Posts by Petra
Last ←Newer Page 1 2 3 4 5 Older→ First
-
I wouldn't put too much stock in online polls or txt polls, as they are easily skewed. I tested this with both Close Up and the Campbell polls by seeing if I could vote twice. I could. So it's my guess that the energised redneck crowd are skewing the data by voting repeatedly.
-
Damn. Those hillbillies are having too much fun. I want a mud pool and a pick up truck pulling my toboggan! That's awesome.
It'll be interesting to see how things play out when Henry returns. I'd love to see him make some bitter bigoted gaffe, and have his fellow presenters take a stand and walk out. I know it's just a pipe dream, but it would be GREAT television... -
I'm going to be completely cynical, and suggest that Andi's "resignation" and "leaked email" are carefully designed to take some heat off Paul. I bet it's all done with a wink, wink, nudge, nudge, "good girl, here have some more money" from the higher ups. She's the faux fall girl that they hope will shift and abate the debate.
-
And the ass o' nonce is still Paul Henry.
-
Paul Henry is a jealous oaf. Susan Boyle was born with some retardation, but she is a beautifully talented singer who is able to bring great joy to millions of people around the world. Paul Henry, on the other hand, is just retarded.
-
@andin
tee hee
Please tell me your name is Andrew and that you're an Acountant, drunk in parnership with Taylor McLachlan. :-D
-
A couple of things that have been over-looked in the discussion both here and at large are a) the lower drinking age and, b) the marked increase in recent years by the booze barns near the campus to cynically promote binge drinking.
This. Anyone who thinks there isn't a supply angle here isn't thinking like a booze baron.
Yeah, not to mention the way it's marketed. "Export Yourself!"
Export yourself, alright.
I'm not for banning booze, by any means; but I am for banning its advertising. The ads target young people, driving a culture that believes it's not a fun party until you're pissed as, bro. -
Sorry Mr 46 year old accountant, we're going to have to decline application because it appears you rioted when you were 18.
Unlikely. They suffer the consequences of their actions for a while, takes them a bit longer to get off the ground, and then after proving themselves for a number of years that they have developed positively as a human being then I doubt very much that they would suffer all that much over crimes committed when they were 18.
-
Reminds me how the first universities in western Europe were developed under the aegis of the Catholic Church. Thankfully the concept graduated to one of research, non-secular education and (eek) enlightenment. But yes we could revert and start expelling students for their sins, and just pray that our next nobel winning physicist doesn't have a penchant for getting on the piss.
Really? It reminds you of that? Good grief!
I'm not talking about perceived sins under some fundamentalist religious order of days gone by; I'm talking about actual criminal behaviour resulting in damage to property and persons. I have no problem with people getting on the piss and going a bit wild. I do have a problem with willfull damage and violent actions against others (even if those others were nasty fascist policemen, oh my!)
Also, in many professional environments (law enforcement, education, social work, many corporations both public and private), if you do something so egregious in your spare time that it brings disrepute upon your profession, then you will be either sacked or punitively dealt with by your employment body. In this instance, a few bad eggs are bring disrepute upon all of studentdom, Otago Univeristy as a whole, and possibly Dunedin as a city, too.
Sure, Mike Mechanic may not lose his job for drunken charge of a riot, but Andrew Accountant with a view to parnership with Taylor McLachlan probably will (or at the very least lose his prospects as a potential future partner).
Actions have consequences, even outside Medieval churches. And these bloody selfish few are destroying it for everyone else - they will pretty much dictate whether or not Undie 500 will even continue in future years. Now that is not fucking fair.
-
But where did the angle that these kids are some kind of upper-class oiks come from? I have no idea about their backgrounds, but these are Otago Uni students (and/or Canty ones) we're talking about - not Oxbridge or Harvard students. (I only mean that in a cost per degree way - not in quality of education).
Sure, not everyone can afford a university education, but referring to these students as white, rich and privileged only seems to vent anger against a strawman stereotype.Fair cop. Guilty as charged.