People you shouldn't trust
Moderator: Jon O'Neill
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who start Facebook updates with "That moment when..."
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who write to Susie Dent to ask about the origin of some word or saying, when they could just Google it. (If these people really exist and aren't made up by the show.)
- Johnny Canuck
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1649
- Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
- Location: Montréal 😃, Québec 😕, Canada 😃
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Frak. Apparently, I am officially Not To Be Trusted.Gavin Chipper wrote:People who write to Susie Dent to ask about the origin of some word or saying, when they could just Google it. (If these people really exist and aren't made up by the show.)
I'm not dead yet. In a rut right now because of stress from work. I'll be back later in S89. I also plan to bring back the Mastergram - if I can find a way to run a timer or clock through pure MediaWiki without having to upload to Vimeo every time.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Unlucky. OK, I'll allow that such people are to be trusted if they write in just to see if they can get their question read out on television, as long as they do not do so in as a genuine pursuit of information (unless as just a secondary means) - i.e. they still just Google it themselves anyway.Johnny Canuck wrote:Frak. Apparently, I am officially Not To Be Trusted.Gavin Chipper wrote:People who write to Susie Dent to ask about the origin of some word or saying, when they could just Google it. (If these people really exist and aren't made up by the show.)
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 3:21 pm
- Location: Dublin
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who arbitrarily change the rules and add caveats just so they don't offend people they want to appear nice to.Gavin Chipper wrote:Unlucky. OK, I'll allow that such people are to be trusted if they write in just to see if they can get their question read out on television, as long as they do not do so in as a genuine pursuit of information (unless as just a secondary means) - i.e. they still just Google it themselves anyway.Johnny Canuck wrote:Frak. Apparently, I am officially Not To Be Trusted.Gavin Chipper wrote:People who write to Susie Dent to ask about the origin of some word or saying, when they could just Google it. (If these people really exist and aren't made up by the show.)
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6303
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who point out the above inconsistently ![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
- Mark Deeks
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who say "passed away" instead of "died". Just say it.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
- Mark Deeks
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am
Re: People you shouldn't trust
I mean, what's the purpose of changing it? When people pass away, they die. Do we not just substitute "passed away" for "died" when we hear it? I think so, in which case, why do the first substitution? Just say it. Don't be afraid of death. It's the most normal thing going.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: People you shouldn't trust
There are countless equivalent examples too, and it all depends on circumstance and knowing your audience. Essentially I get what you're saying but I disagree that it's never appropriate to pussyfoot around certain things. But then I am a big girl's blouse.
- Mark Deeks
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am
Re: People you shouldn't trust
We as humans are burdened by the awareness of our own mortality, unlike, say, worms. The best we can do is deal with it. I get the need to pussyfoot, but I just don't know why this does it.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6303
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
I'm guessing that you haven't lost anyone close recently.
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6303
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
No I don't mean your next door neighbour
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
- Ian Volante
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3965
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Why would that make a difference? A family member of mine died quite recently, and I still felt no need to descent into euphemism to soften the fact that he karked it at an undue age. Does using phrases like 'passed away', or the laughable 'fell asleep' make anyone feel better about things?Marc Meakin wrote:I'm guessing that you haven't lost anyone close recently.
I worry about the poor bastards who got buried because they simply fell asleep.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6303
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
I am one of the dying breed of people with a little decorum when dealing with delicate matters like bereavement.
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
- Ian Volante
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3965
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Don't you mean 'passing away breed'?Marc Meakin wrote:I am one of the dying breed of people with a little decorum when dealing with delicate matters like bereavement.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Journalists/newsreaders who use jargonistic phrases on the general public without stopping to think that people might not know what the fuck they're on about. For example:
Self-immolation
Diplomatic Cables
Deficit (no-one actually knew what this meant when the term first came into common usage in about 2008)
Abolishing the 10p tax rate
There's loads more. That's just what sprung to mind.
Self-immolation
Diplomatic Cables
Deficit (no-one actually knew what this meant when the term first came into common usage in about 2008)
Abolishing the 10p tax rate
There's loads more. That's just what sprung to mind.
- Mark Deeks
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am
Re: People you shouldn't trust
No one close to me has died or passed away recently, no. But I don't think that changes my opinion any. Death sucks, but I don't know if changing its name helps with that.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
- Matt Morrison
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 7822
- Joined: Wed Oct 22, 2008 2:27 pm
- Location: London
- Contact:
Re: People you shouldn't trust
You and Ian are both saying "don't use 'passed away' with me, say what you mean" which is totally and utterly fine. But I bet you both know _other_ people who wouldn't appreciate the kind of bluntness you're advocating, and not trusting people purely based on their attempts to make something a little less harsh seems weird; even if you disagree with them doing it, I can't see how their reasons to do so are untrustworthy.
