reputation of melb uni & monash uni for com/law (3 Viewers)

[stamos]

hahah that guy has to be trolling

i refuse to believe collosal jerks like that exist

 

[xeuyrawp]

... and before the other merciless pedants out there get too trigger happy the reply buttons: boy's in my original post above ought to have been boys' ...

I was actually being petty to show what a petty asshole you are, without devoting too much time, as frigid et al have done.

a quote eh? in your half-lukewarm attempt to sound educated, you do realise that the context of that quote is not even closely related to the topic. what gertrude said in criticism about a character who portrays her, in my opinion, is not even closely related to santa. firstly, santa's male - have you got gender identity issues? secondly, he doesn't 'protest', but 'advocates'. third, he's not criticising himself. SNAP - distinguished.

Omg, I just read that hahah!

<3 <3 <3 frigie.

 

[BobPrior]

1) You must be old

2)We do a combo of seminars (2hrs) and lectures. There is nothing wrong with lectures if they encourage particapation. (We aren't massive in law students).

3) PASS is Peer Assisted Support Scheme. It is not a result. It is used for people who are having difficulty with harder subjects. They probably told your cousin tio attend PASS before he could pass. LoLz.

4) Dr Nelson. P. He is in fact my Quantitative methods (COMM121) lecture and tutor, since I haven't completed my Commerce Core. I would be very happy to ask him in person if that actually happened. Give me your cousin's details. PM me if you like. I will also give him your email address and we may verify it.

5) I'm not defending it. It was never under attack by anyone. You seem to have interpretation problems.

6) Lecturers don't hand out passes willy nilly. They worked hard for their degree, I don't think any sane lecturer would do that in order to destroy their own reputation.

EDIT: Subject Outline:

PERFORMANCE LEVEL
To be eligible to pass this subject, students must achieve an overall mark of at least 45%, and at
least 40% on the final examination.

Have in mind that this is a first year subject, anything in the 45-49% will prohibit you from doing the follow up subject. That mark is only for people who don't want anything to do with Finance/Eco in future.

Before you all get too hot under the collar at 66daystogo's comments I think I should offer a wee bit of evidence in defence ... Last semester, I too did Business Statistics and Forecasting with Nelson and Abbas. I too did nothing all semester. I too 'failed' (39%), yet on my transcript it states that I attained a "Pass" in the subject. I am happy with that, but I do feel it has diluted the quality of my degree a bit - not that I'm complaining

(I also think 66daystogo said "PASS" in capitals to highlight the point, not to refer to the program.)

Also, santa, what right do YOU have to demand PERSONAL details from anyone on this forum???? You ARE NOT a representative of UoW's academic standards monitoring agency (are you?)? Look, you obviously have a problem with 66days - just 'build a bridge' my friend, build a bridge.

And before you ask, NO, I am not going to provide you with my student details so you can go and 'confirm' this. I think we should all just admit that there has been a lot of bad blood on this forum and it's time to stop, rule a line and get on with our lives.

66daystogo: please don't reply to santa. Forget it. It will only end in tears :'(

Oh, and the Queen Gertrude thing - accepted idiomatic usage of the quotation as described by Dr Hailsloame's English Idioms would appear to approve the context in which 66days has used it. But let's not get into that debate

 

[neo o]

Before you all get too hot under the collar at 66daystogo's comments I think I should offer a wee bit of evidence in defence ... Last semester, I too did Business Statistics and Forecasting with Nelson and Abbas. I too did nothing all semester. I too 'failed' (39%), yet on my transcript it states that I attained a "Pass" in the subject. I am happy with that, but I do feel it has diluted the quality of my degree a bit - not that I'm complaining

(I also think 66daystogo said "PASS" in capitals to highlight the point, not to refer to the program.)

Also, santa, what right do YOU have to demand PERSONAL details from anyone on this forum???? You ARE NOT a representative of UoW's academic standards monitoring agency (are you?)? Look, you obviously have a problem with 66days - just 'build a bridge' my friend, build a bridge.

And before you ask, NO, I am not going to provide you with my student details so you can go and 'confirm' this. I think we should all just admit that there has been a lot of bad blood on this forum and it's time to stop, rule a line and get on with our lives.

66daystogo: please don't reply to santa. Forget it. It will only end in tears :'(

Oh, and the Queen Gertrude thing - accepted idiomatic usage of the quotation as described by Dr Hailsloame's English Idioms would appear to approve the context in which 66days has used it. But let's not get into that debate

Moonlight, could you run an IP check on this guy? IT'S 666 IN DISGUISE!

