make it stop somebody
> 
> Please



you lot are being such a drove of trollage today.

and spanglechick, no offence but you seem to know v.little about journalism and are talking bollocks. With a very linear view. But just to explain a few things, news stories is what i do. I bash them out real quick in very sharp tabloidy english too. Inform like the economist, write like the sun. thats the style lots of them like. I am not that good with words you see, distinctly average. you dont have to be a wordsmith though, or you might be a sub or writing for the times literary supplement.

I am a news writer (although i write features too). I can spot sharp angles on things sometimes and turn them into hard hitting stories. I dont think i can write at all, i try hard though. I am an angle spotting news reporter, not a feature writer (which requires a higher standard of English).

The fact that i can find the story is  why i am a good reporter (apparently). Journalism is not just writing well at all, it is about spotting angles and hooks on things for front covers, which is what i do. 

hope you understand now


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> what you said there is a reflection of how _you_ feel about you.
> 
> no offence honestly!


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

shut the fuck up, cheesy, there's a good lass.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Probably an overreaction against convention?



 chortle


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

>



if it makes you feel better.

as for the dub muppet, hes on ignore, as i may do with you too


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

It is of course frighteningly possible that, in our day and agew, a semi-literate might be able to obtain regular employment as a journalist on the grounds of being able to spot an "angle" (i.e. know what's considered fashionable by similar tenth-rate metropolitan poseurs). O tempora, o mores. Still, hard to know for sure without seeing a portfolio.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

can we get back to the OP please though.... someone police this, pretty pretty _please??!_


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

i've never come across such a self-regarding, ignorant, self-aggrandising, unaware, tedious, wrongheaded individual in my life. Makes me want to drive spikes into my eyes to make it stop


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Is that because she says "There's more to life than this"?



She loves music, experiments a bit, doesn't take herself too seriously, works hard at creating for the love of creating and brings joy to others in the process...and (arguably) has a fantastic voice.  Have you seen Dancer in the Dark? If you have and it didn't make you cry you are soulless.


----------



## spanglechick (Sep 25, 2007)

I do - but the misconception exists that someone who writes for a living must be able to write well.  That's why people don't believe you're a journo.

There is also a, perhaps arrogant assumption that someone academically gifted will write with a solid standard of literacy.  I did try to make the point earlier in the thread that not all university subjects require this standard.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> can we get back to the OP please though.... someone police this, pretty pretty _please??!_




"i DEMAND that people agree with me otherwise i'll scream and shout"


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> if it makes you feel better.


What makes you think I need your permission to smile?


> as for the dub muppet, hes on ignore, as i may do with you too


You do whatever you want, Cheesy. 

Hold on.

No, I tried for at least a minute there to be bothered about you ignoring me, but I couldn't do it.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> i've never come across such a self-regarding, ignorant, self-aggrandising, unaware, tedious, wrongheaded individual in my life.



Dag nab it, them Duke boys been in your watermelon patch agin Boss?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> i've never come across such a self-regarding, ignorant, self-aggrandising, unaware, tedious, wrongheaded individual in my life. Makes me want to drive spikes into my eyes to make it stop



(((((dub)))))


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

spanglechick said:
			
		

> I do - but the misconception exists that someone who writes for a living must be able to write well.  That's why people don't believe you're a journo.
> 
> There is also a, perhaps arrogant assumption that someone academically gifted will write with a solid standard of literacy.  I did try to make the point earlier in the thread that not all university subjects require this standard.



yes you did. I dont write the way i do on here for work though. I am very lazy on here and never edit grammar or anything. My standard jumps really high and far from it at work. Plus you have to write and actually rewrite your professional articles really snappily and in tight, bright, slightly dramatic language with some kind of 'style.' which one never would do on here. Its extremely different and extremely exhausting.  No big deal. 

Being a news writer is better though, and i am a professional who gets the cover a lot for my ideas, the fact that I can see the story glaring at me when i am at some conference, just like the odd times i have spotted something in academia, which i have used to do well. Knock it all you like. Its as solid as stone. I dont know how I spot the story but i seem to be able to. Cos you dont last five minutes on a busy newsdesk if you cant do it.

This is what i have done, and it makes very happy


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Dag nab it, them Duke boys been in your watermelon patch agin Boss?



Poor phil, still unable to move on from his "Boss Hogg" joke, even though it wasn't funny the first time he used it, so was unlikely to have miraculously become amusing on its' 500th outing.


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 25, 2007)

spanglechick said:
			
		

> I do - but the misconception exists that someone who writes for a living must be able to write well.


That is a pretty severe misconception to be fair.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

actually, do you want to know what really boils my piss about cheesy? is that she paints herself as an innocent little victim beset on all sides by simply howwid people, and actually she can be nasty, snide, arrogant, patronising and loathsome but would never admit as much. 

At least when I'm rude to people I don't try and pretend otherwise.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Poor phil, still unable to move on from his "Boss Hogg" joke, even though it wasn't funny the first time he used it, so was unlikely to have miraculously become amusing on its' 500th outing.




jesus - is he still trawling that one out? bless.....


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> why you would want to join em moomoo, i will never know. I thought you were one of the nice ones




I *am* one of the nice ones!  

In fact, I'm positively fantastic!  


I've just written out a long post trying to give cheesy advice but then thought better of it seeing as I would only have got a load of abuse in return.  

So I'll just say this.

Cheesy, give it a rest love.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Poor phil, still unable to move on from his "Boss Hogg" joke, even though it wasn't funny the first time he used it, so was unlikely to have miraculously become amusing on its' 500th outing.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> actually, do you want to know what really boils my piss about cheesy? is that she paints herself as an innocent little victim beset on all sides by simply howwid people, and actually she can be nasty, snide, arrogant, patronising and loathsome but would never admit as much.
> 
> At least when I'm rude to people I don't try and pretend otherwise.



I've not noticed.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> actually, do you want to know what really boils my piss about cheesy? is that she paints herself as an innocent little victim beset on all sides by simply howwid people, and actually she can be nasty, snide, arrogant, patronising and loathsome but would never admit as much.
> 
> At least when I'm rude to people I don't try and pretend otherwise.



Mmm, but you're possibly a bit more, I don't know, self-aware, don't take yourself seriously because you know life's too short?


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> I *am* one of the nice ones!
> 
> In fact, I'm positively fantastic!
> 
> ...



give it a rest? no chance, this is a messageboard. say what you like and express yourself. you care too much of what people will think moomoo, which  probably shows you are sensitive in a good way. I dont care however, which might make me kinda ruthless but this is the internet and i dont take it seriously


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> I've not noticed.




which bit?


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> This is what i have done, and it makes very happy




I don't think you are happy though.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> which might make me kinda ruthless but this is the internet and i dont take it seriously



genius


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

and evidence from Dubversions spiteful post quoted by VP there is why he is on ignore now. 

Dubversion unfortunately does take this place scarily seriously and his hateful and imbecilic posts frighten me


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> give it a rest? no chance, this is a messageboard. say what you like and express yourself. you care too much of what people will think moomoo, which  probably shows you are sensitive in a good way. I dont care however, which might make me kinda ruthless but this is the internet and i dont take it seriously



Oh the utter irony!


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> and evidence from Dubversions spiteful post quoted by VP there is why he is on ignore now.
> 
> Dubversion unfortunately does take this place scarily seriously and his hateful and imbecilic posts frighten me




BOO!!


----------



## Madusa (Sep 25, 2007)

you bunch of crazies!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> I don't think you are happy though.


She's as happy as someone who contradicts herself so often can be!


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Oh the utter irony!



i am not hateful and spiteful like that Dubversion. He enjoys it too, hence why i say 'scary' and 'frighten'

didnt a load of people ask for him to be banned? 

this place is a nice messageboard without his personal digs & infantile pontificating


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 25, 2007)




----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> which bit?



The bit about Cheesy boiling your piss, and the other bits.


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Oh the utter irony!




Pipped to the post there VP !


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> give it a rest? no chance, this is a messageboard. say what you like and express yourself. you care too much of what people will think moomoo, which  probably shows you are sensitive in a good way. I dont care however, which might make me kinda ruthless but this is the internet and i dont take it seriously




Oh well.  I've tried.  



Anyway, Tribe is on and Bruce Parry is better looking than you.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> and evidence from Dubversions spiteful post quoted by VP there is why he is on ignore now.
> 
> Dubversion unfortunately does take this place scarily seriously and his hateful and imbecilic posts frighten me



Interesting.

You're able to divine from a single post (because, after all, you have him on ignore so you'd only see quoted posts) that he "takes this place scarily seriously", and that his "hateful and imbecilic *posts*" (my emphasis) frighten you.

That's a major construction built on a very small foundation, Cheesy.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i am not hateful and spiteful like that Dubversion. He enjoys it too, hence why i say 'scary' and 'frighten'
> 
> didnt a load of people ask for him to be banned?



They *demanded* it in fact.  But it'll take more than the public will to run ole Boss outta Hazzard country, yessiree.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> this place is a nice messageboard without his personal digs & infantile pontificating



so it's ALL my fault? 

all the other people who think you're a joke don't bother you? how terribly resilient of you


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i am not hateful and spiteful like that Dubversion. He enjoys it too, hence why i say 'scary' and 'frighten'
> 
> didnt a load of people ask for him to be banned?
> 
> this place is a nice messageboard without his personal digs & infantile pontificating



Cheesy, read the ban thread again, bearing in mind that the OP stresses the humourous nature of the thread.

Right, have you assimilated and do you understand the actual context of the "ban" now?

Good.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Interesting.
> 
> You're able to divine from a single post (because, after all, you have him on ignore so you'd only see quoted posts) that he "takes this place scarily seriously", and that his "hateful and imbecilic *posts*" (my emphasis) frighten you.
> 
> That's a major construction built on a very small foundation, Cheesy.



Surely there were post*s* that she will have read prior to putting Dub on ignore? 

Whether they support the conclusion or not is another matter.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> I've achieved every target I've ever set myself, I've got a fat portfolio of higher ed qualifications gained over the last quarter-century, and I'm married to the loveliest woman in the world. I'm happy as Larry, and unlike you I'm comfortable about it, so don't need to post threads surreptitiously bigging myself up.



Then why does so much anger and bitterness seep through in many of your posts?


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> give it a rest? no chance, this is a messageboard. say what you like and express yourself. you care too much of what people will think moomoo, which  probably shows you are sensitive in a good way.* I dont care however, which might make me kinda ruthless but this is the internet and i dont take it seriously *






> and evidence from Dubversions spiteful post quoted by VP there is why he is on ignore now.
> 
> Dubversion unfortunately does take this place scarily seriously and his hateful and imbecilic posts frighten me




Can you really not see the contradiction here CP ????????


really can't you ?


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Then why does so much anger and bitterness seep through in many of your posts?




can't say i've noticed that. A healthy disdain for bullshit and morons, but nothing worse than that.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Interesting.
> 
> You're able to divine from a single post (because, after all, you have him on ignore so you'd only see quoted posts) that he "takes this place scarily seriously", and that his "hateful and imbecilic *posts*" (my emphasis) frighten you.
> 
> That's a major construction built on a very small foundation, Cheesy.



he takes it very seriously, worryingly seriously and writes bitchy comments like he really hates people. He wrote so many hateful personal things about me, i was a bit freaked out in the end. I think he wanted that.

Thats why i put him on ignore. Hes not here for the right reasons IMO, because he enjoys bullying. and gets a sadistic kick from it. thats why people called for him to be banned. He is not a nice person - theres a hateful streak there and a crashing paranoia when someone else is happy. Dubs like that, suspicious like, unhappy or somethin,  i dont know.

But fuck him, because ultimately, his cuntishness is a sorrowful reflection on his own life, and his own misery, nowt to do with me. I am a stranger that irrititates him, but this Dubversion is a bit of an evil piece of work, and he takes things personally, and gets personal. I find that frightening, hence ignoring him  

next!!!


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Then why does so much anger and bitterness seep through in many of your posts?



Seep through?  Drench, drown, flood, inundate, steep, stew, engulf and soak more like.  Violent Panda is the Baron of Bitter.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Cheesy, read the ban thread again, bearing in mind that the OP stresses the humourous nature of the thread.
> 
> Right, have you assimilated and do you understand the actual context of the "ban" now?
> 
> Good.




it was quite heartwarming to see how many of the usual suspects really really NEEDED to believe the ban was a serious suggestions 

(((fuckwits)))


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> can't say i've noticed that. A healthy disdain for bullshit and morons, but nothing worse than that.



Not you: VP.

I haven't said anything about you.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> he takes it very seriously, worryingly seriously and writes bitchy comments like he really hates people. He wrote so many hateful personal things about me, i was a bit freaked out in the end. I think he wanted that.
> 
> Thats why i put him on ignore. Hes not here for the right reasons IMO, because he enjoys bullying. and gets a sadistic kick from it. thats why people called for him to be banned. He is not a nice person - theres a hateful streak there and a crashing paranoia when someone else is happy. Dubs like that, suspicious like, unhappy or somethin,  i dont know.
> 
> ...



i'm like Aleister Crowley, Timmy Mallet and Gollum all in one handy package and I'm here to ruin your life


----------



## invisibleplanet (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> he takes it very seriously, worryingly seriously and writes bitchy comments like he really hates people. He wrote so many hateful personal things about me, i was a bit freaked out in the end. I think he wanted that.
> 
> Thats why i put him on ignore. Hes not here for the right reasons IMO, because he enjoys bullying. and gets a sadistic kick from it. thats why people called for him to be banned. He is not a nice person - theres a hateful streak there and a crashing paranoia when someone else is happy. Dubs like that, suspicious like, unhappy or somethin,  i dont know.
> 
> ...



what you said there is a reflection of how _you_ feel about you. 

no offence honestly!


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> it was quite heartwarming to see how many of the usual suspects really really NEEDED to believe the ban was a serious suggestions



Yes, 73% of them to be precise.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Not you: VP.
> 
> I haven't said anything about you.




and I was responding to your point about VP.

dumbass


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

mentalchik said:
			
		

> Can you really not see the contradiction here CP ????????
> 
> 
> really can't you ?



i dont get hateful on here mate. To the point of hatred/ malice. He does this. people do notice. Thats the difference.

i dont want to talk about it anyway, because it scares me a bit, ie: the hateful way people can get on the internet. I have him on ignore and will never read another 'comment' he makes which is quoted by another.  

back to the OP.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> They *demanded* it in fact.  But it'll take more than the public will to run ole Boss outta Hazzard country, yessiree.



I hate to reiterate my pity for you, phil, but you really do have a hard time with humour, don't you? 
(((((phils' sense of humour)))))


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Excuse me........


What does Vanilla mean?

I presume it's not ice cream in this context?


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> Cheesypoof said:
> 
> 
> 
> > i dont want to talk about it anyway.



bet you do 




			
				Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i will never read another 'comment' he makes which is quoted by another.



bet you do 




			
				Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> back to the OP.



bet you don't


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Then why does so much anger and bitterness seep through in many of your posts?



It does?

Perhaps you see what you want to see, Johnny.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> he takes it very seriously, worryingly seriously and writes bitchy comments like he really hates people. He wrote so many hateful personal things about me, i was a bit freaked out in the end. I think he wanted that.
> 
> Thats why i put him on ignore. Hes not here for the right reasons IMO, because he enjoys bullying. and gets a sadistic kick from it. thats why people called for him to be banned. He is not a nice person - theres a hateful streak there and a crashing paranoia when someone else is happy. Dubs like that, suspicious like, unhappy or somethin,  i dont know.
> 
> But fuck him, because ultimately, his cuntishness is a sorrowful reflection on his own life, and his own misery, nowt to do with me. I am a stranger that irrititates him, but this Dubversion is a bit of an evil piece of work, and he takes things personally, and gets personal. I find that frightening, hence ignoring him


But you also enjoy playing the self-righteous wronged victim cheesy 

There's a whole lot of power in claiming that 'I'm entirely innocent and the world is wrong' victim stance too  

In that post above - you're playing the victim and using the victim position to have a _vicious_ dig at someone else who you're accusing of, uh, _viciously _having a go at you 

It's _such_ a serious post accusing someone else of being _so _serious 

The whole drama queen thing is daft. On all sides. You no more pure victim than dub is pure bully. But it's a powerful way of legitimating 'victimised' aggression.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

I think Cheesy is mercurial, illogical, flighty, and emotionally fragile. I also think that she's creative in a unique way, and quite intelligent. Sometimes she says things that make me goggle in amazement; sometimes I want to tell her to sod off.

 I look forward to her posts and her threads, because she is thoroughly an individual. I never know what to expect next.

And I think  that's what's behind the general vituperation. Many of you see yourselves as free spirits, iconoclasts, rebels, and so you are, but there's a playbook, and if it isn't in the playbook, it's taboo, verboten, not of the body.

Your rebelliousness is underscored with a village mentality that makes you want to iron flat any wrinkles that do not conform to the accepted patterns.

Cheesy is such a wrinkle, and she rankles the stodgy british underpinnings of your collective psyche.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> what you said there is a reflection of how _you_ feel about you.
> 
> no offence honestly!



fuck off you. The moderators have seen my posts on here for years. I have tried to settle the problem with Dubs before and have asked him to put me on ignore, leave me the fuck alone, and bury the hatchet.

the mods have never complained to me.  I may be a bit mixed up/ or posts may seem arrogant (which is an internet persona kind of amplification - the things i say are true about my life though.

The mods here know i am not some fucking troll, and that i dont like confrontation, which is what you are stoking. 

i wont throw it back in your face invisible either. And i wont start on you for being rude there, ie: i am not a spiteful cunt. I hate internet fighting and wouldd like to post in peace and love to be honest


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> It does?
> 
> Perhaps you see what you want to see, Johnny.



Why would I choose to see bitterness where none exists?


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i dont get hateful on here mate. To the point of hatred/ malice. He does this. people do notice. Thats the difference.
> 
> i dont want to talk about it anyway, because it scares me a bit, ie: the hateful way people can get on the internet. I have him on ignore and will never read another 'comment' he makes which is quoted by another.
> 
> back to the OP.




Erm, sorry mate,i meant the bit how you said you don't care, you're ruthless and don't take the internet at all seriously.........



condescension can be just as annoying, mate !