- Ian Volante
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3965
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
Re: People you shouldn't trust
I understand it, I didn't lump in on the non-trust side of things though. If I was talking to someone who was upset about a death, I'd be gentle and understanding as appropriate, but I'd be surprised if I ended up using a euphemism. I'd probably just talk about something else if they were that sensitive.Matt Morrison wrote:You and Ian are both saying "don't use 'passed away' with me, say what you mean" which is totally and utterly fine. But I bet you both know _other_ people who wouldn't appreciate the kind of bluntness you're advocating, and not trusting people purely based on their attempts to make something a little less harsh seems weird; even if you disagree with them doing it, I can't see how their reasons to do so are untrustworthy.
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles
- Adam Gillard
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1762
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:42 pm
- Location: About 45 minutes south-east of Thibodaux, Louisiana
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who get on an escalator on the right (standing) side and then change their mind part-way up and cut in front of someone to use the left (walking) side.
Mike Brown: "Round 12: T N R S A E I G U
C1: SIGNATURE (18) ["9; not written down"]
C2: SEATING (7)
Score: 108–16 (max 113)
Another niner for Adam and yet another century. Well done, that man."
C1: SIGNATURE (18) ["9; not written down"]
C2: SEATING (7)
Score: 108–16 (max 113)
Another niner for Adam and yet another century. Well done, that man."
- Thomas Carey
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1480
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:17 pm
- Location: North-West of Bradford
- Contact:
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who don't use the standing/walking side system.Adam Gillard wrote:People who get on an escalator on the right (standing) side and then change their mind part-way up and cut in front of someone to use the left (walking) side.
cheers maus
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
When I started this thread, the whole trust thing wasn't meant to be taken literally. It was supposed to be more of a humorous thing. Just "people who do wrong stuff" really.Matt Morrison wrote:even if you disagree with them doing it, I can't see how their reasons to do so are untrustworthy.
- Johnny Canuck
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1649
- Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
- Location: Montréal 😃, Québec 😕, Canada 😃
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who use enclosing punctuation marks or all capitals for emphasis in online contexts where bold, italic and underline are available.Matt Morrison wrote:You and Ian are both saying "don't use 'passed away' with me, say what you mean" which is totally and utterly fine. But I bet you both know _other_ people who wouldn't appreciate the kind of bluntness you're advocating, and not trusting people purely based on their attempts to make something a little less harsh seems weird; even if you disagree with them doing it, I can't see how their reasons to do so are untrustworthy.
I'm not dead yet. In a rut right now because of stress from work. I'll be back later in S89. I also plan to bring back the Mastergram - if I can find a way to run a timer or clock through pure MediaWiki without having to upload to Vimeo every time.
- Mark Deeks
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Yeah, this is pretty much where I was with it too. It's not as though if someone said "passed away" I would refuse to entrust my dog with them. I think it's a bit odd and unnecessary and speaks to a fear of death that is probably unhealthy, but I wouldn't actively distrust them.Gavin Chipper wrote:When I started this thread, the whole trust thing wasn't meant to be taken literally. It was supposed to be more of a humorous thing. Just "people who do wrong stuff" really.Matt Morrison wrote:even if you disagree with them doing it, I can't see how their reasons to do so are untrustworthy.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1266
- Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 9:57 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
At least "passed away" means "died", and everyone understands it. There was an item on the Liverpool FC website a couple of years ago, the day after Yaya Toure had had a dreadful game in the World Cup, expressing their sympathies to Kolo Toure on the passing of his brother. Turned out it was another brother, who had died.
The one that aggravates me is the universal way that the media will report "Tributes were being paid to X, who died today" which implies that the news story is the tributes. Do they think it somehow softens the blow, when the actual news is "X died today". Particularly when it's your local paper, and the tributes amount to his mother saying he was lovely, and his headmaster who clearly can't exactly remember which one he was.
The one that aggravates me is the universal way that the media will report "Tributes were being paid to X, who died today" which implies that the news story is the tributes. Do they think it somehow softens the blow, when the actual news is "X died today". Particularly when it's your local paper, and the tributes amount to his mother saying he was lovely, and his headmaster who clearly can't exactly remember which one he was.
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1783
- Joined: Sat Oct 23, 2010 3:21 pm
- Location: Dublin
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who share stuff from the "Humans of New York" facebook page. What the hell is that all about?