 

[Frigid]

Oh, and the Queen Gertrude thing - accepted idiomatic usage of the quotation as described by Dr Hailsloame's English Idioms would appear to approve the context in which 66days has used it. But let's not get into that debate

with the greatest respect, google yields nought on your Dr Hailsloame's English Idioms.

btw, "Bob", welcome to BoredofStudies...

 

[wanton-wonton]

Just because one doesn't have a high post count doesn't necessarily mean his input is any less credible than both of Fridigs(sp?) or neo_o's.

 

[santaslayer]

Before you all get too hot under the collar at 66daystogo's comments I think I should offer a wee bit of evidence in defence ... Last semester, I too did Business Statistics and Forecasting with Nelson and Abbas. I too did nothing all semester. I too 'failed' (39%), yet on my transcript it states that I attained a "Pass" in the subject. I am happy with that, but I do feel it has diluted the quality of my degree a bit - not that I'm complaining

(I also think 66daystogo said "PASS" in capitals to highlight the point, not to refer to the program.)

Also, santa, what right do YOU have to demand PERSONAL details from anyone on this forum???? You ARE NOT a representative of UoW's academic standards monitoring agency (are you?)? Look, you obviously have a problem with 66days - just 'build a bridge' my friend, build a bridge.

And before you ask, NO, I am not going to provide you with my student details so you can go and 'confirm' this. I think we should all just admit that there has been a lot of bad blood on this forum and it's time to stop, rule a line and get on with our lives.

66daystogo: please don't reply to santa. Forget it. It will only end in tears :'(

Oh, and the Queen Gertrude thing - accepted idiomatic usage of the quotation as described by Dr Hailsloame's English Idioms would appear to approve the context in which 66days has used it. But let's not get into that debate

1) The subject you are referring to is incorrect. We are talking about the introductory COMM121 course.

2) That is right, I don't have any right to demand anything from anyone. But where in my previous post do you personally interpret that I demanded anything? What I do have a right in though, is the knowledge of what is required in order to pass the subject, because clearly, the example 66 has mentioned is beyond the guidelines of the subject outline. I have all the right in the world to express my concern for this inconsistency and demand that the said lecturer give me a full explanation of his passing criteria. I 'too' have a friend that got 39% as an overall mark but failed. I don't think it is unreasonable to ask for such evidence.

3) This is also to clear the Dr's name. If 66 cannot provide me with anything satisfactory, then I will provide the Dr with the forum link and give him the option of taking it further with 66. It is clearly defaming the good Dr if what he/she has said is incorrect. Moderator's please retain 66's IP address. Thank you.

4) Are you the said cousin? It's funny how a new account pops up at THIS time!

 

[santaslayer]

I'm not.
But I know who he is. And I am sick of him taking out his aggression from these stupid forums out on his friends

He takes his aggression out on people because some people have hammered him in an online forum? WoW. Interesting character.

 

[BobPrior]

He takes his aggression out on people because some people have hammered him in an online forum? WoW. Interesting character.

I know, I know
I have just rung 66 and I have convinced them (yes, them) never again to visit this site or contribute to these forums. They can be petty, as their recent posts have shown to the whole online community. Their comments are not in the spirit of this forum, and so now you will all be spared their messages.

 

[santaslayer]

I know, I know
I have just rung 66 and I have convinced them (yes, them) never again to visit this site or contribute to these forums. They can be petty, as their recent posts have shown to the whole online community. Their comments are not in the spirit of this forum, and so now you will all be spared their messages.

I thought you had 4 posts before? Mods have deleted some of your posts already?

If THEY do not visit these forums again then I will email the forum link to my lecturer Dr Nelson P and see where it goes from there. Of course, I will allow 'them' reasonably sufficent time to come up with something before I go off sending the email.

Mr Bob, wanton_wanton just sent me a PM assuring me of 66's credibility. I don't see why he needs to cease all posting activities. Tonight has been quite eventful. This is what happened in chronological order:

1) I respond to 66's post.

2) You, Mr Bobprior pop up from nowhere with a whopping 5 posts.

3) I respond to your post

4) wanton_wanton sends me a PM assuring me of 66's credibility. "he is more credible than you may think..."

5) You respond by referring 66 as 'them'.

I am trying very hard not to sound confused. I think all three IP addresses should be checked up on.

 

[66daystogo]

I thought you had 4 posts before? Mods have deleted some of your posts already?

If THEY do not visit these forums again then I will email the forum link to my lecturer Dr Nelson P and see where it goes from there. Of course, I will allow 'them' reasonably sufficent time to come up with something before I go off sending the email.

Mr Bob, wanton_wanton just sent me a PM assuring me of 66's credibility. I don't see why he needs to cease all posting activities. Tonight has been quite eventful. This is what happened in chronological order:

1) I respond to 66's post.