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 25, 2007)

STOP FEEDING THE VICTIM 

It's a two-way pattern


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i dont get hateful on here mate. To the point of hatred/ malice. He does this. people do notice. Thats the difference.
> 
> i dont want to talk about it anyway, because it scares me a bit, ie: the hateful way people can get on the internet.
> 
> back to the OP.



Fuck sake cheesy - you told me to go and shoot myself once because I wasn't proud to be Irish!


----------



## Madusa (Sep 25, 2007)

teehee!


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 25, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> But you also enjoy playing the self-righteous wronged victim cheesy
> 
> There's a whole lot of power in claiming that 'I'm entirely innocent and the world is wrong' victim stance too
> 
> ...



Bullshit.  Dubversion hates Cheesy and picks on her all the time, everyone sees it, he doesn't even deny it.  He enjoys it.  Gets a kick out of it.  Totally flipping obvious, nothing could be obviouser.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> fuck off you. ...



so that's my first bet won


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> can't say i've noticed that. A healthy disdain for bullshit and morons, but nothing worse than that.



Hey, if Cheesy, Canuck and dwyer all say I'm bitter, then I must be, mustn't I? 

Or perhaps, just perhaps, it's beneficial to such people to believe that anyone who contradicts them must be like that. I don't know, I'm just a simple chap, I'm not a journalist or a professor or a Johnny.


----------



## untethered (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Cheesy is such a wrinkle, and she rankles the stodgy british underpinnings of your collective psyche.



To summarise, what you seem to be saying is that someone who posts random nonsense is bound to get everyone's back up at one time or another.

And you think this is good.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> But you also enjoy playing the self-righteous wronged victim cheesy
> 
> There's a whole lot of power in claiming that 'I'm entirely innocent and the world is wrong' victim stance too
> 
> ...



maybe. none of it matters though. Can we get back to the OP now please? How did you do so well at uni, quaody? i am genuinely interested. What study techniques do you use? do you agree that its not about covering yourself with loads of study, but attempting applying original thoughts and being brave with them?


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 25, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Bullshit.  Dubversion hates Cheesy and picks on her all the time, everyone sees it, he doesn't even deny it.  He enjoys it.  Gets a kick out of it.  Totally flipping obvious, nothing could be obviouser.


As is Cheesy's self-righteous and legitimating victimhood 

e2a: unless, of course, there's only one part to any interaction these days


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Fuck sake cheesy - you told me to go and shoot myself once because I wasn't proud to be Irish!




can't have been her, she only wants 





> to post in peace and love to be honest


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Seep through?  Drench, drown, flood, inundate, steep, stew, engulf and soak more like.  Violent Panda is the Baron of Bitter.



Careful there, sweaty-palms, don't get too carried away, who knows what might happen!


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> he takes it very seriously, worryingly seriously and writes bitchy comments like he really hates people.
> 
> Thats why i put him on ignore. thats why people called for him to be banned. He is not a nice person - theres a hateful streak there and a crashing paranoia when someone else is happy. Dubs like that, suspicious like, unhappy or somethin,  i dont know.
> 
> ...



Heaven forbid!!   

I don't know why some people take against Cheesypoof. Everyone posts self-obsessive look at me self affirmation type posts from time to time. I don't find her posts the least bit offensive or irritating.

What's going on with this thread? It's not even a full moon yet....

Is it meant as a discussion of 'getting good grades by making things simple'? or is it Cheesy wanting to declare her First and in the process potentially dissing the efforts of those who 'only' got a 2:1, a 2:2 or half an O level? Does it *really* matter? All _that _much? 

Why can't we all just get along?


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 25, 2007)

You're all fucking barking 

I'm off


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> I'm just a simple chap



Yeah right.  And I'm Roscoe P. Coltrane.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Excuse me........
> 
> 
> What does Vanilla mean?
> ...



Staid and traditional in ones' sexual tastes.


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Sep 25, 2007)

No _I'm _Roscoe P Coltrane


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> To summarise, what you seem to be saying is that someone who posts random nonsense is bound to get everyone's back up at one time or another.
> 
> And you think this is good.



But that's my point: if it's just random nonsense, there's nothing to be upset about. But many of you absolutely see red about Cheesy. 

It makes no sense to get so mad about fluff - unless you are of a psychological constitution that is made uncomfortable by nonconforming things.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Careful there, sweaty-palms, don't get too carried away, who knows what might happen!



I know, I touched a nerve.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Staid and traditional in ones' sexual tastes.



I just told my husband that cheesy sez I'm vanilla. 

He chortled. Quite a lot.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> I know, I touched a nerve.



So THAT'S what you call it.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I think Cheesy is mercurial, illogical, flighty, and emotionally fragile. I also think that she's creative in a unique way, and quite intelligent. Sometimes she says things that make me goggle in amazement; sometimes I want to tell her to sod off.
> 
> I look forward to her posts and her threads, because she is thoroughly an individual. I never know what to expect next.
> 
> ...



wow!!! thanks a million - that was v.beautiful, too kind.

and the lack of faith in me that it might be possible that i *might* actually be quite like this is exactly why Dubversion hates me. 

there is no big deal to anything i say, and what i say is genuine. i never tell lies on here and what i say about my job, study, drinking problems whatever is all true. No big deal. I dont know why people doubt any of it. They dont know how to handle it. My persona on here is a little cartoonish, but i am a writer and you cant help having fun with it. Thats okay and something with which i am very familiar. 

none of it matters though, because all i want to do on here is post away happily, which i do anyway. And moomoo, i am pretty happy   

can we kindly get back to the OP now and stop this psychological analysis/ cross examination?


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 25, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> I don't know why some people take against Cheesypoof.



Misogyny.  Simple really.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

I think you also have a general animus toward anyone who brings attention upon themselves in an overt way, or who acknowledges their own success. I recognize this because there's a holdover of it in the Canadian mentality, there from our days as your colony.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Bullshit.  Dubversion hates Cheesy and picks on her all the time, everyone sees it, he doesn't even deny it.  He enjoys it.  Gets a kick out of it.  Totally flipping obvious, nothing could be obviouser.



Except the way you're sniffing, eh phil?


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Staid and traditional in ones' sexual tastes.




Thank you.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> So THAT'S what you call it.



Yep.  Oh yes indeedy.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> I know, I touched a nerve.



Hmmm, so my hypothesis that you surf one-handedly is proved correct!


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 25, 2007)

Back to the OP? I get good grades by reading the requirements for coursework, throwing them in the bin and doing something more complicated/challenging. I do well in exams because i know how to revise for them. I do well in presentations because most people cannot tell the difference between confidence and terror.

The OP was a flawed generalisation caused by a narrow world view and a lack of thought about other disciplines than Cheesy's own. If it were simple i wouldn't be wasting three years on a degree in it.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I think you also have a general animus toward anyone who brings attention upon themselves in an overt way, or who acknowledges their own success. I recognize this because there's a holdover of it in the Canadian mentality, there from our days as your colony.



I don't think you need to tell him this Johnny, VP is neither stupid nor lacking in self-awareness.  He knows what he is.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> I just told my husband that cheesy sez I'm vanilla.
> 
> He chortled. Quite a lot.



When he stopped laughing did he manage to enquire what "non-vanilla" means, and if so has he recovered from fainting yet?


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> fuck off you. The moderators have seen my posts on here for years. I have tried to settle the problem with Dubs before and have asked him to put me on ignore, leave me the fuck alone, and bury the hatchet.
> 
> the mods have never complained to me.  I may be a bit mixed up/ or posts may seem arrogant (which is an internet persona kind of amplification - the things i say are true about my life though.
> 
> ...




This reply to invisible planet's perfectly reasonable and polite post is a perfect example of _your_ aggressive and confrontational side.  

Anyway......


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> But that's my point: if it's just random nonsense, there's nothing to be upset about. But many of you absolutely see red about Cheesy.
> 
> It makes no sense to get so mad about fluff - unless you are of a psychological constitution that is made uncomfortable by nonconforming things.



yes. they see bits of my intelligence, they know that i dont go with the norm,  while they have been socialised to speak when spoken to. I was raised to speak out at all times, and be opinionated. They know i think and am not some poxy admdinistrator sitting in an office posting crap about shoe shopping.  They cannot ignore it. I challenge them sometimes but mostly, they troll because they dont know how to take me. I know exactly what they are like and dwhat to expect. I will be unpredictable sometimes and contradict myself a lot. If they can keep up - theres no reaching me. 

can we get back to the OP now please?


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> When he stopped laughing did he manage to enquire what "non-vanilla" means, and if so has he recovered from fainting yet?


 

Errr, what does 'non-vanilla' mean?


----------



## FridgeMagnet (Sep 25, 2007)

Chocolate.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> When he stopped laughing did he manage to enquire what "non-vanilla" means, and if so has he recovered from fainting yet?



He's a bit disappointed that I can't smell colours.  He's quite glad about the lack of Doherty adoration though.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> ...
> can we get back to the OP now please?



Yes, ok.  

I never went to university


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 25, 2007)

FridgeMagnet said:
			
		

> Chocolate.


Mint choc chip


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Thank you.



No problem.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Bob_the_lost said:
			
		

> Back to the OP? I get good grades by reading the requirements for coursework, throwing them in the bin and doing something more complicated/challenging. I do well in exams because i know how to revise for them. I do well in presentations because most people cannot tell the difference between confidence and terror.
> 
> The OP was a flawed generalisation caused by a narrow world view and a lack of thought about other disciplines than Cheesy's own. If it were simple i wouldn't be wasting three years on a degree in it.



it evolved. It wasnt narrow, it was about as flat and lateral as you could get, which is to say: doing really well at uni, requires a bit of study but mainly imagination.

i think it would apply to most disciplines. sorry i was hurrying when i did the OP. sorry i didnt clarify.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

My university technique was to lie in bed all day reading squillions of books and shagging my boyfriend. I also went out and got pissed a fair bit. I did quite well.

Edited to add, I actually had more than one boyfriend when I was at university!


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I think you also have a general animus toward anyone who brings attention upon themselves in an overt way, or who acknowledges their own success. I recognize this because there's a holdover of it in the Canadian mentality, there from our days as your colony.



you are on fire today, i love when these things get political! lol


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Errr, what does 'non-vanilla' mean?



Adventurous and non-traditional in ones' sexual activities.

Mind you, that's a pretty broad spectrum.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Errr, what does 'non-vanilla' mean?



The opposite of 'vanilla', which in this instance means 'bland'.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> He's a bit disappointed that I can't smell colours.



That's the one that really set you people off, isn't it?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> He's a bit disappointed that I can't smell colours.  He's quite glad about the lack of Doherty adoration though.



As are we all, or nearly all.


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> It makes no sense to get so mad about fluff - unless you are of a psychological constitution that is made uncomfortable by nonconforming things.






> Unfortunately, if 99.999% of Urban posters were to ignore idiocy, there would be few people left posting.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> My university technique was to lie in bed all day reading squillions of books and shagging my boyfriend. I also went out and got pissed a fair bit. I did quite well.



well done mate. well done everyone. this thread is very amusing now 

if theres anything to learn from this thread, i think its to drop hangups. they are null and void, unhelpful to us, theres no need for it, tis pointless.

anyways dudes i got to go! x


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> My university technique was to lie in bed all day reading squillions of books and shagging my boyfriend. I also went out and got pissed a fair bit. I did quite well.
> 
> Edited to add, I actually had more than one boyfriend when I was at university!



Serially or in parallel?


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> it evolved. It wasnt narrow, it was about as flat and lateral as you could get, which is to say: doing really well at uni, requires a bit of study but mainly imagination.
> 
> i think it would apply to most disciplines. sorry i was hurrying when i did the OP. sorry i didnt clarify.


Then your world view needs to evolve a lot more. Perhaps a good start would be to include any course that can be considered vocational. You didn't think.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Serially or in parallel?



Not saying.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> I was raised to speak out at all times, and be opinionated.


The general idea is to have opinions worth expressing.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Adventurous and non-traditional in ones' sexual activities.
> 
> Mind you, that's a pretty broad spectrum.




Thank you.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> The general idea is to have opinions worth expressing.



Ah.

Something has just occurred to me.

Perhaps, besides Bjork, she has Julie Burchill as a role model?

That might explain the worthiness or otherwise of the opinions, might it not?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Not saying.



That's your prerogative.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> The general idea is to have opinions worth expressing.



And also to be able to express them, concisely and coherently.

But maybe that's just to damn linear. Man.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> The general idea is to have opinions worth expressing.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Thank you.



Please, don't mention it.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I'm desparate for allies on urban75, and so must resort to flattering various people outside of the political fora and consciously schmooze them when I'm not planting my shill-driven propaganda about the place. In order to do this, I *bond* with various people who display *mercurial, illogical, flighty, and emotionally fragile* personalities, since they respond best to the flattery I spin. I like to think that by using simple flatteries and telling the *mercurial, illogical, flighty, and emotionally fragile* personalities here that they're *creative in a unique way, and quite intelligent* that they'll then back me up or rally supporters to my aid when I find myself cornered and confronted after posting my political propagandas. Of course, not everyone is fooled. Butchersapron and ViolentPanda are darned shrewd and have seen through me, and I wish they would sod off.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Bob_the_lost said:
			
		

> Then your world view needs to evolve a lot more. Perhaps a good start would be to include any course that can be considered vocational. You didn't think.



have started one of those this month, a masters. sorry cant say what its in as its job related. It is 100 per cent vocational. I want to evolve as much as possible.  

night.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> That's your prerogative.



 I wouldn't want to damage my vanilla reputation.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

>



*YOU* are a very bad person!!!


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)




----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

>




you forgot, "and maybe they'll send me a nudie pic"


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

at invisibleplanet


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> I wouldn't want to damage my vanilla reputation.



I wondered where the smell of custard was coming from!!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> you forgot, "and maybe they'll send me a nudie pic"



Bastard! 

You just made tea come out of my nostrils!


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> I think I'm _tres_ clever, but I'm unable to spell 'desperate' correctly. Maybe I should be more circumspect when trying to demonstrate my superiority.




..................


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Oh dear, poor old Johnny doesn't seem to realise that following humour with pedantry is kind of graceless.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> I wondered where the smell of custard was coming from!!



Is it a kind of yellowy violetty whooshy tingly kind of smell?


----------



## Hocus Eye. (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> have started one of those this month, a masters. sorry cant say what its in as its job related. It is 100 per cent vocational.* I want to evolve as much as possible.*
> 
> night.



_Evolve _is a strange word to use about your own development.  Do you mean that you might begin crawling on to land and breathing through lungs instead of gills?


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

"I'm sorry, could you repeat that?"


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> I say that Johnny Canuck's _desparate_ for allies on urban75, because I've made the assumption that he's driven by the same herd mentality that motivates me and my bohemian chums



..........................


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Is it a kind of yellowy violetty whooshy tingly kind of smell?



Yeah!! 

With petals of words forming frills of aquamarine!


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

I think this thread should be stickied and all new posters should read it before posting to avoid and misconceptions.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Oh dear, poor old Johnny doesn't seem to realise that following humour with pedantry is kind of graceless.



It's ok though, because I'm a feckless colonial. 

Invisible: repeat after me - 'd-e-s-p-e-r-a-t-e'.

Now off you go, back to your superiority.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> ..........................



Bohemian!

   

Hilarious!!


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Hocus Eye. said:
			
		

> _Evolve _is a strange word to use about your own development.  Do you mean that you might begin crawling on to land and breathing through lungs instead of gills?



why is the word 'evolve' weird? you dont only evolve once do you? you evolve every day in my opinion. 

bed time now


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> why is the word 'evolve' weird? you dont only evolve once do you? you evolve every day in my opinion.


Oh God


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> I think this thread should be stickied and all new posters should read it before posting to avoid and misconceptions.



Quite right too.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Sep 25, 2007)

desparate = desperate + disparate

meaning:  involving or employing extreme measures in an attempt to escape defeat after being discovered to have fundamentally incongruous elements


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> why is the word 'evolve' weird?



Because "develop" makes more sense, is more accurate, and has more utility.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Oh God



Good point.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Oh God



in terms of lifecycles like respiration yes. Not some poxy hippy psychobabble 'i'm evolving' shit, which is no doubt the first conclusion you jumped to.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Bohemian! Can I be bohemian _and_ vanilla? 

*worries*


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Sometimes, Groucho, sometimes when we are tested to our limits, only an appeal to a non-existent Creator can help us.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 25, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> desparate = desperate + disparate
> 
> meaning:  involving or employing extreme measures in an attempt to escape defeat after being discovered to have fundamentally incongruous elements



In which case, that's pretty good desparation right there.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> It's ok though, because I'm a feckless colonial.


Do you still have a shortage of women in the colonies, then? 

Poor chaps!


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Bohemian!
> 
> 
> 
> Hilarious!!



You mean, you actually caught the joke?



Nah, I doubt it.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Sep 25, 2007)

i is teh neologist


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> in terms of lifecycles like respiration yes. Not some poxy hippy psychobabble 'i'm evolving' shit, which is no doubt the first conclusion you jumped to.


And how does "respiration" "evolve"?


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Oh God




I don't think even God knows what Cheesy is going on about.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Bohemian! Can I be bohemian _and_ vanilla?
> 
> *worries*



Many of the Bloomsbury Set seem to have managed to pull it off.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Because "develop" makes more sense, is more accurate, and has more utility.



'learn' would have been okay too. I didnt use the conventional word all you would have. So  what? it makes sense, perfect sense to say evolve, which means developing anyway, its just a word that is misused in new age hippy shit wordage too much and you all fell for it too.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

anyway, back to the OP


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Oh God








"This. Is. OUTRAGEOUS!"


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Many of the Bloomsbury Set seem to have managed to pull it off.



I might have to change my tag.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> I don't think even God knows what Cheesy is going on about.



Who's she (G-d, not Cheesy)?


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Sometimes, Groucho, sometimes when we are tested to our limits, only an appeal to a non-existent Creator can help us.



And Bjork knows you are tested to your limits!


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> I didnt use the conventional word all you would have.


Hah, marvellous. It's like debating with Shakespeare.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> I might have to change my tag.



"Bohemian Vanihilist"?


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> And Bjork knows you are tested to your limits!


I quite like Bjork actually, but the dippy act gets on my nerves rather more than it would have twenty years ago.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> anyway, back to the OP



It's evolving

the thread....