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6303
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Men who think that football is a bit shit
People who hate dogs
People who hate dogs
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
- Adam Gillard
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1762
- Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 8:42 pm
- Location: About 45 minutes south-east of Thibodaux, Louisiana
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Men
Mike Brown: "Round 12: T N R S A E I G U
C1: SIGNATURE (18) ["9; not written down"]
C2: SEATING (7)
Score: 108–16 (max 113)
Another niner for Adam and yet another century. Well done, that man."
C1: SIGNATURE (18) ["9; not written down"]
C2: SEATING (7)
Score: 108–16 (max 113)
Another niner for Adam and yet another century. Well done, that man."
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Sexists.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who say to me when I swear something along the lines of "I don't think I've ever heard you swear before. You don't seem like the sort of person who would swear." You'd be surprised how many people have actually said this to me over my life. I find it a really odd thing to even go through someone's mind. Cunts.
- Mark Deeks
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2446
- Joined: Tue Jul 12, 2011 3:15 am
Re: People you shouldn't trust
I get that sometimes except with "that was quite quick witted, for you". I don't think it's anything personal or thought through. I think people just say things sometimes.
Eoin Monaghan wrote:
He may not be liked on here, but you have to give some credit to Mark
- JimBentley
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2820
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
- Contact:
Re: People you shouldn't trust
My theory is that it means that you - in normal conversation - swear appropriately, i.e. only when the situation demands it to, for instance, reinforce a point. This distinguishes you from people who swear every other word. But then excessive and unnecessary use of swearing can be funny too.Gavin Chipper wrote:People who say to me when I swear something along the lines of "I don't think I've ever heard you swear before. You don't seem like the sort of person who would swear." You'd be surprised how many people have actually said this to me over my life. I find it a really odd thing to even go through someone's mind. Cunts.
I of course have mastered both techniques (but employ them in an entirely inappropriate manner).
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who think the word "literally" is off limits when you're exaggerating. As if saying "I literally died laughing" is any more inaccurate than saying "I died laughing".
- Johnny Canuck
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1649
- Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
- Location: Montréal 😃, Québec 😕, Canada 😃
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Agreed. In my opinion, "literally" has a legitimate figurative use.Gavin Chipper wrote:People who think the word "literally" is off limits when you're exaggerating. As if saying "I literally died laughing" is any more inaccurate than saying "I died laughing".
I'm not dead yet. In a rut right now because of stress from work. I'll be back later in S89. I also plan to bring back the Mastergram - if I can find a way to run a timer or clock through pure MediaWiki without having to upload to Vimeo every time.
Re: People you shouldn't trust
It annoys pedants, which is always a legitimate use.Johnny Canuck wrote:Agreed. In my opinion, "literally" has a legitimate figurative use.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who pronounce "Asia" with a "sh" sound rather than a "zh" sound.
Re: People you shouldn't trust
You're both literally wrong. Literally has (or should have*) a very specific function of distinguishing a statement from figurative, hyperbolic, ironic or metaphorical statements. Just because it is widely misused doesn't mean it should be ok to widely misuse it.Johnny Canuck wrote:Agreed. In my opinion, "literally" has a legitimate figurative use.Gavin Chipper wrote:People who think the word "literally" is off limits when you're exaggerating. As if saying "I literally died laughing" is any more inaccurate than saying "I died laughing".
*I see the OED has bowed to the stupidity of the general public by including a non-literal definition of literally....
1.1 (informal) Used for emphasis while not being literally true
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
The word "literally" doesn't have to be used literally any more than the word "hoarsely" has to be used "hoarsely". It's an error of levels or something to say otherwise. When you use the word "literally", it applies to what you are saying after the word "literally", not the word itself. And the word "literally" is just a word like any other in the English language, which can be used for exaggeration or figuratively.sean d wrote:You're both literally wrong. Literally has (or should have*) a very specific function of distinguishing a statement from figurative, hyperbolic, ironic or metaphorical statements. Just because it is widely misused doesn't mean it should be ok to widely misuse it.Johnny Canuck wrote:Agreed. In my opinion, "literally" has a legitimate figurative use.Gavin Chipper wrote:People who think the word "literally" is off limits when you're exaggerating. As if saying "I literally died laughing" is any more inaccurate than saying "I died laughing".
*I see the OED has bowed to the stupidity of the general public by including a non-literal definition of literally....