2) You, Mr Bobprior pop up from nowhere with a whopping 5 posts.

3) I respond to your post

4) wanton_wanton sends me a PM assuring me of 66's credibility. "he is more credible than you may think..."

5) You respond by referring 66 as 'them'.

I am trying very hard not to sound confused. I think all three IP addresses should be checked up on.

I am a professional shit stirrer, from melbourne, as it happens - hence my original interest in this forum. And, as you have so rightly shown, i can be a worthless piece of shit in many respects. My gf and I have been using the computer and forum usernames of a good friend of ours ... i know wanton-wanton knows him.

 

[santaslayer]

I am a professional shit stirrer, from melbourne, as it happens - hence my original interest in this forum. And, as you have so rightly shown, i can be a worthless piece of shit in many respects. My gf and I have been using the computer and forum usernames of a good friend of ours ... i know wanton-wanton knows him.

1) No you're not. You haven't stirred anything up yet.

2) I refuse to believe someone would go to the trouble of phoning a friend to talk about trivialties of an internet forum events. I hope people like that don't exist. That sounds like a vauge apology, using a another account. Of course, I will not go to the extent of believing it is an apology, since nothing like that has been said yet.

3) This is a predominately NSW dedicated forum for HSC'ers. Yes, I am still here.

4) I never said you were a worthless piece of shit. I may agree with you, but I never said anything to that extent.

5) Updated events:

a) wanton adds me to msn and starts to converse with me. hmmm...
b) he tells me this 66 person is actually 2 people.
c) the time difference between me posting the question of 'them' and 'him' and wanton explaining to me of multiple users of the account are within a few seconds...
6) 66 posts straight after. emphasising that this is a 2 person account. he also mentions wanton.

As I am saying, I am trying very hard not to sound counfused.

 

[wanton-wonton]

I hope you're not saying that I'm those two people. As of now, I'd say 66daystogo is gone, since he deleted all his posts.

 

[santaslayer]

Mods, Y R U Deleting All Of 66's Posts?

Please Retain Them As I Have To Use It.

Good Thing I Quoted Them All.



EDIT: oK, sorry mods, not ur fault.

anyway, i have all his statements quoted. deleting all posts does not do anything.

 

[wanton-wonton]

Maybe he/she deleted it themselves?

 

[santaslayer]

Maybe he/she deleted it themselves?

Yeah, sorry.

I never said you were any of them two, why be so defensive for?

I don't understand why he deleted all his posts for. He seems to be so very credible with his assurances that UoW (Dr Nelson) likes to be very nice to students and hand out passes to turds that should of clearly failed. Why do that for? It was such a good opportunity to uncover all the dodgy shit UoW does. Daymn!

Wanton, I don't get how he is so smart as you have clearly demonstrated how successful he is in the PM you sent. Why did he leave so early BoS so early. I would of liked to kniow him better and be best of buddies. He seems to be of very good character. We would of done so many things together...sharing and caring like the buddies we're supposed to be...

Is his girlfriend hot?

It's amusing how people like to say funny things on an open internet forum, esp a LAW one.

 

[66daystogo]

That sounds like a vauge apology, using a another account. Of course, I will not go to the extent of believing it is an apology, since nothing like that has been said yet.

I unreservedly apologise for the offence I have caused here. I have been stupid, petty and naive. I have wronged santaslayer and have said incorrect, hurtful things.

I am sorry.

I have made misrepresentations, based on incorrect information, about the University of Wollongong which I retract. I have been an idiot to think that what I was writing was in some way a prank, I realise that it is not. I have been stupid. I have been offensive. I am sorry.

Everything I have said I withdraw and I offer my most sincere apology to those I have offended with my posts. I truly am very, very sorry.

 

[wanton-wonton]

I never said you were any of them two, why be so defensive for?

I thought you implied that this whole thing was set up. It was actually very spontaneous. All a coincidence, I guess.

I'm just a bystander, don't get me involved.

 

[Frigid]

i grow tiresome of this thread. let's get back to something remotely related to law, shall we?

 

[santaslayer]

I thought you implied that this whole thing was set up. It was actually very spontaneous. All a coincidence, I guess.

I'm just a bystander, don't get me involved.

kekekkekeekkeehh...

we'll know after an ip check...lol



the funny thing is that u referred to 66 as a he in ur first post about him deleting all posts...
then u go on by confirming that he/she may of deleted the posts in ur second post.

maybe im reading into it too much. pedantic prick i am.

anyway, ip check should solve many problems.
the federal police are very good with ip checks.