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> 'learn' would have been okay too. I didnt use the conventional word all you would have. So  what? it makes sense, perfect sense to say evolve, which means developing anyway, its just a word that is misused in new age hippy shit wordage too much and you all fell for it too.



"Learn" wouldn't have been okay though, because the context of your use of "evolve" was clearly about professional self-development.

So roll those eyes at yourself, missy!


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> I quite like Bjork actually, but the dippy act gets on my nerves rather more than it would have twenty years ago.



I don't think she acts (except in Dancer in the Dark), and I don't think she is at all dippy


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> "Learn" wouldn't have been okay though, because the context of your use of "evolve" was clearly about professional self-development.
> 
> So roll those eyes at yourself, missy!



Well then you use 'learn' in your sentences!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Hah, marvellous. It's like debating with Shakespeare.



Except that it isn't.


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 25, 2007)

I got set a nice simple bit of coursework by one lecturer, easy marks. It bored me so much i didn't bother doing it. I got 0%.
I got set more simple stuff by another lecturer, i threw it away and did something on the same topic, but rather more complex. I got 99%.

Your hypothesis is bunkum.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> I don't think she is at all dippy


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Except that it isn't.




Very funny.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> My university technique was to lie in bed all day reading squillions of books and shagging my boyfriend. I also went out and got pissed a fair bit. I did quite well.



Where do I sign up


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Hah, marvellous. It's like debating with Shakespeare.



If this be magic, let it be an art


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)




----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> And how does "respiration" "evolve"?



Donna, i'm just gonna explain what i meant so dont go nuts on me here. Any life cycle or systematic cycle in the body is like a mini-evolution, IMO and could be viewed as such. Easily.  Maybe even as an underrated one. Evolution is definitely not confined solely to the prehistoric-man view IMO, as, in the same way the word 'evolve' neednt be confined to the hippy shit 'i'm evolving phoebe from friends' narrow streamlined view.

the word actually means develop, and what i was saying to bob was i want to develop and learn. I said evolve actually to project myself as someone at the very start, who knows nothing. I typed 'i know nothing, i wish to learn' and changed it to 'evolve' which was more succint for me, anyway....

Again, with references to those words, the associations of science and psychobabble are the kind of 'first reaction' conventions that occur to people who dont use their imaginations quickly enough, and fall for the cliche. well, not doing this IMO is really good for people/ good for your head and thought processes/ kind of what this thread is about too...


----------



## Madusa (Sep 25, 2007)

God, some people are so stuffy!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

>



That's not "dippy", that's "hippy", surely? I mean to say, there's flowers in her hair and everything!


----------



## catinthehat (Sep 25, 2007)

Well Im going to advising my students to bung University College Dublin on their UCAS forms.  Once they find out they can get a first by making things simple and just using their imagination they will be gagging.  Out with all that theory of surplus value nonsene, begone ideological state apparatus, flee phneomenology, ethnomethodology and all that puzzling stuff - just focus on some Bjork lyrics and bobs your uncle.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

see, donna? SEE?

unshackle yourself, man, before it's too late!!!


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)




----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> Donna, i'm just gonna explain what i meant so dont go nuts on me here. Any life cycle or systematic cycle in the body is like a mini-evolution, IMO and could be viewed as such. Easily.  Maybe even as an underrated one. Evolution is definitely not confined solely to the prehistoric-man view IMO, as, in the same way the word 'evolve' neednt be confined to the hippy shit 'i'm evolving phoebe from friends' narrow streamlined view.
> 
> the word actually means develop, and what i was saying to bob was i want to develop and learn. I said evolve actually to project myself as someone at the very start, who knows nothing. I typed 'i know nothing, i wish to learn' and changed it to 'evolve' which was more succint for me, anyway....
> 
> Again, with references to those words, the associations of science and psychobabble are the kind of 'first reaction' conventions that occur to people who dont use their imaginations quickly enough, and fall for the cliche. well, not doing this IMO is really good for people/ good for your head and thought processes/ kind of what this thread is about too...



Have you considered starting a religion? There was a real audience for this sort of stuff when I was young and it may still be there now. Or some sort of Von Daniken-type book.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

>



Swift could write.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Have you considered starting a religion? There was a real audience for this sort of stuff when I was young and it may still be there now. Or some sort of Von Daniken-type book.



The sort of thing you'd be at a loss to write?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Swift could write.



That isn't actually a picture of Swift.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> That's not "dippy", that's "hippy", surely? I mean to say, there's flowers in her hair and everything!



It is not foolish, it is dressing up for a stage(d) performance.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Madusa said:
			
		

> God, some people are so stuffy!



Fuck, I just tried to change my tag to Stuffed Bohemian Vanillaist, but its too long.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> Any life cycle or systematic cycle in the body is like a mini-evolution, IMO and could be viewed as such.


No it couldn't. Most life cycles basically involve a reproducing the same situation as they started with - breathing, for instance. They do not involve an alteration and if they do, it's as likely to be a degeneration as anything else.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> That isn't actually a picture of Swift.


No, really?


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> That isn't actually a picture of Swift.



Pedant!


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> That isn't actually a picture of Swift.



It is Gulliver though isn't it?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> No it couldn't. Most life cycles basically involve a reproducing the same situation as they started with - breathing, for instance. They do not involve an alteration and if they do, it's as likely to be a degeneration as anything else.



See, you're trying to do it, but it comes out the way a robot would conceive of it.

It's not inspired with light.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> I'm saying nowt.
> 
> It takes a lot of effort to be a bitter twat you know.
> 
> And all this being jealous of Cheesy is just eating me up inside.



Its frightening you know moomoo how intelligent us 'jealous' people are
But by non measured criteria. You know, Im told, by two diffrerent educational psychologists, (both used as expert witnesses) that the most intelligent people in society wouldnt get a 'first' because they are so intelligent that we asume things dont need explaining. We write or communicate as if various aspects of thought are a complete given fact.. 
Hence those with the maximum intelligence would, in fact achieve a lower degree, because a criteria needed to be set. Hence understanding has been overlooked as 'non understanding' by those who have met the criteria set down by acadmics who arent, in fact terribly clever. They are able to tick boxes because that is what they have been trained to use their brain to do...hence meeting measured criteria, if you are properly clever you usually assume those you communicate with or to are at least as intelligent as you...

Call it jealously if you will...

Others might say its dyslexic... or variants of...


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> It's not inspired with light.


Perhaps Cheesy should become a Breatharian.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> No, really?









I don't really mean to be picking on you: you're just a convenient example.


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

So can anyone summarise the emerging concensus on how one goes about getting good grades at university?


----------



## Groucho (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I don't really mean to be picking on you: you're just a convenient example.



That image is 'Forbiden'


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 25, 2007)

Groucho said:
			
		

> So can anyone summarise the emerging concensus on how one goes about getting good grades at university?


Not listening to cheesy.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

^^^^^^^^^ aint that just the truth


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Bob_the_lost said:
			
		

> Not listening to cheesy.



dunno what youse two are being so smug for. did either of you get firsts? why be so stroppy? at least i am qualified to answer it. I dont think getting it is a big deal either.

You get good grades by keeping things simple, quite short IMO, and having full faith in your convictions, ie: being brave to put forward your own ideas, in simple language, above all using a bit of imagination and never just learning a load of stuff from a book.

its the greatest lesson i ever learned. and it worked.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> at least i am qualified to answer it. I dont think getting it is a big deal either.



No, you _claim _you are qualified and the fact youve gone on and on about it, even started a thread about 'your method' shows you think its "a very big deal indeed"

Yet the proof is in what you post here where you appear fond of waffle, bullshit and dont seem terribly bright, your posts bear this out.

Go on, call us jealous


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> dunno what youse two are being so smug for. did either of you get firsts? why be so stroppy? at least i am qualified to answer it. I dont think getting it is a big deal either.
> 
> You get good grades by keeping things simple, quite short IMO, and having full faith in your convictions, ie: being brave to put forward your own ideas, in simple language, above all using a bit of imagination and never just learning a load of stuff from a book.
> 
> its the greatest lesson i ever learned. and it worked.



Oh good grief. I'm *so* jealous.


----------



## cesare (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> You get good grades by keeping things simple, quite short IMO, and having full faith in your convictions, ie: being brave to put forward your own ideas, in simple language, above all using a bit of imagination and never just learning a load of stuff from a book.



I didn't go to University, but where I (a) have achieved lower level qualifications, or (b) have been assessing or recruiting on the basis of written work/presentations ... I'd agree with you.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> No, you _claim _you are qualified and the fact youve gone on and on about it, even started a thread about 'your method' showd you think its a very big deal indeed"
> 
> Yet the proof is in what you post here where you appear fond of waffle, bullshit and dont seem terribly bright, your posts bear this out.
> 
> Go on, call us jealous



a projection of your own self, own own perceived failures and jealousy of another woman, a reflection of your own feelings about yourself. Sorry you feel that way. Bitterness will do fuck all for you. Its really bad, as is spite.

I am sorry you havent gotten what you want. That post has nothing to do with me at all you know. As i said: that post is a reflection of how you see yourself. shame for you.

night.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> a projection of your own self, own own perceived failures and *jealousy* of another woman, a reflection of your own feelings about yourself. Sorry you feel that way. Bitterness will do fuck all for you. Its really bad, as is spite.
> 
> I am sorry you havent gotten what you want. That post has nothing to do with me at all you know. As i said: that post is a reflection of how you see yourself. shame for you.
> 
> night.



Predictable, Cheesy. And might I say, linear.



And now I'm off to bed and book.and perhaps a non-vanilla fuck


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> You get good grades by keeping things simple, quite short IMO, and having full faith in your convictions, ie: being brave to put forward your own ideas, in simple language, above all using a bit of imagination and never just learning a load of stuff from a book.


You clearly know fuck all about computing. Nor engineering. Nor (at a guess) science or maths to name but a few. If i wanted to dabble in a subject then your advice might make some sense, i want more than that and thankfully most degrees demand it too.

Please take the effort to restrain your comments to the humanities subjects that you might have half a clue about.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> a projection of your own self, own own perceived failures and jealousy of another woman, a reflection of your own feelings about yourself. Sorry you feel that way. Bitterness will do fuck all for you. Its really bad, as is spite.
> 
> I am sorry you havent gotten what you want. That post has nothing to do with me at all you know. As i said: that post is a reflection of how you see yourself. shame for you.
> 
> night.



Oh but I have
The fact you judge yourself to be eminently more qualified to judge me bears out exactly what Ive said about you... 'your criteria against which you judge sucess'


sad, pathetic, even so insecure that you needed to judge and criticise my username the second you decided that this place was where you would assess your own self worth

Id say that says far more about you than me

and to end this post your two first degree cerificates, phos and student details... you know... if you believe you are what you say you are that will only take a few minutes

But you wont will you?


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Oh good grief. I'm *so* jealous.




(((((Chairman Meow)))))


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> I didn't go to University, but where I (a) have achieved lower level qualifications, or (b) have been assessing or recruiting on the basis of written work/presentations ... I'd agree with you.



thanks cesare. why people cant see that keeping things simple and using your imagination hugely amplify your study, i will never know.

because they dont do well themselves maybe?

or they are incapable of formulating new thoughts on a subject that aint been done before? they are scared and frightened. No courage in expressing their own convictions with confidence. Too lazy to styretch themselves to attempt to invent a new thing? to theorize it? Too scared, and scared of people who do it casually and say it casually like its no big deal. Thats me, nothing i do is a big deal and i dont consider myself any big deal whatsoever or in any way better. I always think though. I always take a risk. I dont just learn it, I think it. and that is what the folks are  uptight about, being afraid they dont have it in them to 'see.' i wonder if they do, i suspect that most do.

i suspect too, that examiners and professors want to actually read something unique, like a twist on a subject or a brand new analogy. No matter how crazy its worth gambling. Because if you express it right, and persuasively with evidence, it becomes a theory onto itself. Thats how some firsts are conjured. Its very simple. with courage and faith.

edit: my grammar


----------



## invisibleplanet (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> fuck off you. The moderators have seen my posts on here for years. I have tried to settle the problem with Dubs before and have asked him to put me on ignore, leave me the fuck alone, and bury the hatchet.
> 
> the mods have never complained to me.  I may be a bit mixed up/ or posts may seem arrogant (which is an internet persona kind of amplification - the things i say are true about my life though.
> 
> ...



what you said there is a reflection of how _you_ feel about you. 

no offence honestly!

e2a: those were your words cheesy, and you called me rude for using them _and_ implied I am a spiteful cunt! so, I'll repeat them again: what you said there is a reflection of how _you_ feel about you. no offence honestly!


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Bob_the_lost said:
			
		

> You clearly know fuck all about computing. Nor engineering. Nor (at a guess) science or maths to name but a few.
> 
> Please take the effort to restrain your comments to the humanities subjects that you might have half a clue about.



 have a degree in social sciences... I dont doubt she knows nothing about them either. In facty id be ashamed if it transpired that she was part of my cohort.
Id take an OU degree immediately ( because that would be below cheesy obviously)


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> a projection of your own self, own own perceived failures and jealousy of another woman, a reflection of your own feelings about yourself. Sorry you feel that way. Bitterness will do fuck all for you. Its really bad, as is spite.
> 
> I am sorry you havent gotten what you want. That post has nothing to do with me at all you know. As i said: that post is a reflection of how you see yourself. shame for you.
> 
> night.




I don't get the impression that LMHF feels any of that.  

But just in case I'm wrong and you're right.................


(((((LilMissHissyFit)))))


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> thanks cesare. why people cant see that keeping things simple and using your imagination hugely amplify your study, i will never know.
> 
> because they dont do well themselves maybe?
> 
> .



No, beacuse Caesare likes stirring it on any thread she can see an opening on
Not because thats any measurement of academic achievement( although she has to have intellect Ill give her that, only its used as well as you use yours- on a pile of useless wankery) but because, like you, she thinks its fun and she enjoys the attention


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> I don't get the impression that LMHF feels any of that.
> 
> But just in case I'm wrong and you're right.................
> 
> ...



Dont be DAFT... Cheesy being right about anything other than whats in her little head

pass me the mop,I just wet the floor


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> have a degree in social sciences... I dont doubt she knows nothing about them either. In facty id be ashamed if it transpired that she was part of my cohort.
> Id take an OU degree immediately ( because that would be below cheesy obviously)



oh stop it little miss please! 

have some dignity.


----------



## cesare (Sep 25, 2007)

Bob_the_lost said:
			
		

> You clearly know fuck all about computing. Nor engineering. Nor (at a guess) science or maths to name but a few.
> 
> Please take the effort to restrain your comments to the humanities subjects that you might have half a clue about.



Slight derail ... A while ago I had to design an assessment centre for a graduate intake. We were recruiting for management trainees for high-end retail, wholesale and manufacturing. It was quite alarming (but also interesting) to see the huge range of results across the graduates being assessed (the only ones invited were those with a 2:2 or higher).

Intellectual ability/qualification did not necessarily equate to practical application of those skills.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

CHEESYT M'dearI thought you were off to bed..
while you are still up... those DOUBLE first certificates if you dont mind, shouldnt be a problem no?


----------



## cesare (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> No, beacuse Caesare likes stirring it on any thread she can see an opening on
> Not because thats any measurement of academic achievement( although she has to have intellect Ill give her that, only its used as well as you use yours- on a pile of useless wankery) but because, like you, she thinks its fun and she enjoys the attention



Do fuck off. That's the only post I made on this thread, and it clearly wasn't stirring at all.

Bitch.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Dont be DAFT... Cheesy being right about anything other than whats in her little head
> 
> pass me the mop,I just wet the floor




S'okay, I've cleaned it for you.



Us non university types can be quite useful sometimes.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Youd have walked it at university, only you were busy doing something eminently more useful to society....


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> oh stop it little miss please!
> 
> have some dignity.




Oh Cheesy, you are a card!


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 25, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> Slight derail ... A while ago I had to design an assessment centre for a graduate intake. We were recruiting for management trainees for high-end retail, wholesale and manufacturing. It was quite alarming (but also interesting) to see the huge range of results across the graduates being assessed (the only ones invited were those with a 2:2 or higher).
> 
> Intellectual ability/qualification did not necessarily equate to practical application of those skills.


That's an entirely different rant, i'm still stuck on this idea that imagination and communications skills are all you need to get good grades


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

(((((((((((moomoo and me))))))))))


non university types


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Youd have walked it at university, only you were busy doing something eminently more useful to society....



That's patronizing.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> Do fuck off. That's the only post I made on this thread, and it clearly wasn't stirring at all.
> 
> Bitch.



Just my assessment over just about any and every thread worth pulling up a deckchair on... its quite a talent ill give you that. The debating version of the X factor...always in there whipping it up, never quite the star but ever present


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> oh stop it little miss please!
> 
> have some dignity.





con·de·scen·sion  (knd-snshn)
n.
1. The act of condescending or an instance of it.
2. Patronizingly superior behavior or attitude.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> Slight derail ... A while ago I had to design an assessment centre for a graduate intake. We were recruiting for management trainees for high-end retail, wholesale and manufacturing. It was quite alarming (but also interesting) to see the huge range of results across the graduates being assessed (the only ones invited were those with a 2:2 or higher).
> 
> Intellectual ability/qualification did not necessarily equate to practical application of those skills.



it doesnt i dont think

and bob, i think that showing originality/ imagination in computing/maths and keeping things simple and concise should help. Like inventing things, finding the quickest way to resolve the puzzle, of course it requires lateral thinking,  not just learning from a book. 

if everyone learned the book, how would the top students be diffrentiated? the difference is in the originality. I dont know for sure with maths and never claimed to on here. Someone ealier in this thread _did_ say imagination is necessary for maths by the way.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

mentalchik said:
			
		

> (((((((((((moomoo and me))))))))))
> 
> 
> non university types




Want to help me with the washing up?


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> That's patronizing.



Id call caring for someone with a debilitating and life limiting illness and raising three kids and then  not falling to bits an achievement rather than patronising. Of course it does depend whether you look down on people who do such things. I dont- hence Id seriously question your assesment of my comments as patronising.( have you any idea how straining that is???)