1.1 (informal) Used for emphasis while not being literally true
But if I was writing the dictionary, I might not bother with the informal sense. The point is that there is literally nothing special about the word. It can be used figuratively, but so can any other word. There example here is "I have received literally thousands of letters", but you could also say "I have received thousands of letters", in which case you'd be using the word "thousands" figuratively", but I don't think this needs to be mentioned in the dictionary entry for "thousands".
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Agreed. And it defines what follows as being in a literal, actual, non-figurative sense.Gavin Chipper wrote: When you use the word "literally", it applies to what you are saying after the word "literally", not the word itself.
Certainly you can state "I have received thousands of letters" and everyone would understand that you mean you have received loads of letters. But if you say you have "literally received thousands of letters" that should means you have received at least 2,000 letters. The whole point of the word literally is to denote the fact the fact that you have in a literal sense received thousands of letters.... you're saying "I'm not speaking figuratively here, I have actually received multiples of a thousand letters"
- Johnny Canuck
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1649
- Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
- Location: Montréal 😃, Québec 😕, Canada 😃
Re: People you shouldn't trust
In my opinion, the debate over whether or not "literally" can be used in an informal sense has been inconceivably overblown.
I'm not dead yet. In a rut right now because of stress from work. I'll be back later in S89. I also plan to bring back the Mastergram - if I can find a way to run a timer or clock through pure MediaWiki without having to upload to Vimeo every time.
Re: People you shouldn't trust
This is quite interesting (I literally don't understand all of it, but there are some beautiful sentences): http://www.theguardian.com/media/mind-y ... sused-word
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Nice circular definition there. I'd say defining a word by using the word itself is a bad idea.sean d wrote:I see the OED has bowed to the stupidity of the general public by including a non-literal definition of literally....
1.1 (informal) Used for emphasis while not being literally true
Last edited by Tim Down on Wed Jun 22, 2016 11:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- Johnny Canuck
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1649
- Joined: Sun Oct 03, 2010 10:44 pm
- Location: Montréal 😃, Québec 😕, Canada 😃
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Especially so if a word is defined by the word itself preceded by "not"!Tim Down wrote:Nice circular definition there. I'd say defining a word by using the word itself is a bad idea.Gavin Chipper wrote:I see the OED has bowed to the stupidity of the general public by including a non-literal definition of literally....
1.1 (informal) Used for emphasis while not being literally true
I'm not dead yet. In a rut right now because of stress from work. I'll be back later in S89. I also plan to bring back the Mastergram - if I can find a way to run a timer or clock through pure MediaWiki without having to upload to Vimeo every time.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
I think that quote has literally been attributed to the wrong person.Tim Down wrote:Nice circular definition there. I'd say defining a word by using the word itself is a bad idea.Gavin Chipper wrote:I see the OED has bowed to the stupidity of the general public by including a non-literal definition of literally....
1.1 (informal) Used for emphasis while not being literally true
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Oops. Sorry. Fixed now.Femidom Chunderthrust wrote: I think that quote has literally been attributed to the wrong person.
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who think that a scale from 1 to 10 is the same as a score out of 10. In fact, people who ask you to rate something on a scale from 1 to 10. Why 1 to 10? Why not 15 to 71? 0 has to got to be the zero point!
- JimBentley
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2820
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
- Contact:
Re: People you shouldn't trust
But it's not always 1 to 10, is it? Sometimes 0 is an option, so 0 to 10 (or eleven ranks). Depends on how the question is termed. I think you sometimes assume that people are less rigorous than you, when the case may be that they are in fact more rigorous.Gavin Chipper wrote:Why 1 to 10?
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Sometimes it is an option, and the people who give you a 0 to 10 scale can be trusted. But 1 to 10 is very common.JimBentley wrote:But it's not always 1 to 10, is it? Sometimes 0 is an option, so 0 to 10 (or eleven ranks). Depends on how the question is termed. I think you sometimes assume that people are less rigorous than you, when the case may be that they are in fact more rigorous.Gavin Chipper wrote:Why 1 to 10?
- Ian Volante
- Postmaster General
- Posts: 3965
- Joined: Wed Sep 03, 2008 8:15 pm
- Location: Edinburgh
- Contact:
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Why? One is the first number of the counting, and is somewhat more venerable than its upstart neighbour zero.Gavin Chipper wrote:0 has to got to be the zero point!
meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles meles
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
I just think it's odd to have a scale from 1 to 10. It's confusing for one thing. People might give a score of 5 thinking it's the middle, when actually it's equivalent to 4 out of 9. 5.5 would actually be the middle score. I'd be surprised if many people actually properly took into account this asymmetry when giving their score. It's also the same as saying "Add one to your score out of 9". Absolutely stone-cold mental, I genuinely can't see any other description that applies.Ian Volante wrote:Why? One is the first number of the counting, and is somewhat more venerable than its upstart neighbour zero.Gavin Chipper wrote:0 has to got to be the zero point!
