living in europe

Stanislas de Kertanguy writes:

I fail to see how demanding that candidates to an exam be exactly on
time, and denying those who are late, is "being in the dark ages".

It's the notion of keeping the subject of the exam secret that is
archaic.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

DDT Filled Mormons writes:

Your shyness clouding your ability to reason.

I've never noticed my shyness interfering with an ability to reason
per se. It prevents me from interacting with people sometimes, but
that is all.

Then why did you reply with a statement that could only be intended to
divert attention from what you said?

You surely mean a statement from which you were only able or willing
to make a single inference.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

DDT Filled Mormons writes:

You place usenet posting before hygiene?

No.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

DDT Filled Mormons writes:

You never have before.

If I have not admitted it, it has not happened.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.

DDT Filled Mormons writes:
So if it's in my nature to cheat people for money, but it doesn't feel
that way, I am still not passing into the dark side?

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 06:27:13 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:
Yes. You'd be a sociopath, someone who naturally lacks any
consideration for others and has no conscience or ethics. Such people
exist, but it's hard to say whether or not being that way is a
conscious choice on their part.

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 08:44:05 +0100, DDT Filled Mormons wrote:
So by your reasoning, everyone rich is either corrupt or a sociapath.

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 08:57:18 +0200, "Tim C."
wrote:
Or born of rich corrupt sociopaths.
--

Or lucky enough to land a winning lottery ticket?

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 10:05:38 +0200, Martin wrote:

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 08:28:31 +0200, "Tim C."
wrote:
I really don't look good in a short skirt.

Pantyhose may improve the appearance of your legs,and smooth out those
annoying pantylines.

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 10:56:48 +0200, Martin wrote:
The one I let go worked in a continuous muddle. I spent nights and
weekends of my own time rewriting his program & got it working without
faults and within a week he had totally wrecked it again. He called
source files of his program file1 file 2 file 3 ... file 100 ... He
hadn't a clue what the numbers stood for. He allocated error codes in
the same manner. I found half a dozen error#10, each for a different
error. AFAIK nowadays he lectures computer science at a university.
After I let him go the company that employed him let him go too. He
got a job with another company which by chance was taken over half a
year later by his former company, who had to let him go again.
--

Do you think he might have been mixi?

Stanislas de Kertanguy writes:

I fail to see how demanding that candidates to an exam be exactly on
time, and denying those who are late, is "being in the dark ages".

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 05:35:55 +0200, Mxsmanic
wrote:It's the notion of keeping the subject of the exam secret that
is archaic.

Perhaps something got lost in translation here. Perhaps when he says
"subject" he doesn't mean subject generically as you do (i.e.,
history, math, biology, etc.), but the actual questions which comprise
the exam. At least that is how I read his statement. Looking at it
from that point of view, then certainly you have to arrive on time to
take an exam, lest you somehow obtain details of the content of the
exam which give you an unfair advantage over the other test takers.
This is true for school courses (university included) as well as
competency testing for some jobs, graduate school exams, college
admittance exams, professional licensing exams (accounting, law,
etc.). Similarly, there is a time limit and you must stop at the
designated time. Another reason to be on time, to take full advantage
of the allotted time.

On Thu, 13 Oct 2005 07:46:52 +0200, The Rev Gaston wrote:

Mxsmanic wrote:

Stanislas de Kertanguy writes:

I fail to see how demanding that candidates to an exam be exactly on
time, and denying those who are late, is "being in the dark ages".

It's the notion of keeping the subject of the exam secret that is
archaic.

Do you not understand what Stanislas means by "subject", or are you
being deliberately obstructive?

G;

You want to guess?
--
Tim C.

On Wed, 12 Oct 2005 20:54:47 +0200, Stanislas de Kertanguy wrote:

I remember a friend at high school whose Swatch had hands rotating
anticlockwise. That was very difficult to get used to!

A friend once had a wall clock with just the hour hand on it. The face was
marked "1ish", "2ish", "3ish" ....
--
Tim C.