Unpaid carers save the economy financially approx £87 million per year, as well as raising the next generation Id say thats no small achievement


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Only if we can do it simply and with imagination moomoo


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

mentalchik said:
			
		

> con·de·scen·sion  (knd-snshn)
> n.
> 1. The act of condescending or an instance of it.
> 2. Patronizingly superior behavior or attitude.



she was trolling and had to be hushed. i am by no means condescending the girl. My response to her, by the way, was to defend myself against an unmitigated attack of her trolling anyway. She was quite nasty and deserved to get it back. Anyone would have answered it.

i feel, however, in saying that the criticisms she made are really about how she feels about herself, i have hit a raw nerve with her, based on my inkling that she is bitter about her perceived failures in her own life though, hence her aggression and attempted derails on here.

i wont take her seriously unless she has something to contribute to the thread. And can she please behave herself? thats why i said its embarassing for her. Totally unnecessary.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Id call caring for someone with a debilitating and life limiting illness and raising three kids and then  not falling to bits an achievement rather than patronising. Of course it does depend whether you look down on people who do such things. I dont- hence Id seriously question your assesment of my comments as patronising.( have you any idea how straining that is???)



Why would I look down on that?

We're on a thread where people are discussing [or were discussing] how to do well in university.

You say to a woman who stayed home with her family, something about 'doing something useful'. Saying that here, on this thread, is akin to patting her on the head and saying 'there's a good girl', imo, and is patronizing.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i feel, however, in saying that the criticisms she made are really about how she feels about herself, i have hit a raw nerve with her, based on my inkling that she is bitter about her perceived failures in her own life though, hence her aggression and attempted derails on here.



you're a fucking cunt.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Id call caring for someone with a debilitating and life limiting illness and raising three kids and then  not falling to bits an achievement rather than patronising. Of course it does depend whether you look down on people who do such things. I dont- hence Id seriously question your assesment of my comments as patronising.( have you any idea how straining that is???)
> 
> Unpaid carers save the economy financially approx £87 million per year, as well as raising the next generation Id say thats no small achievement



good for you. i find that hugely admirable and i mean that very sincerely.

you have sacrificed a lot, yes?

is that why you are slightly bitter though about the things you also could have achieved because of the sacrifices you made and therefore berating at me? its definitely hit a raw nerve with you so i suspect it might be. No one here is better than anyone either. we are all equals. We discussed talents earlier and I said IMO that emotional intelligence is more valuable than academic anyway.

sorry to be personal. I have taken loads of real personal stuff on this thread. No big deal. Tell me its none of my goddam business if you want to.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> she was trolling and had to be hushed. i am by no means condescending the girl. My response to her, by the way, was to defend myself against an unmitigated attack of her trolling anyway. She was quite nasty and deserved to get it back. Anyone would have answered it.
> 
> i feel, however, in saying that the criticisms she made are really about how she feels about herself, i have hit a raw nerve with her, based on my inkling that she is bitter about her perceived failures in her own life though, hence her aggression and attempted derails on here.
> 
> i wont take her seriously unless she has something to contribute to the thread. And can she please behave herself? thats why i said its embarassing for her. Totally unnecessary.




You really are a nasty piece of work aren't you.

I don't say this very often (actually this could be a first) but you are a cunt.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Im contibuting, not trolling
The fact you wont read and respond to the points Ive raised shows a limit to your intellect Cheesy..
Like I said, you can fit a preset criteria. However you cannot or will not back your assertion you have two firsts... nor can you argue with the points Ive made

I think that demonstrates a lack of useable intellect. I know which group id be choosing from if interviweing for a job... those who crow " Ive got a first" and those who say " I havent but I piss all over you"

Youve very ably demonstrated what a couple of people who interview have said about 'first' degree students... they think they are the dogs bollocks but, as you contend,need to keep things simple, are amongst the least articulate and adaptable of people when it comes to real skills, thinking on their feet and genuine intelligence

Nobody is going to give you three weeks to research and write an essay on how to solve a problem  in the real world. They want an answer in 5 mins max, suggestions, articulation

None of which you possess... so yeah youre right... keep it simple...


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> good for you. i find that hugely admirable and i mean that very sincerely.
> 
> you have sacrificed a lot, yes?
> 
> ...




Errr, she was talking about me you dozy bint.


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> if everyone learned the book, how would the top students be diffrentiated? the difference is in the originality. I dont know for sure with maths and never claimed to on here. Someone ealier in this thread _did_ say imagination is necessary for maths by the way.


The top students _are_ differentiated by having read the book. They are differentiated by the hours upon hours they spend writing, assessing and modifying code. They are differentiated because they know that using the DOM and name tag to access elements in javascript is no longer considered good practice and to use the id tag instead. They know this, not because they had a eureka moment whilst bathing, but because they studied the topic. The difference is in the quality of the work and the knowledge required to do it.

Imagination is good but it's not what makes a good programmer. The ability to communicate succinctly to non specialists is very useful for a tech support role, but it won't diagnose a failing hard drive.

Your posts insinuate that knowledge in itself is worthless or less use than imagination. Any subject in which that's true shouldn't be a uni degree imo.


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> good for you. i find that hugely admirable and i mean that very sincerely.
> 
> you have sacrificed a lot, yes?
> 
> ...




Jeebus you really are a knob !


con·de·scen·sion  (knd-snshn)
n.
1. The act of condescending or an instance of it.
2. Patronizingly superior behavior or attitude.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Errr, she was talking about me you dozy bint.



moomoo...i dont mind in the slightest when you call me a dozy bint


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> moomoo...i dont mind in the slightest when you call me a dozy bint




I called you a nasty cunt a few posts back.


Just in case you missed it.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> The fact you wont read and respond to the points Ive raised shows a limit to your intellect Cheesy..



i've NEVER seen her respond to a point. Over and over and over she gets queried or pulled up, over and over and over again she ignores it or deflects it or starts twatting on about how she can't explain it because she's really smart and we're not.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Nobody can go at it like a bunch of women.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

mentalchik said:
			
		

> Jeebus you really are a knob !
> 
> 
> con·de·scen·sion  (knd-snshn)
> ...



why do people do this posting thing with the dictionary 'explanation' in some attempt to 'prove' something? It doesnt prove anything, its like a child saying 'so there' it proves nothing mentalchik. 

come up with an idea instead. Itd make your posts more interesting. 

or an easy copout, take my post right now and call it condescending, so you dont have to think at all, but instead simply go - look! there, wasnt that patronising?


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> i've NEVER seen her respond to a point. Over and over and over she gets queried or pulled up, over and over and over again she ignores it or deflects it or starts twatting on about how she can't explain it because she's really smart and we're not.



well quite....


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

I'm putting my money on the housewives. They tend to have better tricep development.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> i've NEVER seen her respond to a point. Over and over and over she gets queried or pulled up, over and over and over again she ignores it or deflects it or starts twatting on about how she can't explain it because she's really smart and we're not.




Err, you forgot the bit where she is vile and abusive.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

...and no: Dub can't be an honorary woman for purposes of this fight.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I'm putting my money on the housewives. They tend to have better tricep development.




We're far too busy doing the washing up at the moment.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Err, you forgot the bit where she is vile and abusive.




i've pointed that out umpteen times before - the really snide nastiness, the abusive and threatening PMs she sends, the sneering condescension.  Some people get it. Others -mostly people either trying to knock points off me (like Dwyer) or slime round cheesy (like JC2) ignore it or refuse to believe it.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Err, you forgot the bit where she is vile and abusive.



*puts moomoo back on ignore*

i thought she was nice, urban, she doesnt think before she speaks much but i thought she was a softie? 

shes on ignore anyway, i found her very predictable/ boring.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> We're far too busy doing the washing up at the moment.



That's how you get the good triceps...


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> i've pointed that out umpteen times before - the really snide nastiness, the abusive and threatening PMs she sends, the sneering condescension.  Some people get it. Others -mostly people either trying to knock points off me (like Dwyer) or slime round cheesy (like JC2) ignore it or refuse to believe it.



Dub, don't worry about me; just focus on your real target: Cheesy.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Dub, don't worry about me; just focus on your real target: Cheesy.



awww...this thread was getting nice again still moomoo started using abusive language and lilmisshissyfit showed up  

i'm off to the DF, at least theres nice people there! 

Bye!


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

I punched Slime round cheesy into google and got this.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> *puts moomoo back on ignore*
> 
> i thought she was nice, urban, she doesnt think before she speaks much but i thought she was a softie?
> 
> shes on ignore anyway, i found her very predictable/ boring.




join the elite, moomoo - of people she has on ignore but still discusses constantly. it's ACE


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> *puts moomoo back on ignore*
> 
> i thought she was nice, urban, she doesnt think before she speaks much but i thought she was a softie?
> 
> shes on ignore anyway, i found her very predictable/ boring.


Shes joining me then, for daring to challenge you when you deigned to tell me I had to change my username because it "wasnt cool" after not posting here for years

Your a twat cheesy, there are people who love you, there are more who think you try and derride decent posters on here to try and gain kudos...
Those who know the real, pathetic, insecure you who has tried to define herself by what she thinks she can show here

needless to say your 'fanclub' will be back in the morning


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> why do people do this posting thing with the dictionary 'explanation' in some attempt to 'prove' something? It doesnt prove anything, its like a child saying 'so there' it proves nothing mentalchik.
> 
> come up with an idea instead. Itd make your posts more interesting.
> 
> or an easy copout, take my post right now and call it condescending, so you dont have to think at all, but instead simply go - look! there, wasnt that patronising?




(takes off rubber gloves)

sorry, i aint as clever as you, aint got the book learning love.

I'm not trying to prove anything, just making an observation like..........

and anyway, thought you were all ruthless and didn't take it seriously ?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> awww...this thread was getting nice again still moomoo started using abusive language and lilmisshissyfit showed up
> 
> i'm off to the DF, at least theres nice people there!
> 
> Bye!



Moomoo's ok.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Shes joining me then, for daring to challenge you when you deigned to tell me I had to change my username because it "wasnt cool" after not posting here for years.



What was your uncool user name?

Did you change it on cheesy's advice?


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> *puts moomoo back on ignore*
> 
> i thought she was nice, urban, she doesnt think before she speaks much but i thought she was a softie?
> 
> shes on ignore anyway, i found her very predictable/ boring.





Fuck me you are really nasty person !


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Moomoos a very cool bird
Shows how low you will stoop trying to diss her to score points really cheesy


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i'm off to the DF, at least i get an easy ride there!



i corrected it for you


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Bob_the_lost said:
			
		

> The top students _are_ differentiated by having read the book. They are differentiated by the hours upon hours they spend writing, assessing and modifying code. They are differentiated because they know that using the DOM and name tag to access elements in javascript is no longer considered good practice and to use the id tag instead. They know this, not because they had a eureka moment whilst bathing, but because they studied the topic. The difference is in the quality of the work and the knowledge required to do it.
> 
> Imagination is good but it's not what makes a good programmer. The ability to communicate succinctly to non specialists is very useful for a tech support role, but it won't diagnose a failing hard drive.
> 
> Your posts insinuate that knowledge in itself is worthless or less use than imagination. Any subject in which that's true shouldn't be a uni degree imo.



thanks for that bob. knowledge isnt worthless, its essential. I do think there is study required, a fair bit in fact but not every single thing for the humanities, you really need the simplicity of breaking down complex concepts, and imagination to make the breakthrough, based on knowledge. The knowledge is the foundation. It doesnt have to be fluent though like it might be for maths. And i didnt say that the exact same way applies to any subject. Another computing/ maths person is the right one to answer you. There was someone on here earlier


----------



## invisibleplanet (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> *puts moomoo back on ignore*
> 
> i thought she was nice, urban, she doesnt think before she speaks much but i thought she was a softie?
> 
> shes on ignore anyway, i found her very predictable/ boring.



perhaps if we call you _a cuntful of spite_ instead of _a spiteful cunt_?
it's simple, imaginative - a graphic twist on the usual presentation.

is it worth a *first*? do you think?


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 25, 2007)

How on earth is any of that related to making things simple then? It's totally unrelated.


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

(((((((((((moomoo on ignore)))))))))


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> What was your uncool user name?
> 
> Did you change it on cheesy's advice?



did I Bollocks... LIlmisshissyfit wasnt cool apparently... according to the very clever4 cheesy, she demanded I change it

Despite the fact it was dreamed up as an escape while enduring a 6 year olds tantrum which involved screaming and kicking on the floor and looking up and seeing a lilmiss+Mrmen toy on my monitor

But of course she is queen and I should change for her, lest I affect her sensibilities, she didnt know me of course, she hadnt posted here for about 5 years but she thought she could tell me what to do.
Like fuck
Ive never been anything different I own my words

Fuck her


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Moomoos a very cool bird
> Shows how low you will stoop trying to diss her to score points really cheesy



Moomoo's been through a bad time, but I don't think she wants to be viewed as a helpless victim incapable of fighting her own battles.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Moomoos a very cool bird
> Shows how low you will stoop trying to diss her to score points really cheesy



excuse me. absolutely wrong end of the stick. Totally. She is okay, but she trolls me, she started it a while back and sent me a nasty PM out of the blue, because I corrected her on a point she made about a story being covered in a newspaper, when it blatantly wouldnt. 

I corrected her politely or rather _suggested_ that it was unlikely it would be covered by a newspaper, and i explained why on a threadto her in public. It is conceivable that i was right on the point, being a journalist who has written for local papers before and seeing what goes on the pages. She for some mad reason, took it all personally though, and actually sent me a rotten PM, a personal attack, i didnt expect it in a million years!!! from moomoo! And i certainly didnt answer it.

she doesnt think before she speaks and has some very shallow views IMO. She is on ignore now, and i wont interact with her on urban again. 

And although i let most comments glide over my head, not only moomoo is sensitive from time to time you know.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> she doesnt think before she speaks and has some very shallow views IMO. She is on ignore now, and i wont interact with her on urban again.



you're a fucking cunt


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> did I Bollocks... LIlmisshissyfit wasnt cool apparently... according to the very clever4 cheesy, she demanded I change it
> 
> Despite the fact it was dreamed up as an escape while enduring a 6 year olds tantrum which involved screaming and kicking on the floor and looking up and seeing a lilmiss+Mrmen toy on my monitor



Oh, I thought you were the little miss hissy fit one because it sort of fits...


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> you're a fucking cunt



I'll bet you talk to women in real life that way too.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> excuse me. absolutely wrong end of the stick. Totally. She is okay, but she trolls me, she started it a while back and sent me a nasty PM out of the blue, because I corrected her on a point she made about a story being covered in a newspaper, when it blatantly wouldnt.
> 
> I corrected her politely or rather _suggested_ that it was unlikely it would be covered by a newspaper, and i explained why on a threadto her in public. It is conceivable that i was right on the point, being a journalist who has written for local papers before and seeing what goes on the pages. She for some mad reason, took it all personally though, and actually sent me a rotten PM, a personal attack, i didnt expect it in a million years!!! from moomoo! And i certainly didnt answer it.
> 
> ...



what you said there is a reflection of how you feel about you. 

no offence honestly!


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I'll bet you talk to women in real life that way too.




thankfully, i've never met someone like cheesy in real life.

Anyway, what's your point. Should I insult a female differently because she is female?

hmm...


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> did I Bollocks... LIlmisshissyfit wasnt cool apparently... according to the very clever4 cheesy, she demanded I change it
> 
> Despite the fact it was dreamed up as an escape while enduring a 6 year olds tantrum which involved screaming and kicking on the floor and looking up and seeing a lilmiss+Mrmen toy on my monitor
> 
> ...




i was wrong there and drunk and sorry. I got the reasons for your name wrong and apologised *profusely* for it and you have been taking it personally since, and dbeing a right old bitch to me ever since, evinced on this thread in particular.

sad.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

invisibleplanet said:
			
		

> what you said there is a reflection of how you feel about you.
> 
> no offence honestly!



it isnt mate. I would not send someone a horrible PM telling them they are 'a laughing stock' as moomoo did. Out of nowhere. I dont get paranoid like that if someone corrects me on a point where they know more than me. I am willing to go 'ok.'

and moomoo, just for the record, i couldnt give a fuck about what people think of me, i think you care far too much about it, fair enough. I have not been nasty to her at all. That PM was rotten, and uncalled for.

anyways.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> thankfully, i've never met someone like cheesy in real life.
> 
> Anyway, what's your point. Should I insult a female differently because she is female?
> 
> hmm...



I think it pays to choose words carefully before insulting anyone, but yes, harsh words spoken by a larger male to a female can be almost a precursor to agression, or can be viewed that way by a woman.


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Good lord, 23 pages !


It must be gratifying having all this attention !


Personally it's been  for me (got rid of a lot of tension) and way better than the tele for company !


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> She for some mad reason, took it all personally though, and actually sent me a rotten PM, a personal attack, i didnt expect it in a million years!!! from moomoo! And i certainly didnt answer it.



  

You are a liar.  

Only in your dreams would I send you a pm except to reply out of politeness to you!


Forward me a copy of this pm that I supposedly sent you.


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I think it pays to choose words carefully before insulting anyone, but yes, harsh words spoken by a larger male to a female can be almost a precursor to agression, or can be viewed that way by a woman.



he takes it all very seriously and genuinely means his spite. That is why i have him on ignore, because I find his hatefulness frightening. I mean that - people like him scare the hell out of me.


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 25, 2007)

I got a good rant or three out the way and remembered just how much fun my course is when i ignore the lecturers


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

APPOLOGISE Profusely cheesy??? Like shit you have

Hint- dont go near the internet when drunk

as for the rest youve posted since, including and particularly the way youev derrided some really decent people on here

I think its you thats sad, a sad, insecure bitter twisted CUNT

now off you go, open that wrap, sniff it up your nose, go on...open that bottle

There are people on here youve tried to belittle who have done things a million times more worthwhile that write some shit in a magazine, things that matter, things you cant even comprehend... because you you you is far more important to cheesy( like piece of paper with a FIRST on ALLEDGEDLY) than things that actually make a difference


----------



## Monkeygrinder's Organ (Sep 25, 2007)

<believes moomoo>


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I think it pays to choose words carefully before insulting anyone, but yes, harsh words spoken by a larger male to a female can be almost a precursor to agression, or can be viewed that way by a woman.




oh shut up, johnny - your chivalry is terribly unconvincing.


----------



## Treebeak (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> Thats my contention.



23 pages!!!??!! 

All I can say is, having not read 23 pages of posts (keeping it simple, innit) I have to agree. I got a first by doing coursework which was simple but which I knew I had an interest in, that I wouldnt get bored in, but which I knew would get me good marks cos I understood what I was talking about in an academic way. 