If it's 0 to 10 then it's the same as 0 to 100 but with everything divided by 10. But comparing a 1 to 10 scale with a 1 to 100 scale doesn't work as nicely.
On The Last Leg, Jeremy Corbyn was asked on a scale of 1 to 10 how much "in" he was with the EU. This was later misreported on the news as his score out of 10 rather than his score out of 9, plus 1.
Last edited by Gavin Chipper on Fri Sep 16, 2016 3:57 pm, edited 1 time in total.
- JimBentley
- Fanatic
- Posts: 2820
- Joined: Fri Jan 11, 2008 6:39 pm
- Contact:
Re: People you shouldn't trust
On a sort of related (not really) aside, all our A-Level mock examinations had a maximum score of 100, i.e. if you answered everything correctly you would score 100. All of them except in Maths that is, for some reason the mock exams always had a maximum of 114, or 109, or 112, or some other seemingly-random figure between 100 and 120. Can anyone confirm if they can recall such a weird system? Maybe it still goes on, who knows.Gavin Chipper wrote:I just think it's odd to have a scale from 1 to 10. It's confusing for one thing. People might give a score of thinking it's the middle, when actually it's equivalent to 4 out of 9. 5.5 would actually be the middle score. I'd be surprised if many people actually properly took into account this asymmetry when giving their score. It's also the same as saying "Add one to your score out of 9". Absolutely stone-cold mental, I genuinely can't see any other description that applies.Ian Volante wrote:Why? One is the first number of the counting, and is somewhat more venerable than its upstart neighbour zero.Gavin Chipper wrote:0 has to got to be the zero point!
- Thomas Carey
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1480
- Joined: Sun Jan 09, 2011 4:17 pm
- Location: North-West of Bradford
- Contact:
Re: People you shouldn't trust
They pretty much all (except some weird tiny exam boards) use 75 now.Jim Bentley wrote: On a sort of related (not really) aside, all our A-Level mock examinations had a maximum score of 100, i.e. if you answered everything correctly you would score 100. All of them except in Maths that is, for some reason the mock exams always had a maximum of 114, or 109, or 112, or some other seemingly-random figure between 100 and 120. Can anyone confirm if they can recall such a weird system? Maybe it still goes on, who knows.
cheers maus
-
- Kiloposter
- Posts: 1123
- Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:15 pm
- Location: Harlow
Re: People you shouldn't trust
In our maths exam, each question was worth a number of marks for a correct answer, and the individual totals were scaled to make the best 100. On one occasion, after this had been done, it was found that I'd not been credited for an answer, so rather than change everybody's by rescaling, the master decided to keep the factor he'd used, so I ended with 102% ![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 13276
- Joined: Mon Jan 21, 2008 10:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who ever use the word "gifted" to describe anyone.
- Euan Slatter
- Acolyte
- Posts: 141
- Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2016 5:06 pm
- Location: Portishead, NORTH SOMERSET
Re: People you shouldn't trust
Sharon Osbourne on X Factor.
COUNTDOWN or THE TUBE? Which is better? There's only one way to find out....
Call it a draw![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
Robins Till I Die
Call it a draw
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
Robins Till I Die
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6303
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who post the exact same thing as the previous poster thus creating the impression of a great coincidence or the impression the poster is a dickwad
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6303
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
Re: People you shouldn't trust
People who post the exact same thing as the previous poster thus creating the impression of a great coincidence or the impression the poster is a dickwad
GR MSL GNDT MSS NGVWL SRND NNLYC NNCT
-
- Post-apocalypse
- Posts: 6303
- Joined: Wed May 20, 2009 3:37 pm
- Euan Slatter
- Acolyte
- Posts: 141
- Joined: Thu Oct 06, 2016 5:06 pm
- Location: Portishead, NORTH SOMERSET
Re: People you shouldn't trust
That just proved you were correct, that second postMarc Meakin wrote:Oops, I rest my case
![Very Happy :D](./images/smilies/icon_e_biggrin.gif)
COUNTDOWN or THE TUBE? Which is better? There's only one way to find out....
Call it a draw![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
Robins Till I Die
Call it a draw
![Smile :)](./images/smilies/icon_e_smile.gif)
Robins Till I Die