And that's it!


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> he takes it all very seriously and genuinely means his spite. That is why i have him on ignore, because I find his hatefulness frightening. I mean that - people like him scare the hell out of me.




and yet you can't stop talking about me can you?

anyway, back to the OP


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

mentalchik said:
			
		

> Good lord, 23 pages !
> 
> 
> It must be gratifying having all this attention !
> ...



i would definitely have preferred a debate on the OP rather than moomoo and dubversions hateful remarks to be honest (thanks guys). I specifically object to hateful, personal digs on people

and spiteful PMs moomoo. You are on ignore now. 

i am off now. Tis only the internet.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> You are a liar.
> 
> Only in your dreams would I send you a pm except to reply out of politeness to you!
> 
> ...



I think she should post it to me, dub, monkeygringersorgan,mentalchick and JC2 too

in fairness like


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> I specifically object to hateful, personal digs on people



you post them all the time, you hypocritical shit


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Well when she sends it to me I will be more than happy to apologise.


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> and yet you can't stop talking about me can you?
> 
> anyway, back to the OP





Ah but we all fancy the bad boy dubs !


 





> and spiteful PMs moomoo. You are on ignore now.




how convenient!


but after all tis only the internet !


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> You are on ignore now.




Gutted. 

And still waiting...............


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> I think she should post it to me, dub, monkeygringersorgan,mentalchick and JC2 too
> 
> in fairness like




jesus. christ. Moomoo, you remember that PM. It was after i posted my thread about my mate being done for dealing green, you said the house would be covered in a story in a local paper. I suggested something like 'thats unlikely, it would be covered' with no offence intended to you.

and then i got this crazy Pm from you which referred to me being a 'laughing stock' I was stunned. I didnt expect it from you. I didnt want to upset you either or feed it so i didnt answer you.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i would definitely have preferred a debate on the OP rather than moomoo and dubversions hateful remarks to be honest (thanks guys). I specifically object to hateful, personal digs on people
> 
> and spiteful PMs moomoo. You are on ignore now.
> 
> i am off now. Tis only the internet.



You were off to bed an hour ago... you know... when I asked you for proof of your TWO firsts.

You kow that FIRST in sociology and your FISRT in journalism

Id hate to think we were keeping you up like

both of which you believe makes you superior to everone else here and both of which makes you think makes it ok to insult people and call the jealous and lacking, no matter what they did with their time while you 'alldgely ' spent years with your head in a book...

Now if you wouldnt mind once youve had a kip....... those cerificates and juistiofy exactly your achievements supercede those of a woman who cared for a dying husband and raised three children and one who worked three jobs, did a degree and cared for a suicidal 10 year old while fighting a legal battle to get her the education she needed
plus whatever it is dub and mentalchick and anyone else would like to throw into the mix

WERE WAITING


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Thought moomoo was on ignore like ?


for ever


----------



## untethered (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> You get good grades by keeping things simple, quite short IMO, and having full faith in your convictions, ie: being brave to put forward your own ideas, in simple language, above all using a bit of imagination and never just learning a load of stuff from a book.
> 
> its the greatest lesson i ever learned. and it worked.



The precondition to having the courage of one's convictions is to have the discernment to know when it's worth going public with them and when it's worth spending more time trying to understand your subject.

There seems to be some kind of reaction against the perceived educational atmosphere of decades ago where supposedly perfection was expected and the slightest deviation from it was punished with humiliation or worse.

Now, it seems that having an opinion and having the confidence to express it is sufficient. This fits in well with modern relativism. When nothing is inherently true, the only way to distinguish between competing claims to truth is to evaluate the confidence and panache of their proponents.

As others have already mentioned, I think you're extrapolating too far from your own experience on your particular course. The way to get a good grade at university, it seems, is to choose a subject where chutzpah and style count for more than substance and where "radical", novel thinking is valued, no matter how poorly it may have been thought through.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

-mentalchick said:
			
		

> Thought moomoo was on ignore like ?
> 
> 
> for ever



and me... supposedly
and dub...
and probably you too

*wibble*


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> I think she should post it to me, dub, monkeygringersorgan,mentalchick and JC2 too
> 
> in fairness like



i deleted it straight away and didnt answer it. It ended with her making some bizarre reference to me being a 'laughing stock' though and when i read it i sat there shaking my head going 'what the fuck is she on about?'

anyways, she sent it, i was not expecting it, a bit disgusted like but actually didnt rise to it cos who needs that jip? i just deleted it.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

anyway, back to the OP


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> jesus. christ. Moomoo, you remember that PM. It was after i posted my thread about my mate being done for dealing green, you said the house would be covered in a story in a local paper. I suggested something like 'thats unlikely, it would be covered' with no offence intended to you.
> 
> and then i got this crazy Pm from you which referred to me being a 'laughing stock' I was stunned. I didnt expect it from you. I didnt want to upset you either or feed it so i didnt answer you.




Sorry, you have lost me.   

The only pm I ever remember receiving from you is one where you were quite obviously very drunk and I wouldn't dream of posting up the details.  

Pm's are, after all, private.  

I honestly have no idea what you are talking about.  But if there is something I have forgotten and you would like to forward the pm in question to me then I would be quite willing to apologise if I was out of order.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

CHEESY-convenient that, recieve a PM which 'upset you so' and you delete it immediately despite wanting to rely on it??
You are a bullshitter cheesy, an addicted, insecure nomark who does people down to make herself feel better- and chooses people she things are an easy target but in doing so chooses poorly, chooses somene who has been doing something fucking worhwile- more tyhan you will ever encounter hopefully- moomoo of all people

fuck off


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i deleted it straight away and didnt answer it. It ended with her making some bizarre reference to me being a 'laughing stock' though and when i read it i sat there shaking my head going 'what the fuck is she on about?'
> 
> anyways, she sent it, i was not expecting it, a bit disgusted like but actually didnt rise to it cos who needs that jip? i just deleted it.




so what about all the abusive PMs you've sent, eh, cheesy?


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

mentalchik said:
			
		

> Thought moomoo was on ignore like ?
> 
> 
> for ever




(((((me)))))


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> and me... supposedly
> and dub...
> and probably you too
> 
> *wibble*




Oooooh have never been on ignore !


even simply or with imagination !


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> You were off to bed an hour ago... you know... when I asked you for proof of your TWO firsts.
> 
> You kow that FIRST in sociology and your FISRT in journalism
> 
> ...



i didnt get a first in jounalism.

I never said that ones achievements in life were in any way comparable to academia - they are not. peoples personal lives have nothing to do with anything on this thread. youre fishing for something that isnt there.

i have no idea of what peoples lives are, this thread has absolutely nothing to do with what you have said there, nothing whatsoever. 

it is about achieving good grades and how to do it, how people do it. Nothing more.


----------



## invisibleplanet (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> (((((me)))))




((((((((((((((((moomoo))))))))))))))))


----------



## Sweet FA (Sep 25, 2007)

I don't believe a word CP says to be honest. The way's she's acted on this thread (well the last dozen or so pages I've read) is typical. 

I've never seen an ounce of proof to back up any of the claims she makes about anything. Plus the fact her command of English is fucking atrocious (down to her stream of consciousness writing apparently); weird for someone who supposedly uses the language on a daily basis in an environment where precision and accuracy are paramount. You'd think it was a habit to write cogently if you did it for a living.

What always surprises me is when she says things like she did re: moomoo's pm. I mean; that's so easily provable isn't it? Has she really just made that up completely? It's weird.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

I'm still waiting.  

If you can't come up with the pm, an apology will do.

By pm if you like.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

CHEESYPOOF said:
			
		

> i didnt get a first in jounalism.
> 
> I never said that ones achievements in life were in any way comparable to academia - they are not. peoples personal lives have nothing to do with anything on this thread. youre fishing for something that isnt there.
> 
> ...




ahem.... there you go again... abuses people. makes claims
NO PROOF you did say "The other one" when talking about firsts... that you have TWO firsts- one on journalism, one in sociology

surely if you are so proud, scanning in your first degree cerificates, a nice portrait, cap and gown wont be a problem for you??


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> CHEESY-convenient that, recieve a PM which 'upset you so' and you delete it immediately despite wanting to rely on it??
> You are a bullshitter cheesy, an addicted, insecure nomark who does people down to make herself feel better- and chooses people she things are an easy target but in doing so chooses poorly, chooses somene who has been doing something fucking worhwile- more tyhan you will ever encounter hopefully- moomoo of all people
> 
> fuck off



i would NEVER pick on a fucking target on here. Moomoo picked on me you know!!!! 

i swear to god. I didnt answer that PM and have never instigated a trolling her on here. Ever.

i merely suggested to her that something wouldnt be published in a paper. FFS


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> A
> now off you go, open that wrap, sniff it up your nose, go on...open that bottle



You never done those things?


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> dunno what youse two are being so smug for. did either of you get firsts? why be so stroppy? at least i am qualified to answer it. I dont think getting it is a big deal either.


I believe that by these bizarre criteria, I'm mildly more qualififed than you, Ms. Poof 

I agree 400% with moomoo and bob an ting.

Therefore, they are righter? Hmmm.

[/playground]


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

she's a fraud and a spiteful little bitch, and always has been. I'm just relieved that other people are working it out.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i would NEVER pick on a fucking target on here. Moomoo picked on me you know!!!!
> 
> i swear to god. I didnt answer that PM and have never instigated a trolling her on here. Ever.
> 
> i merely suggested to her that something wouldnt be published in a paper. FFS




Still waiting.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> oh shut up, johnny - your chivalry is terribly unconvincing.



pwned


----------



## Cheesypoof (Sep 25, 2007)

this thread has become a witchunt out for my blood.

i am most definitely off.

for good from this thread. its become terrible and i aint putting up with this shit.

bye.


----------



## untethered (Sep 25, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Unpaid carers save the economy financially approx £87 million per year, as well as raising the next generation Id say thats no small achievement



I don't dispute the social value of the work that unpaid carers do, but I tend to treat statistics like these with the same scepticism as the ones about the amount of money that's apparently lost to the music industry due to downloading.

These statistics are based on an entirely hypothetical estimate of demand at a certain price. However, such things weren't demanded in the market, so the price cannot be known.

If what you do has social value, the best thing to do is to speak of it in those terms. If you want to boil it down to economics, you may rapidly find that your activity is "worth less" than dealing arms or manufacturing rivets, which would be a gross oversimplification.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 25, 2007)

(@ cheesy)

so you keep saying.

anyway, back to the OP


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 25, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> this thread has become a witchunt out for my blood.
> 
> i am most definitely off.
> 
> ...





Yeah but at least it had imagination !


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

opened the bottle sure

opened that wrap, no actually I havent ,much less after making unsubstantiatied allegations on a messageboard about someone who deserves a whole lot better

Might be better if she did and confined herself to her own business than doing down other people who dont bloody deserve her bullshit


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> so what about all the abusive PMs you've sent, eh, cheesy?



Let's take a straw poll: Who has received an abusive email from Cheesy?

I'll go first: not me.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 25, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> I'm still waiting.
> 
> If you can't come up with the pm, an apology will do.
> 
> By pm if you like.



Putting pms in the public threads is a bannable offence, I believe.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> I don't dispute the social value of the work that unpaid carers do, but I tend to treat statistics like these with the same scepticism as the ones about the amount of money that's apparently lost to the music industry due to downloading.
> 
> These statistics are based on an entirely hypothetical estimate of demand at a certain price. However, such things weren't demanded in the market, so the price cannot be known.
> 
> If what you do has social value, the best thing to do is to speak of it in those terms. If you want to boil it down to economics, you may rapidly find that your activity is "worth less" than dealing arms or manufacturing rivets, which would be a gross oversimplification.



well I dont disgree with you, I feel the 'invaluable' has more value than economics but there are those who will scream "LINK" "STATS" which is why I placed it purely econimic terms
after all who can put a value on being cared for by people who love you and want you to be happy?


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 25, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Let's take a straw poll: Who has received an abusive email from Cheesy?
> 
> I'll go first: not me.



Semi abusive, she placed most of the abuse in the public domain


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> she's a fraud and a spiteful little bitch, and always has been. I'm just relieved that other people are working it out.



She's been taking stick from about twenty people, on lots of threads, for months.


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

This thread is so much like this it's scary:


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Semi abusive, she placed most of the abuse in the public domain



So is that a 'yes' or a 'no'?


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Let's take a straw poll: Who has received an abusive email from Cheesy?
> 
> I'll go first: not me.




well if prior threads are to be believed, quite a lot of people JC2. but let's not let the truth interfere with your spirited campaign on cheesy's behalf, motivated as it is by nothing more than a desire to see her treated fairly.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> So is that a 'yes' or a 'no'?




I couldn't possibly say. 

Not if it's a bannable offence. 



Still waiting for an apology btw Cheesy.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> well if prior threads are to be believed, quite a lot of people JC2. but let's not let the truth interfere with your spirited campaign on cheesy's behalf, motivated as it is by nothing more than a desire to see her treated fairly.



Fair treatment: what a concept.


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> This thread is so much like this it's scary:



No tits jokes yet.


----------



## mentalchik (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> She's been taking stick from about twenty people, on lots of threads, for months.




Johnny you been taking abuse from loadsa peeps on here for years...........it don't bother you too much !


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> She's been taking stick from about twenty people, on lots of threads, for months.




all of whom, presumably, are simply DREADFUL human beings who - entirely without provocation - have taken against poor little cheesy?

get a fucking grip, JC2, you're starting to make an arse of yourself


----------



## moomoo (Sep 26, 2007)

Oh well, looks like I'm not going to get my apology.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> So is that a 'yes' or a 'no'?


Id say yeah but not a seriousky abusive 'CUNT' PM.,more a 

"cheesy you fucking prune, fuck off" PM


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> I couldn't possibly say.
> 
> Not if it's a bannable offence.



You can say, you just can't post it up.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 26, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Oh well, looks like I'm not going to get my apology.



After the third try shes gone to bed... hard work this going to bed shit


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Just my assessment over just about any and every thread worth pulling up a deckchair on... its quite a talent ill give you that. The debating version of the X factor...always in there whipping it up, never quite the star but ever present



Whilst you - you paragon of virtue - content yourself by stalking Portia's real name and whereabouts; telling a kid that's having a rough time on New Deal to get a job; and interminably popping up on Cheesypoof's threads to have a go at her & anyone that agrees with anything she says.

Lovely.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Id say yeah but not a seriousky abusive 'CUNT' PM.,more a
> 
> "cheesy you fucking prune, fuck off" PM



The question wasn't 'did you send an abusive pm to cheesy', it was 'have you received an abusive pm from cheesy'.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 26, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i didnt get a first in jounalism.


The second PM I ever got from you was gwan every which way but loose about your first in _journalism,_ cheesy  Very explicitly journalism. At a university somewhere just North of Manchester. I'm pretty sure I can remember which one 

I used ignore after a string of frankly bizarre allegations about wholly non-existent PMs posted when you were pissed off about something entirely unrelated. And the prompt receipt of an overnight barrage of somewhat confusing none-too-understandable largely-capitalised invective PMs 

Even though I - admittedly - sometimes can't resist a peek at your posts and do tend to try and retain a healthy smidgen of good behaviour in there _sometimes_, teh ignurrz does AT LEAST keep away the unpredictable vitriolic, abusive, capitalised PMs 

Oh, and - of course - as moomoo's discovering the principle of ATTACK IS DEFEND!!! I AM NEVER WRONG!!! REPLY TO EVERYTHING WITH DEFLECTION AND MORE ABUSE


----------



## moomoo (Sep 26, 2007)

Right, I know she will be reading this so......

Last chance.

Still waiting for an apology Cheesy.

And I know I'm not on ignore coz I just sent her a 'non abusive' pm.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 26, 2007)

Portia?? She lives near me, I posted her some info by PM, usable, proper help type info aboyt people who could help her.... for someone who was falling to bits mentally and I think you might find she posted me a thank you for caring thread..so yeah 'stalking' if you like, she might see it differently

and as for someone who was on "new deal" who posted that it was inconvenient because he could go to the gym nor take lots of ketamine"
yeah get a job( if its as simple as that youve got a choice), sinnce he posted that the situation wasnt quite that simple and he wants to get a qualificatiob... have I commented ? I think you'll find I havent... 

As for you who appears every time there is some 'action to be had, whips it up and little to add, just lots of agro to be whipped up...like I said, the X factor of not so subtle trolls


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 26, 2007)

[QUOTE-JC2][The question wasn't 'did you send an abusive pm to cheesy', it was 'have you received an abusive pm from cheesy'./QUOTE]
Thats not what I replied- just to make it clear
Those were my thoughts on receiving an abusive PM from cheesy

in other words, not worth responding to, more a singger and a "fuccckksakes"


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> [QUOTE-JC2][The question wasn't 'did you send an abusive pm to cheesy', it was 'have you received an abusive pm from cheesy'./QUOTE]
> Thats not what I replied- just to make it clear
> Those were my thoughts on receiving an abusive PM from cheesy
> 
> in other words, not worth responding to, more a singger and a "fuccckksakes"



So your answer is 'yes'?


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 26, 2007)

I recieved, I did not reply wasnt seriously abiusive, wasnt worth me replying. I actually felt sorry for her, sending me a PM because my user name 'annoyed and needed changing';


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> I recieved, I did not reply wasnt seriously abiusive, wasnt worth me replying. I actually felt sorry for her, sending me a PM because my user name 'annoyed and needed changing';



Not seriously abusive.

Come on, commit: yes or no.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Let's take a straw poll: Who has received an abusive email from Cheesy?
> 
> I'll go first: not me.



I received some PMs from Cheesy after I'd had a massive row with her about James Joyce, which we defused alright on the thread. But they weren't abusive at all. Friendly and sociable.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 26, 2007)

Yeah, but I laughed

I mean, wouldnt you, if you recieved a long PM, littered with expletives, explaining in detail why "Johnny Cannuck2" annoyed them ( to the point of posting a thread and typing said long PM)


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Yeah, but I laughed
> 
> I mean, wouldnt you, if you recieved a long PM, littered with expletives, explaining in detail why "Johnny Cannuck2" annoyed them ( to the point of posting a thread and typing said long PM)



I'd think it was dumb, not abusive.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 26, 2007)

I thought it was both- then I laughed


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> I thought it was both- then I laughed



I'm not even too sure what abusive means.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

Actually, that's not true. If someone called me nigger in a pm, that would be abusive.

I received a nasty pm from a poster here, not too long after I started. He was really mad at me. Since then, we've made amends, and get along fine, for the most part.

In my whole time here, that's the only really nasty pm I've received, other than the one with the links to all this really bizarre gay porn, and weird anal pictures.

If I told you who sent that one, you'd just die.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Portia?? She lives near me, I posted her some info by PM, usable, proper help type info aboyt people who could help her.... for someone who was falling to bits mentally and I think you might find she posted me a thank you for caring thread..so yeah 'stalking' if you like, she might see it differently
> 
> and as for someone who was on "new deal" who posted that it was inconvenient because he could go to the gym nor take lots of ketamine"
> yeah get a job( if its as simple as that youve got a choice), sinnce he posted that the situation wasnt quite that simple and he wants to get a qualificatiob... have I commented ? I think you'll find I havent...
> ...



 I've still got unopened PMs sent from you from that Portia incident, sent in your hysteria  

*debates whether to post em and get another 24 hour banning*

Maybe not ... perhaps I'll just forward them


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 26, 2007)

Anyone who can put up with this level of abuse, from this many people at one time, and still come out swinging has my complete respect.


----------



## Madusa (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Anyone who can put up with this level of abuse, from this many people at one time, and still come out swinging has my complete respect.



Nah she will.  

Fuck, this thread is vitriol city. Nice one, guys.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Actually, that's not true. If someone called me nigger in a pm, that would be abusive.
> 
> I received a nasty pm from a poster here, not too long after I started. He was really mad at me. Since then, we've made amends, and get along fine, for the most part.
> 
> ...



Gay porn and anal pictures???  wasnt one of the mods I take it?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Gay porn and anal pictures???  wasnt one of the mods I take it?



No, but a prolific poster.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> This fits in well with modern relativism. When nothing is inherently true, the only way to distinguish between competing claims to truth is to evaluate the confidence and panache of their proponents.


This isn't true.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> i am by no means condescending the girl


Condescend is not a transitive verb.


----------



## Madusa (Sep 26, 2007)

Oh whatever, Donna. Dont start this shit again... arent you OLD enough to know better? 

Jeez!


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

Madusa said:
			
		

> Oh whatever, Donna. Dont start this shit again... arent you OLD enough to know better?


Old enough, yeah, but is age the only criterion?


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> This isn't true.



I'm not convinced. Your presentation lacks _true_ confidence and panache.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

It is concise and accurate.


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> It is concise and accurate.



That's not good enough, sorry.

I want to be entertained.

I want to be inspired.

I want to like you.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

Few do, and they're probably wrong.


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

At least you're a good judge of lack of character.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 26, 2007)

Cam someeone give me a shout when the abusive pms that cheesy has sent out start getting posted up please? Ta


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 26, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Cam someeone give me a shout when the abusive pms that cheesy has sent out start getting posted up please? Ta




Well she's only told me to go and shoot myself on the boards. Does it not count if its not by PM?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 26, 2007)

That was that bizzarre Irish thread wasn't it?


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 26, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> That was that bizzarre Irish thread wasn't it?



It was indeed.   Cheesy was being all paramilitary on my ass.


----------



## Pingu (Sep 26, 2007)

sometimes people ask me why I stopped taking drugs.

wel mainly it was the drugs testing but I can clearly see another reason right here on this thread.

that could have been me...

contemplates sound of ...wu


----------



## Kanda (Sep 26, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Oh well, looks like I'm not going to get my apology.



Sorry Moomoo, for everything.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 26, 2007)

Kanda said:
			
		

> Sorry Moomoo, for everything.


"The man who apologises for everything apologises for nothing" apparently.

I can't remember who first said that, but the bloke who first told me was busy vomiting on my shoes.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 26, 2007)

Kanda said:
			
		

> Sorry Moomoo, for everything.




Thanks chick.

I think that is the only one I'm going to get.


----------



## Kanda (Sep 26, 2007)

You can now apologise for calling me a chick...!!!


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 26, 2007)

Can the thread title be changed to 'You get good grades in university by making things up' please?


----------



## moomoo (Sep 26, 2007)

Kanda said:
			
		

> You can now apologise for calling me a chick...!!!




Sorry for calling you a chick, duck.


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Can the thread title be changed to 'You get good grades in university by making things up' please?



How about, the best way to get a first is to lie on your CV?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Id call caring for someone with a debilitating and life limiting illness and raising three kids and then  not falling to bits an achievement rather than patronising. Of course it does depend whether you look down on people who do such things. I dont- hence Id seriously question your assesment of my comments as patronising.( have you any idea how straining that is???)
> 
> Unpaid carers save the economy financially approx £87 million per year, as well as raising the next generation Id say thats no small achievement



*£87BILLION*, actually.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> she was trolling and had to be hushed. i am by no means condescending the girl.



Fucking quoted for posterity!!


----------



## tufty79 (Sep 26, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> "The man who apologises for everything apologises for nothing" apparently.



 (serial apologist here)




			
				my mate noel said:
			
		

> "never apologise - it's a sign of weakness"





oh noes! conflictingish advices!

as for this thread - jeebus

*hides under desk*


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> *£87BILLION*, actually.



It's still a bogus statistic.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

Bob_the_lost said:
			
		

> The top students _are_ differentiated by having read the book. They are differentiated by the hours upon hours they spend writing, assessing and modifying code. They are differentiated because they know that using the DOM and name tag to access elements in javascript is no longer considered good practice and to use the id tag instead. They know this, not because they had a eureka moment whilst bathing, but because they studied the topic. The difference is in the quality of the work and the knowledge required to do it.
> 
> Imagination is good but it's not what makes a good programmer. The ability to communicate succinctly to non specialists is very useful for a tech support role, but it won't diagnose a failing hard drive.
> 
> Your posts insinuate that knowledge in itself is worthless or less use than imagination. Any subject in which that's true shouldn't be a uni degree imo.



IME and with two bachelors' degree (done 20 yrs apart), one a Bsc (hons) and the other a BA (hons) so I can judge from both a science and a humanities standpoint, you're on the button. Imagination and the ability to synthesise and communicate ideas *are* important, but the use you can put those two traits to is fundamentally based on *knowing your subject*, and that requires that there "book-learning", and plenty of it.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> It's still a bogus statistic.



No, it's a quantified cost produced by the charity "CarersUK" using a formula they've set out somewhere on the Princess Royal Trust for Carers website.


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> No, it's a quantified cost produced by the charity "CarersUK" using a formula they've set out somewhere on the Princess Royal Trust for Carers website.



Is this magic formula able to determine the cost of an hour of a carer's time in a market that doesn't exist?


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 26, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Sorry for calling you a chick, duck.


Good thing you didn't spoonerise that, moomoo


----------



## moomoo (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> *£87BILLION*, actually.




Whatever the official figures, I get £95 odd pounds a week for being a widow with children and I got £54 iirc per week for caring for someone 24 /7.

Something seriously amiss in the system imo.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 26, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> Good thing you didn't spoonerise that, moomoo


PMSL


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> I don't dispute the social value of the work that unpaid carers do, but I tend to treat statistics like these with the same scepticism as the ones about the amount of money that's apparently lost to the music industry due to downloading.
> 
> These statistics are based on an entirely hypothetical estimate of demand at a certain price. However, such things weren't demanded in the market, so the price cannot be known.
> 
> If what you do has social value, the best thing to do is to speak of it in those terms. If you want to boil it down to economics, you may rapidly find that your activity is "worth less" than dealing arms or manufacturing rivets, which would be a gross oversimplification.


There was I thinking that "Direct Payments" disbursements were used as a cost guideline.


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> No, it's a quantified cost produced by the charity "CarersUK" using a formula they've set out somewhere on the Princess Royal Trust for Carers website.



I've read the full report which is here:

http://www.carersuk.org/hub_content...ent/Newsandcampaigns/Valuingcarers/Fullreport

The whole thing is based around the assumption that the price of an hour of a carer's time is £14.50. Nowhere do they attempt to derive that figure from any kind of market analysis. They call this the "replacement cost" of carers, ie. if unpaid, voluntary carers didn't exist, this is what it would cost to replace all they work that they currently do according to prices that currently pertain in the existing market for paid care. However, that market would be very different if voluntary carers didn't exist, and the scenario is entirely hypothetical anyway.

Massive, unsupported assumptions there. The authors are sociologists at Leeds University.

To all intents and purposes the figures are at best useless and at worst, quite misleading.

I could write a book on the kinds of bogus statistics that get peddled by all and sundry. This is just another one to add to the collection.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

The cost of 'caring' (however the figures are arrived at) is going to be further skewed now that 'the right to request flexible working' has been extended to carers of adults.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Whatever the official figures, I get £95 odd pounds a week for being a widow with children and I got £54 iirc per week for caring for someone 24 /7.
> 
> Something seriously amiss in the system imo.



My wife gets £46 or so pw "Carers Allowance" for caring for me "24/7", which includes stuff (much as you will have done for your late hubbie) that qualified nurses can't and/or won't do.

Seriously amiss doesn't even begin to cover it, IMO.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> I've read the full report which is here:
> 
> http://www.carersuk.org/hub_content...ent/Newsandcampaigns/Valuingcarers/Fullreport
> 
> ...



So let's just ignore it all because the research doesn't fulfil your high standards, eh?

You berk.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> My wife gets £46 or so pw "Carers Allowance" for caring for me "24/7", which includes stuff (much as you will have done for your late hubbie) that qualified nurses can't and/or won't do.
> 
> Seriously amiss doesn't even begin to cover it, IMO.


Indeed, its also not like its a choice. If the person caring for you said "actually, no bollocks to this, Im not willing to be their carer" I very much doubt social services would make arrangements for carers to come in. They just take the attitude but they are there, they WILL do it, so long as we dont provide


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> So let's just ignore it all because the research doesn't fulfil your high standards, eh?
> 
> You berk.



I'm sure the statistics about how much unpaid care is delivered in the country are very useful, but once you start to price that according to a hypothetical market scenario you're in fantasy economics territory.

Analyses of hypothetical markets are about as useful as weather forecasts for hypothetical planets, in my experience.

Do you believe the statistics from the music industry about the amount of money they lose due to downloading? They're based on the same kind of assumption.

14 year old Timmy has 20,000 songs on his iPod. He downloaded them free from peer-to-peer networks and copied them from his friends, free.

Had he bought them legally from the iTunes music store, he would have had to pay 79p per song, or £15,800 for the whole collection.

Timmy earns £800 a year from a paper round and his total net household income is £27,000 pa.

Has he really deprived the music industry of nearly £16,000 revenue? 

You decide.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> PMSL




Yeah, it was quite funny.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> I'm sure the statistics about how much unpaid care is delivered in the country are very useful, but once you start to price that according to a hypothetical market scenario you're in fantasy economics territory.
> 
> Analyses of hypothetical markets are about as useful as weather forecasts for hypothetical planets, in my experience.
> 
> ...



Do the words "fatuous analogy" mean anything to you?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> Indeed, its also not like its a choice. If the person caring for you said "actually, no bollocks to this, Im not willing to be their carer" I very much doubt social services would make arrangements for carers to come in. They just take the attitude but they are there, they WILL do it, so long as we dont provide



Exactly. 

It's not right someone effectively being "trapped" or "dragooned" into being your carer because they happen to love you or be related to you and have a sense of altruism.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Exactly.
> 
> It's not right someone effectively being "trapped" or "dragooned" into being your carer because they happen to love you or be related to you and have a sense of altruism.




To be fair though, I was offered help with his personal care but he didn't want anyone other than me doing that sort of thing for him.  So I managed to wangle 2 hours a day of housework out of the Direct Payments system which was a mega help and stopped me going under completely.


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Do the words "fatuous analogy" mean anything to you?



Yes, and this isn't one.

Both examples are based on extrapolating demand at one price to demand at another.

That's a fundamentally erroneous assumption.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> Yes, and this isn't one.
> 
> Both examples are based on extrapolating demand at one price to demand at another.
> 
> That's a fundamentally erroneous assumption.



But what has this to do with the OP? I DEMAND to know!


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> But what has this to do with the OP? I DEMAND to know!



According to my calculations, nothing whatsoever.

But then, the same could be said for most of the OP's own posts on this thread.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 26, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> But what has this to do with the OP? I DEMAND to know!


There's an OP? 

What happened to the hedgehogs


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> I could write a book on the kinds of bogus statistics that get peddled by all and sundry. This is just another one to add to the collection.


Fair enough. When you write it, will you be sure to note that it is difficult to provide figures in some circumstances and that people often approach this intractable problem by doing their best with the material they have?


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 26, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> There's an OP?
> 
> What happened to the hedgehogs



the catz eatid dems


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Fair enough. When you write it, will you be sure to note that it is difficult to provide figures in some circumstances and that people often approach this intractable problem by doing their best with the material they have?


This isn't one of those circumstances.

If a problem is intractable, you shouldn't waste time and money attempting to solve it.

If a question can't have a meaningful answer, you should avoid it.

I would like to see people in public life be much more circumspect with how they handle and present data. That means employing appropriate specialists to do specialist work and presenting tenuous results with appropriate caveats.

As in all areas of life, these statistics generally come with a begging bowl attached. Whether you're looking for taxpayers', donors' or customers' money, you have a responsibility to be truthful to them about the validity of your presentation.

Instead, we get this:




			
				Carers UK said:
			
		

> *Carers save the UK economy £87 billion a year*
> 
> Unpaid carers are now saving the UK £87 billion every year in potential care costs, which amounts to more than the government's total spend on the NHS in the last financial year.
> 
> ...



If you want to look at it in real economic terms, unpaid carers are actually diminishing the size of the economy by taking that work out of the marketplace. 

Individuals can save money (or more precisely, choose to allocate that money differently) but in no meaningful way can the economy be saved money. The economy is just the total amount of trading that its participants do. It doesn't have a "budget" as such.

I value the work carers do, but I wouldn't attempt to put a price on it in the way this group has here.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> This isn't one of those circumstances.
> 
> If a problem is intractable, you shouldn't waste time and money attempting to solve it.
> 
> If a question can't have a meaningful answer, you should avoid it.


Provided you are able to do so. Sometimes you are not. In this instance it can't necessarily be avoided since there are questions of expenditure and therefore questions of cost are raised.


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Provided you are able to do so. Sometimes you are not. In this instance it can't necessarily be avoided since there are questions of expenditure and therefore questions of cost are raised.



Not only do I think this particular exercise is technically wrong, I think it's also a strategic mistake.

If you want to look at this in an economic way, which is often the way a government will look, I'd say it looks like this:

Millions of people work as unpaid carers for people they know. Some of these people receive a small amount of benefits for doing so.

What is the opportunity cost of these people withdrawing (partially or completely) from the labour market?

How would the economy look if we replaced some of this unpaid care with paid care? What jobs would the unpaid carers then do? How much would the professional care industry contribute to the economy?

None of this takes into account the obvious social benefit of having people cared for by their friends and relatives. But you really can't put a price on that, though I'm sure someone will try to soon enough.

Exactly the same scenario has been played out with childcare. The government's response hasn't been to help mothers stay at home to look after their children but to encourage them to get jobs and replace their unpaid care with work done by professionals.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

That might very well be the case and I am sympathetic to that aspect of your argument, but it remains true that people these days are asked to quantify things and neiother "won't" nor "can't" are always accepted as satisfactory replies.


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> That might very well be the case and I am sympathetic to that aspect of your argument, but it remains true that people these days are asked to quantify things and neiother "won't" nor "can't" are always accepted as satisfactory replies.



In this case, no-one was being compelled to produce these figures. It is an entirely voluntary exercise by a campaign to supposedly support their campaigning objectives.

In the general sense, when "won't" or "can't" won't do, the honest and professional thing is to present your report with the kind of explicit caveats I've referred to earlier.

"These figures are based on a hypothetical scenario which hasn't happened, couldn't happen and would look very different if it did."

Perhaps I should invoice editor for the amount my contributions to this forum would have cost him had he hired someone to write for it.

Or indeed, I could invoice you for my time according to the rate I would have earned had I been working, or would have charged you had you been in the market for a paid interlocutor.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 26, 2007)

This thread is no fun any more.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> Or indeed, I could invoice you for my time according to the rate I would have earned had I been working, or would have charged you had you been in the market for a paid interlocutor.


You could, if you think that your voluntary time here is to be compared to the voluntary time given by carers.


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> You could, if you think that your voluntary time here is to be compared to the voluntary time given by carers.



I'm sure it's clear that wasn't the point I was making.


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> I'm sure it's clear that wasn't the point I was making.


Not the one you were consciously making, no.


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Not the one you were consciously making, no.



Well thank you for that valuable insight into my unconscious motivations.

How much do I owe you, Dr Freud?


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 26, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> This thread is no fun any more.




<ties meow's shoelaces together, shouts "i DEMAND you fall over" and then runs away>


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> How much do I owe you, Dr Freud?


Nothing, it's a public service.


----------



## untethered (Sep 26, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Nothing, it's a public service.



How do you feel about putting someone out of a job by performing this valuable public service for nothing?


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> How do you feel about putting someone out of a job by performing this valuable public service for nothing?


I feel I am likely to increase public interest in the product and thereby enable the apparently luckless Dr Freud to find renewed employment at a higer tariff than before.


----------



## Fez909 (Sep 26, 2007)

Utterly bizarre thread.  Great stuff all involved.  

Cheesy is a nutter.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 26, 2007)

Fez909 said:
			
		

> Cheesy is a nutter.



that's the more generous assessment, i suppose.


----------



## gaijingirl (Sep 26, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> why anyone on earth feels an impulse to stamp down on anothers happiness, success or good fortune suggests an inkling of either jealousy, or bitterness over ones own perceived failures, thus projected on to others.




Such as saying this for example?




			
				Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> well a 2:1 isnt that good is it?


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 26, 2007)

pwned


----------



## Madusa (Sep 26, 2007)

*yawn*

Arent you people bored of this yet??


----------



## Guruchelles (Sep 26, 2007)

I miss Trevor.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> Yes, and this isn't one.
> 
> Both examples are based on extrapolating demand at one price to demand at another.
> 
> That's a fundamentally erroneous assumption.



If it *is* erroneous, it is only erroneous in that it will have underestimated the cost of carers by a large amount, given that if what carers currently do was "marketised", the pressure of demand on supply of labour would boost the costs of carer labour considerably.

That is, of course, if one accepts that familial carers are worthy of similar financial considerations to paid careworkers (even though familial carers undertake tasks that paid careworkers wouldn't).


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

untethered said:
			
		

> This isn't one of those circumstances.
> 
> If a problem is intractable, you shouldn't waste time and money attempting to solve it.
> 
> ...



The only thing that comes to mind reading this tosh is your scrotum and a flensing knife.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> This thread is no fun any more.



*And* you still don't have a cool new tagline.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

Guruchelles said:
			
		

> I miss Trevor.



I think Quoady ate him.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 26, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> pwned



The only people who have been "pwned" on this thread are the various cowards and quislings who rush to curry favour with the likes of you by piling onto the latest victim of your rampaging aggression.  The target of your disguting vitriol has comported herself with dignity and courage throughout.  This thread will forever stand as a monument to both the pussilanimity and the forbearance of humankind.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> The only people who have been "pwned" on this thread are the various cowards and quislings who rush to curry favour with the likes of you by piling onto the latest victim of your rampaging aggression.  The target of your disguting vitriol has comported herself with dignity and courage throughout.  This thread will forever stand as a monument to both the pussilanimity and the forbearance of humankind.



Ah, your usual tyrannical vehemence of expression, eh phil?

Mind you, it doesn't look like the ghosts of either Edmund Burke or Samuel Johnson have possessed your computer this time, as your vehemence here is of distinctly poor quality.


----------



## LilMissHissyFit (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> The only people who have been "pwned" on this thread are the various cowards and quislings who rush to curry favour with the likes of you by piling onto the latest victim of your rampaging aggression.  The target of your disguting vitriol has comported herself with dignity and courage throughout.  This thread will forever stand as a monument to both the pussilanimity and the forbearance of humankind.


 now would be a good time to say "fuck off dwyer"???


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> now would be a good time to say "fuck off dwyer"???



I think so. 

Fuck off dwyer.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> now would be a good time to say "fuck off dwyer"???



Fuck off Gladys Pugh


----------



## Madusa (Sep 26, 2007)

The pack is back! Mad, bad and Meaner than EVA!







Ready and blood thirsty into the night.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

Can someone (with a degree 2:1 or over) please précis this thread for me? I'm an underachiever (2:2 from an ex-poly on the Thames, could have got a 1st from a redbrick) and therefore can't be bothered to read all 29 pages of it. Does it progress much beyond page 5?


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> Fuck off Gladys Pugh



Pugh, Pugh, Barney McGrew, Cuthbert, Dibble and Grubb more like.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Can someone (with a degree 2:1 or over) please précis this thread for me? I'm an underachiever (2:2 from an ex-poly on the Thames, could have got a 1st from a redbrick) and therefore can't be bothered to read all 29 pages of it. Does it progress much beyond page 5?



It's a slagging off Cheesypoof thread, with an occasional interesting foray into carers and statistics. A bit about the point of the OP but not much.


----------



## Madusa (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Can someone (with a degree 2:1 or over) please précis this thread for me? I'm an underachiever (2:2 from an ex-poly on the Thames, could have got a 1st from a redbrick) and therefore can't be bothered to read all 29 pages of it. Does it progress much beyond page 5?



In a pic?


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Can someone (with a degree 2:1 or over) please précis this thread for me? I'm an underachiever (2:2 from an ex-poly on the Thames, could have got a 1st from a redbrick) and therefore can't be bothered to read all 29 pages of it. Does it progress much beyond page 5?


Does any thread?


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 26, 2007)

Cheesy: You get good grades cos you're smart innit. / It's all about how you present your ideas.

Everyone else: WTF!? / What sort of bullshit degrees did you do!?


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

Donna Ferentes said:
			
		

> Does any thread?


Some do actually! But they tend to stay calm


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

Bob_the_lost said:
			
		

> Cheesy: You get good grades cos you're smart innit.
> 
> Everyone else: WTF!?


Anothter witles tautology from cheesypoof followed by disproportionate outrage from the usual mob? 
Some people need to step away from the keyboard and think about what matters!


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Some people need to step away from the keyboard and think about what matters!


Bah, if i spend any more time looking at javascript i'm going to go mad.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> The only people who have been "pwned" on this thread are the various cowards and quislings who rush to curry favour with the likes of you by piling onto the latest victim of your rampaging aggression.  The target of your disguting vitriol has comported herself with dignity and courage throughout.  This thread will forever stand as a monument to both the pussilanimity and the forbearance of humankind.




Oh yes, because viciously accusing me of something I haven't done is both dignified and courageous isn't it.  

Madusa, I'm not in a pack - I think you know me better than that.  For some reason Cheesy likes to go berserk at me every now and then, I am an easy target you see as she thinks I am too thick and shallow to fight back.

Not any more.  

And if you are around Cheesy (and as much as you have told everyone on that I'm on ignore - I know I'm not), I am *still* waiting for an apology.

I will admit to taking the piss out of Cheesy but I take the piss out of a lot of people here and get as much back.  The difference being that we can *read* when someone is joking, whereas with Miss Cheesy, it goes right over her head and she has no sense of humour whatsoever.   

But it's ok.  I understand a bit more about her now and whereas I don't pity her - I'm sure she wouldn't want me to pity her, I can understand why she is how she is.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 26, 2007)

Is it possible to think Cheesy is an idiot without being in a gang? Or am I _finally_ part of the monothought clique?


----------



## Bob_the_lost (Sep 26, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Is it possible to think Cheesy is an idiot without being in a gang? Or am I _finally_ part of the monothought clique?


Welcome brother, welcome.


----------



## Madusa (Sep 26, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> Oh yes, because viciously accusing me of something I haven't done is both dignified and courageous isn't it.
> 
> Madusa, I'm not in a pack - I think you know me better than that.  For some reason Cheesy likes to go berserk at me every now and then, I am an easy target you see as she thinks I am too thick and shallow to fight back.
> 
> ...




Well, I like everyone on this thread, moomoo but the stuff I read last night made me a bit sick to be honest. The sheer level of enjoyment some people got out of it was warped. Truly.

I mean, cheesy can stick up for herself and all that, but her shortcomings aside (I mean we ALL have them) the level of sheer vitriol I read coming from all directions last night against one person warrented it was not. All a number of randoms turning up to stick the fucking boot in. I mean, grow up!

You keep harping on about this apology which in light of stuff that's gone on, I dont think should be a priority. When you push someone into a corner, they're going to bite. I'm sorry moomoo, but it really looked as though you were indeed part of the pack and maybe enjoying it. I'm sorry but I really hate when stuff like this goes on on here. It's the worst of urban and it's fucking embarassing. Really.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 26, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Is it possible to think Cheesy is an idiot without being in a gang? Or am I _finally_ part of the monothought clique?




I'm not part of any gang thanks. 

And I am still waiting for an apology Cheesy.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

Madusa said:
			
		

> . I'm sorry but I really hate when stuff like this goes on on here. It's the worst of urban and it's fucking embarassing. Really.


I agree, even when people are reacting to offensive drivel - it's hard to resist reacting to it sometimes, but it ain't good


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Is it possible to think Cheesy is an idiot without being in a gang?


Certainly, but it's not on to kick the shit out of them is it?


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Certainly, but it's not on to kick the shit out of them is it?



She gives it out as much as she takes it. In fact I think some of the stuff she comes out with to be much more hurtful and insulting than the piss taking she was getting last night.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

Someone has to have the good grace to stop though


----------



## moomoo (Sep 26, 2007)

Madusa said:
			
		

> Well, I like everyone on this thread, moomoo but the stuff I read last night made me a bit sick to be honest. The sheer level of enjoyment some people got out of it was warped. Truly.
> 
> I mean, cheesy can stick up for herself and all that, but her shortcomings aside (I mean we ALL have them) the level of sheer vitriol I read coming from all directions last night against one person warrented it was not.
> 
> You keep harping on about this apology which in light of stuff that's gone on, I dont think should be a priority. *When you push someone into a corner, they're going to bite.* I'm sorry moomoo, but it really looked as though you were indeed part of the pack and maybe enjoying it. I'm sorry but I really hate when stuff like this goes on on here. It's the worst of urban and it's fucking embarassing. Really.




Or that could be rephrased as *when someone is proved to be a complete and utter liar, they are going to panic and try and force attention on to someone else*.

No, Madusa, I didn't enjoy it.  Not my scene at all and I'm just waiting for my apology (which is a priority to me) and then I will just keep off her threads.

Sorry, Madusa, you know I like you very much and I value your opinion but she was well out of order.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 26, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Is it possible to think Cheesy is an idiot without being in a gang?



Personally speaking, even if I do think someone's an idiot, I refrain from joining in when eight or ten people are piling into them.


----------



## moomoo (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> Someone has to have the good grace to stop though



You are completely right. 

I've said all I'm going to say.






But I still didn't send that sodding pm.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> She gives it out as much as she takes it. In fact I think some of the stuff she comes out with to be much more hurtful and insulting than the piss taking she was getting last night.




It's all perception innit

I've had disagreements with Cheesy, and I criticise her for some of the things she posts (chavs, pikeys etc) but I also stick up for her when I think she's getting a hard deal. Tis all about balance I reckon


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

Madusa said:
			
		

> In a pic?



More like


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> It's all perception innit
> 
> I've had disagreements with Cheesy, and I criticise her for some of the things she posts (chavs, pikeys etc) but I also stick up for her when I think she's getting a hard deal. Tis all about balance I reckon



So, its ok for you to have a go at her, if she pisses you off, but not me, apparantly. 

When I get a decent apology from her telling me to go and shoot myself, I might think about leaving her be. As it is, for reasons I prefer not to go into, that was a hideous thing for her to say to me. Hell, it was a hideous thing to say to anyone. So if I see her being an idiot, I will feel free to call her on it.

Only when I'm a bit bored though.


----------



## MightyAphrodite (Sep 26, 2007)

milesy said:
			
		

> what, like making your lecturer a simple tea, like bangers and mash?




this is the correct answer to getting good grades.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

moomoo said:
			
		

> I will admit to taking the piss out of Cheesy but I take the piss out of a lot of people here and get as much back.  The difference being that we can *read* when someone is joking, whereas with Miss Cheesy, it goes right over her head and she has no sense of humour whatsoever.   )



Problem is, when a crowd is putting the boot in, the person on the ground might not be able to tell who's really giving it, and who's holding back a little.

So when they strike back indiscriminately, someone from either group might end up getting it.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 26, 2007)

And incidentally, the answer to this:




			
				Dubversion said:
			
		

> Should I insult a female differently because she is female?



Is "yes."  A man can say this:




			
				Dubversion said:
			
		

> you're a fucking cunt



to a man.  A woman can even say it to a woman (though oddly enough they rarely do).  But a man can't say it to a woman.  And certainly not over and over and over again as you did to Cheesy.  If you can't see why there's no hope for you.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> So, its ok for you to have a go at her, if she pisses you off, but not me, apparantly.
> 
> When I get a decent apology from her telling me to go and shoot myself, I might think about leaving her be. As it is, for reasons I prefer not to go into, that was a hideous thing for her to say to me. Hell, it was a hideous thing to say to anyone. So if I see her being an idiot, I will feel free to call her on it.
> 
> Only when I'm a bit bored though.



Yeah but apart from one row, when I disagree with her I'll just say why and leave it at that, not 'have a go at her'. I (try to) only 'have a go' at people that have a go at me first* 

There's loads of people that I see being an idiot - and no doubt they think the same of me - but I don't feel the need to pop up calling them on it every time they post.

* As demonstrated earlier.


----------



## trashpony (Sep 26, 2007)

You know, the best thing to do with cheesy's threads if she winds you up is not to post on them. I quite often don't even read them. If the OP is inflamatory (deliberately or otherwise) then just avoid. 

Then we can stop having these stupid rows. Which no one comes out of well


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

trashpony said:
			
		

> You know, the best thing to do with cheesy's threads if she winds you up is not to post on them. I quite often don't even read them. If the OP is inflamatory (deliberately or otherwise) then just avoid.
> 
> Then we can stop having these stupid rows. Which no one comes out of well


Yup!


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 26, 2007)

trashpony said:
			
		

> You know, the best thing to do with cheesy's threads if she winds you up is not to post on them. I quite often don't even read them. If the OP is inflamatory (deliberately or otherwise) then just avoid.
> 
> Then we can stop having these stupid rows. Which no one comes out of well



Ok mum.


----------



## trashpony (Sep 26, 2007)

Chairman Meow said:
			
		

> Ok mum.



Why you ...   *shakes fist*



It's a fair cop guv


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 26, 2007)

trashpony said:
			
		

> You know, the best thing to do with cheesy's threads if she winds you up is not to post on them. I quite often don't even read them. If the OP is inflamatory (deliberately or otherwise) then just avoid.
> 
> Then we can stop having these stupid rows. Which no one comes out of well



Why not have a bit of fun with them? Best thing for who? Not for me. You're assuming an end on behalf of other posters here.


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Why not have a bit of fun with them?


It's malicious bullying to do so


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> It's malicious bullying to do so



_I like a good debate, argument, punch-up...break some blokes nose_


----------



## Donna Ferentes (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> It's malicious bullying to do so


Ah, not quite.

I do think Cheesypoof is somebody who likes to call other people "jealous" and is then surprised when other people don't take kindly to that. She should pack it in.

Obviously from that point things do get out of hand: there can be a pack mentality and side-taking and it can all get fairly unpleasant. Possibly the best approach is for individuals to accept that they've said their final piece and to walk off, which I for one will now do.


----------



## Chairman Meow (Sep 26, 2007)

Orang Utan said:
			
		

> It's malicious bullying to do so



Bollocks it is.

sorry trashy


----------



## Orang Utan (Sep 26, 2007)

Aye, people rarely do though!


----------



## butterfly child (Sep 26, 2007)

I haven't read most of this thread.. saw it was a cheesy thread and decided it wasn't worth the effort. 

But hard to ignore all this fuss.

Cheesy is more than capable of dishing it out, but she can't take it. If she didn't dish it out so much, she wouldn't get it so much.

If it's malicious bullying, then it's malicious bullying on both sides.

I just don't bother wasting my time on her.


----------



## trashpony (Sep 26, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Why not have a bit of fun with them? Best thing for who? Not for me. You're assuming an end on behalf of other posters here.



I said 'the best thing to do if you find yourself wound up is not to post on them'. I don't think you've posted (and apologies if you have but I haven't noticed you involved in the big rows). So either you've a) done the same as me or b) aren't wound up. In either case, my advice doesn't apply to you


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> you're a fucking cunt


She _really_ is.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

mentalchik said:
			
		

> It must be gratifying having all this attention !


I presume the gaping holes in the structure of her ego are what lead her to be like this. The attention fills them. It's why I'd encourage everyone who finds her as abominable a human being as I do to put her on ignore. If she doesn't the attention she so desperately, obviously and pathetically craves then she will, hopefully, fuck off elsewhere.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> She _really_ is.



Remember, nosos.

Thatcher.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> I think its you thats sad, a sad, insecure bitter twisted CUNT


But she's so spoilt, arrogant and devoid of self-awareness that she's completely oblivious to her own insecurity. She externalises _everything_ to place herself at the centre of a beautifully pristine universe of her own creation. Nothing is ever her fault or responsibility. It's all down to the jealousy/hatred/insecurity of others.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

LilMissHissyFit said:
			
		

> You kow that FIRST in sociology


Like fuck she did.  

Where from?


----------



## MightyAphrodite (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Nothing is ever her fault or responsibility. It's all down to the jealousy/hatred/insecurity of others.




thats what makes it so tedious....

you cant talk sense to someone who never _ever_ wrong. about anything. 

ever.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Anyone who can put up with this level of abuse, from this many people at one time, and still come out swinging has my complete respect.


She doesn't "come out swinging". She whines and sulks before demanding that people be banned and accusing moderators of prejudice when they don't acquiese to her requests.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

MightyAphrodite said:
			
		

> you cant talk sense to someone who never _ever_ wrong. about anything.


Presuming she's isn't a troll (I'm still only 99% sure) she's like this to a degree unlike anything I've ever come across before. She's a very spoilt human being to the point of being utterly ruined.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

*Perhaps*




			
				butchersapron said:
			
		

> Can the thread title be changed to 'You get good grades in university by making things up' please?


"You temporarily make yourself feel better about your own glaring incapacities through internet based fantasism"?


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 26, 2007)

Any rational person can see that the level of hostility displayed towards her is wildly out of proportion to anything she might conceivably have done.  It is nothing short of hysterical.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> She doesn't "come out swinging". She whines and sulks before demanding that people be banned and accusing moderators of prejudice when they don't acquiese to her requests.


Or accuses said moderators of being "bad".


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Or accuses said moderators of being "bad".


That was funny, and the I DEMAND thing  

Aqua didn't go into full grudge mode though ...


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> It is nothing short of hysterical.


For much of the time I've posted on this site I never even noticed her. Once I did I kept noticing her. I honestly can't recall ever finding anyone quite as irritating as I do her. Of course it's not _rational_. Urban's a social medium. Do you sit in the pub criticising people when they don't relate to each other with sufficient rationality?


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> For much of the time I've posted on this site I never even noticed her. Once I did I kept noticing her. I honestly can't recall ever finding anyone quite as irritating as I do her. Of course it's not _rational_. Urban's a social medium. Do you sit in the pub criticising people when they don't relate to each other with sufficient rationality?



But until now, you haven't been popping up to have a pop  

Why now?

Has this become the Big Thread To Disect Cheesypoof's shortcomings?

Can we do the same for some other idiots?


----------



## Meltingpot (Sep 26, 2007)

FridgeMagnet said:
			
		

> I have a 2:2, personally, but then I _am_ a thick idle cunt.
> 
> Not as bad as you fucking proles with no degree at all though! Go on, fuck off the lot of you, don't deserve to read my binary.



I also have a 2:2 and I worked hard for it, I'm not going to comment further


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> Remember, nosos.
> 
> Thatcher.


It occurred to me when I went home that I only read dislike Thatcher what she _did_. Without having met her I'm prepared to withhold personal judgement. I actually seem to dislike the very special poster on this thread for _who she is_.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> But until now, you haven't been popping up to have a pop


I've not had a go at her _since I put her on ignore_. Unfortunately I noticed this thead and read it.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> I've not had a go at her _since I put her on ignore_. Unfortunately I noticed this thead and read it.



And somehow felt compelled to stick the boot in at the end.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> And somehow felt compelled to stick the boot in at the end.


And 'somehow' felt 'compelled'?  

I read a thread and decided to comment on it. I apologise profusely if this offends your delicate sensibilities and fine conception of forum etiquette.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Any rational person can see that the level of hostility displayed towards her is wildly out of proportion to anything she might conceivably have done.  It is nothing short of hysterical.


Demanding people be banned simply for disagreeing with her and attacking moderators is pretty far beyond what's acceptable on this forum, no?


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> Has this become the Big Thread To Disect Cheesypoof's shortcomings?


As far as I can tell the thread was started to announce her academic qualifications, demean those with lesser qualifications and generally try and lure people in to prop up her apparantly tenuous sense of self-worth while attacking those who aren't game as jealous, stupid or insecure.

The twat brings it on herself.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> And 'somehow' felt 'compelled'?
> 
> I read a thread and decided to comment on it. I apologise profusely if this offends your delicate sensibilities and fine conception of forum etiquette.



Twelve almost consecutive posts of criticism  

My sensibilities aren't particularly delicate - no need for your profuse apology.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Demanding people be banned simply for disagreeing with her and attacking moderators is pretty far beyond what's acceptable on this forum, no?



Hardly.  But even if it were, it wouldn't deserve eight or ten people screaming "CUNT" at her, which is what she's got.  I'm sorry, but its just ridiculous and downright weird the way people are having a go.  I expected it of some people here, but I've been very surprised at others.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

Calm down nosos, and have a nice cup of tea.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> Twelve almost consecutive posts of criticism


I fear putting her on ignore merely repressed my loathing rather than dissipating it.


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 26, 2007)

Cheesypoof said:
			
		

> a projection of your own self, own own perceived failures and jealousy of another woman, a reflection of your own feelings about yourself. Sorry you feel that way. Bitterness will do fuck all for you. Its really bad, as is spite.
> 
> I am sorry you havent gotten what you want. That post has nothing to do with me at all you know. As i said: that post is a reflection of how you see yourself. shame for you.
> 
> night.



cheesy, this post was completely uncalled for. 

You're way out of line in this case.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> I fear putting her on ignore merely repressed my loathing rather than dissipating it.



Like a volcano, eventually erupting


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> But until now, you haven't been popping up to have a pop
> 
> Why now?
> 
> ...



Yes we can.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Hardly.  But even if it were, it wouldn't deserve eight or ten people screaming "CUNT" at her, which is what she's got.  I'm sorry, but its just ridiculous and downright weird the way people are having a go.  I expected it of some people here, but I've been very surprised at others.


Earlier JC2 wrote that urban's sometimes self-concious bohemia is limited by its own _rules of the game_. All sorts of abrasive and odd personality traits are happily subsumed under _individuality_ and the person consequentially accepted but the cardinal sin is a lack of self-awareness. Online and in real life, I know some of the things that people on this site have done and been forgiven of. The key was that the people in question understood that they'd done something wrong. CP's absolute incapacity to consider that she may _ever_ be in the wrong is the problem and that's what provokes the 'irrational' reaction. Communities have social norms. This is a community. CP regularly shits all over the norm that though largely unarticulated is fairly central to how that community functions and understands itself.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> That was funny, and the I DEMAND thing


It was a comedy (though unintentional, I'm sure!) classic! 


> Aqua didn't go into full grudge mode though ...



Because she's too well-balanced to be swayed by some dafto having a rant at her.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

*Look*

_a projection of your own self, own own perceived failures and jealousy of another woman, a reflection of your own feelings about yourself. Sorry you feel that way. Bitterness will do fuck all for you. Its really bad, as is spite.

I am sorry you havent gotten what you want. That post has nothing to do with me at all you know. As i said: that post is a reflection of how you see yourself. shame for you.

night._

I have no doubt that she sees herself as having done _nothing_ wrong here. Yet it's so absolutely typical of how she behaves. If she was like this _yet_ understood the element of transgression of social norm contained with it, people who still _dislike_ her but she wouldn't provoke the 'hysterical' reaction you're talking about.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Yes we can.



 

Who's first on the list? 

I reckon that New Deal thread


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Hardly.  But even if it were, it wouldn't deserve eight or ten people screaming "CUNT" at her, which is what she's got.  I'm sorry, but its just ridiculous and downright weird the way people are having a go.  I expected it of some people here, but I've been very surprised at others.


Eight or ten?

One or two, maybe three if you count moomoo being *driven* by Cheesys' false accusation to use the word.

Seems as though your computer is possessed by a writer of very poor fiction tonight phil, better have it exorcised.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> Who's first on the list?



William!

JOKE!   JOKE!   JOKE!  JOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKE


----------



## Madusa (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> William!
> 
> JOKE!   JOKE!   JOKE!  JOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKE



OI, You leave William be!


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> Twelve almost consecutive posts of criticism



"Almost" doesn't really make the grade. You should have said "_x_ number of consecutive criticisms, _y_ number of unrelated posts and then _z_ number more of consecutive criticisms".


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

Yeah you suck cesare


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> It was a comedy (though unintentional, I'm sure!) classic!
> 
> 
> Because she's too well-balanced to be swayed by some dafto having a rant at her.



Zactly.

Aqua was fairly hilarious herself with her 'oh noes  ' and all  She also ain't stomping about with foam-flecked-spittle-flying-righteousness-induced pursuing.

A good mod   See Cheesy, I went and disagreed with you again!


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> "Almost" doesn't really make the grade. You should have said "_x_ number of consecutive criticisms, _y_ number of unrelated posts and then _z_ number more of consecutive criticisms".



There's a bloody statistician sat next to me  *hides thread*


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> Yes we can.



And do.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Yeah you suck cesare


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Yeah you suck cesare



Who sucks Cesare?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Yeah you suck cesare



I do?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> There's a bloody statistician sat next to me  *hides thread*


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

*Going back to previous theme*




			
				cesare said:
			
		

> A good mod


Mods get attacked on urban and people often apologise. However it wasn't that she attacked Aqua personally, it was that called her a bad mod because she presumed the only explanation for Aqua not immediately carrying out CP's demands was that she was prejudiced by personal loyalties. Likewise I doubt she ever even considered that she herself, rather than Aqua was to blame. There's a very specific personality disposition expressed in that action which she has in spades and is largely responsible for the vitriol directed at her.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> I do?



If so there is no God.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> there is no God.


Preserved for posterity's sake.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> If so there is no God.



Depends who/what you mean by G-d.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> If so there is no God.


----------



## the button (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Preserved for posterity's sake.


 

A _p_ value of less that 0.05 indicates that we can be 95% confident that that's funny as fuck.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Preserved for posterity's sake.



Given the extreme unlikelihood--I would go so far as to say the impossibility--of my precedent qualification, I do not find a significant threat to my deism in the above.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Given the extreme unlikelihood


What makes you so presumptuous as to feel able to speculate on the intricacies of VP and Cesare's private life?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

>



 Indeed!


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Mods get attacked on urban and people often apologise. However it wasn't that she attacked Aqua personally, it was that called her a bad mod because she presumed the only explanation for Aqua not immediately carrying out CP's demands was that she was prejudiced by personal loyalties. Likewise I doubt she ever even considered that she herself, rather than Aqua was to blame. There's a very specific personality disposition expressed in that action which she has in spades and is largely responsible for the vitriol directed at her.


Anyway I've satisfied myself now that my utter contempt for someone I've never met has a rational basis. I'm sad to say it had been bugging me.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 26, 2007)

Anyway, getting back to William, does anyone else feel that his devotion to the Guardian borders on the obsessive?


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> What makes you so presumptuous as to feel able to speculate on the intricacies of VP and Cesare's private life?



The fact that he's presumptuous?


----------



## equationgirl (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Anyway, getting back to William, does anyone else feel that his devotion to the Guardian borders on the obsessive?



Phil. Stop this. Right NOW.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Who sucks Cesare?



Licking's better imo.


----------



## MightyAphrodite (Sep 26, 2007)

equationgirl said:
			
		

> Phil. Stop this. Right NOW.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

trashpony said:
			
		

> You know, the best thing to do with cheesy's threads if she winds you up is not to post on them. I quite often don't even read them. If the OP is inflamatory (deliberately or otherwise) then just avoid.
> 
> Then we can stop having these stupid rows. Which no one comes out of well



You read this one.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> But she's so spoilt, arrogant and devoid of self-awareness that she's completely oblivious to her own insecurity. She externalises _everything_ to place herself at the centre of a beautifully pristine universe of her own creation. Nothing is ever her fault or responsibility. It's all down to the jealousy/hatred/insecurity of others.



But if your own ego is healthily intact, why should that bother you in the least?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> She whines and sulks before demanding that people be banned and accusing moderators of prejudice when they don't acquiese to her requests.



Has anyone been banned at her request yet?


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

*waits for Johnny to get with the program*

That was very Seppoe, did I do it right


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Demanding people be banned simply for disagreeing with her and attacking moderators is pretty far beyond what's acceptable on this forum, no?



Once again: who has been banned?

As for attacking moderators: surely not that!!??


----------



## the button (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> That was very Seppoe, did I do it right


You like so didn't not do it right.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

the button said:
			
		

> You like so didn't not do it right.




*waits for a Donna intervention*


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> But if your own ego is healthily intact, why should that bother you in the least?


Because being fairly happy with myself doesn't preclude being concerned with anti-social behaviour? In fact it makes it more likely I'll take an interest?


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 26, 2007)

Guruchelles said:
			
		

> I miss Trevor.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Has anyone been banned at her request yet?


Are you purposively missing the point or do you genuinely consider that it’s not anti-social because a moderator hasn’t acted on her demands?


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Because being fairly happy with myself doesn't preclude being concerned with anti-social behaviour? In fact it makes it more likely I'll take an interest?



The issue is becoming upset or even angry because someone else seems to have ego flaws. Surely a better response to a childish tantrum or what have you, is detached amusement.

It might be different if the person was in the room with you, although I don't really think so; but here, it's words on a screen.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Are you purposively missing the point or do you genuinely consider that it’s not anti-social because a moderator hasn’t acted on her demands?



The things you're talking about are tantrums. If she's asking for people to be banned, the mods are giving those requests the weight that they deserve.

I might be concerned if people were actually being banned; but they're not.

So it's just words.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

>


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> The issue is becoming upset or even angry because someone else seems to have ego flaws. Surely a better response to a childish tantrum or what have you, is detached amusement


That's true of 99% of people I dislike. She is my bête noire. Someone being that profoundly lacking in self-awareness threatens me on some level.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> The things you're talking about are tantrums. If she's asking for people to be banned, the mods are giving those requests the weight that they deserve.
> 
> I might be concerned if people were actually being banned; but they're not.
> 
> So it's just words.


I disagree. As I said earlier:



> Earlier JC2 wrote that urban's sometimes self-concious bohemia is limited by its own rules of the game. All sorts of abrasive and odd personality traits are happily subsumed under individuality and the person consequentially accepted but the cardinal sin is a lack of self-awareness. Online and in real life, I know some of the things that people on this site have done and been forgiven of. The key was that the people in question understood that they'd done something wrong. CP's absolute incapacity to consider that she may ever be in the wrong is the problem and that's what provokes the 'irrational' reaction. Communities have social norms. This is a community. CP regularly shits all over the norm that though largely unarticulated is fairly central to how that community functions and understands itself.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Someone being that profoundly lacking in self-awareness threatens me on some level.



If that's the case, then you should be looking at yourself, not her, with respect.

Maybe Cheesy is to be a learning experience for you.


----------



## nosos (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> Maybe Cheesy is to be a learning experience for you.


Well, yes, it illustrates the value I place on self-awareness but given that value I knew that anyway.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> That's true of 99% of people I dislike. She is my bête noire. Someone being that profoundly lacking in self-awareness threatens me on some level.



Blimey. That's according her with some serious status, (((nosos)))


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

nosos said:
			
		

> Well, yes, it illustrates the value I place on self-awareness but given that value I knew that anyway.



The question to ask, is why are you so disturbed by her. How is it that it gets to you, when it shouldn't.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> The question to ask, is why are you so disturbed by her. How is it that it gets to you, when it shouldn't.


And it's clearly getting to you when it shouldn't that it shouldn't be getting to nosos but is, right? 

Come to that, is it getting to me when it shouldn't that it's getting to you when it shouldn't that it's getting to nosos when it shouldn't?

The urban virtuous circle strikes again 

It's all so relative that at the end of the day, no-one's standing everywhere but everyone's standing on the high ground 

BACK to Trevor


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> And it's clearly getting to you when it shouldn't that it shouldn't be getting to nosos but is, right?



No; 'getting to' has an element of emotional involvement.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> No; 'getting to' has an element of emotional involvement.


JC2: 54,495 uninvolved emotionless posts and counting


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> JC2: 54,495 uninvolved emotionless posts and counting



Things have 'gotten to' me before, but Cheesy's tantrums aren't amongst them.


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> BACK to Trevor



BACK to Klunk


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

P.s, I find it better not to let things 'get to' me, especially in a discussion about something that matters to me. Usually, once you lose your temper, you lose the contest.


----------



## mrs quoad (Sep 26, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> P.s, I find it better not to let things 'get to' me, especially in a discussion about something that matters to me. Usually, once you lose your temper, you lose the contest.


There are no winners, johnny. That's the internet law


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 26, 2007)

mrs quoad said:
			
		

> There are no winners, johnny. That's the internet law



I was talking about life in general.


----------



## ViolentPanda (Sep 26, 2007)

cesare said:
			
		

> *waits for Johnny to get with the program*
> 
> That was very Seppoe, did I do it right



How would he know?


----------



## cesare (Sep 26, 2007)

ViolentPanda said:
			
		

> How would he know?



I know   He's a Loon


----------



## mango5 (Sep 27, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> William!
> 
> JOKE!   JOKE!   JOKE!  JOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKEJOKE





> Anyway, getting back to William, does anyone else feel that his devotion to the Guardian borders on the obsessive?


Oh! My sides have split.  See ya in 24 hours.


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 27, 2007)

mango5 said:
			
		

> Oh! My sides have split.  See ya in 24 hours.



Its a fair cop. Slap on the bracelets.


----------



## the button (Sep 27, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> You'll never take me alive, copper.


Poor phil.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Its a fair cop. Slap on the bracelets.



I've just banned you from MATB for 24 in soilidarity. Have i got this thing right?


----------



## cesare (Sep 27, 2007)

mango5 said:
			
		

> for you, dwyer, ze thread is over


----------



## the button (Sep 27, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> I've just banned you from MATB for 24 in soilidarity. Have i got this thing right?


One moderating policy! One glorious destiny!

Onward to victory with the cadre of the glorious & heroic internets soviet!


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 27, 2007)

Hang on maybe, just maybe, I can still make it over the wall...


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 27, 2007)

quite astonishing how some people on this thread seem capable of only seeing certain posts and not others. Perhaps they have some special "Cheesy is a poor hard done by little flower" filter or something.

oh, and - fuck off dwyer


----------



## the button (Sep 27, 2007)




----------



## phildwyer (Sep 27, 2007)

Quick boys, get the car in gear, here I come...


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 27, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> quite astonishing how some people on this thread seem capable of only seeing certain posts and not others. Perhaps they have some special "Cheesy is a poor hard done by little flower" filter or something.
> 
> oh, and - fuck off dwyer




Uh-oh......


----------



## the button (Sep 27, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> quite astonishing how some people on this thread seem capable of only seeing certain posts and not others.


The ignore function, I think they call it.


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 27, 2007)

cock off, johnny.


----------



## the button (Sep 27, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> Quick boys, get the car in gear, here I come...


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 27, 2007)

Phew, Christ that was close.  Now all I need's a good plastic surgeon and a ticket to Rio.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 27, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> cock off, johnny.



Will this lighten your mood?


----------



## Dubversion (Sep 27, 2007)

ah, you're a tiresome cunt, johnny - you can join all the other tiresome cunts on ignore, I think. I used to find you amusing, now you're a bore..


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 27, 2007)

Dubversion said:
			
		

> ah, you're a tiresome cunt, johnny - you can join all the other tiresome cunts on ignore, I think. I used to find you amusing, now you're a bore..



Well, from one tiresome cunt to another:









[What happened: didn't get laid tonight?]


----------



## Madusa (Sep 27, 2007)

Poetry and art!


----------



## the button (Sep 27, 2007)

Poor Johnny.


----------



## MightyAphrodite (Sep 27, 2007)

everyone should go to the  thread.


----------



## Johnny Canuck3 (Sep 27, 2007)

the button said:
			
		

> Poor Johnny.



I'm going to cry myself to sleep tonight.


----------



## cesare (Sep 27, 2007)

Johnny Canuck2 said:
			
		

> I'm going to cry myself to sleep tonight.



Clean that bloody fingernail first though  

Tsk


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2007)

This is worse than joe politrixs thread. Effort people. Brio. Anger, hate, nastiness with a clear blue benchmark. No plodding!


----------



## MightyAphrodite (Sep 27, 2007)

mango5 forgot something


----------



## phildwyer (Sep 27, 2007)

MightyAphrodite said:
			
		

> mango5 forgot something



The Bastille lies in ruins!  To the barricades mes braves...


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2007)

Oh no, i'm going to etc in the past


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2007)

phildwyer said:
			
		

> The Bastille lies in ruins!  To the barricades mes braves...


Technically it's only you through the gates - but i'll come. Who shall we get? Flimsier?


----------



## soulman (Sep 27, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> I've just banned you from MATB for 24 in soilidarity. Have i got this thing right?


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2007)

soulman said:
			
		

>



48 you think?


----------



## soulman (Sep 27, 2007)

butchersapron said:
			
		

> 48 you think?



I don't think anyone cares what you do.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2007)

soulman said:
			
		

> I don't think anyone cares what you do.



You seem to make a big ol' fuss now and again.


----------



## mango5 (Sep 27, 2007)

I think this thread has run dry.  Give your 'debating' points a new start folks.


----------



## butchersapron (Sep 27, 2007)

weh?


----------

