"®i©ardo" wrote in message
...
On 10/10/2010 19:54, Brimstone wrote:

"Bruce" wrote in message
...
®i©ardo wrote:

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in
contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.


My thoughts, exactly.

I don't know which is worse - people who do not care how wrong they
are, or people who do not know. In either case, the teaching
"profession"* has an awful lot to answer for.


[* Never was the word 'profession' so inappropriately applied.]

What is worse are the people with nothing better to do that scribble
interminably over a couple of mistakes. Quite obviously you and the PP
believe that people who make honest mistakes, in a totally unimportant
passage, should be shot. **** knows how you would react if it was a
similar error in a multi-billion pound contract.

Well, it would probably negate the contract, which demonstrates exactly
why such things are of the utmost importance! Unless, of course, you can
afford to throw billions of pounds by virtue of your ignorance or
stupidity.

But a newsgroup posting and a multi-billion pound contract are not even
close to being of the same importance are they?

Still, being a good Socialist (if there can be such a thing), it wouldn't
worry you, would it, as it would be someone else's money anyway.

If I were a socialist, good or bad, you might have a point. As I'm not, you
don't.

®i©ardo wrote:
On 10/10/2010 19:54, Brimstone wrote:
"Bruce" wrote in message
...
®i©ardo wrote:

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.


My thoughts, exactly.

I don't know which is worse - people who do not care how wrong they
are, or people who do not know. In either case, the teaching
"profession"* has an awful lot to answer for.


[* Never was the word 'profession' so inappropriately applied.]

What is worse are the people with nothing better to do that scribble
interminably over a couple of mistakes. Quite obviously you and the PP
believe that people who make honest mistakes, in a totally unimportant
passage, should be shot. **** knows how you would react if it was a
similar error in a multi-billion pound contract.





Well, it would probably negate the contract, which demonstrates exactly
why such things are of the utmost importance! Unless, of course, you can
afford to throw billions of pounds by virtue of your ignorance or
stupidity. Still, being a good Socialist (if there can be such a thing),
it wouldn't worry you, would it, as it would be someone else's money anyway.


It's pretty clear he doesn't give a toss either way, which very
effectively demonstrates the monumental arrogance of the profoundly
ignorant. He doesn't know, he doesn't care that he doesn't know, and
he doesn't care about the consequences of not knowing.

Not a winning combination. One can only hope that he is never placed
in a position where his ignorance could cause harm to others.

®i©ardo wrote:
On 10/10/2010 19:41, Bruce wrote:
wrote:

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.


My thoughts, exactly.

I don't know which is worse - people who do not care how wrong they
are, or people who do not know. In either case, the teaching
"profession"* has an awful lot to answer for.


[* Never was the word 'profession' so inappropriately applied.]


Strange that you should say that, as I hesitated over whether or not to
use the word "profession", relating to teaching, in an earlier posting.


As if we needed to be reminded of the very low quality of the average
"trained" teacher, a recent proposal that only people with a 2:2
honours degree (or higher grade) would be accepted for teacher
training was shouted down on the basis that hardly anyone with a
maths- or science-related qualification would then apply.

None of my secondary maths or science teachers had a degree that was
lower than a 2:1. About half had Firsts. And that was in the days
when achieving a 2:1 required a far higher standard than now, and a
First was very rare indeed.

Today, a First is very common indeed, 2:1 is the norm and 2:2 degrees
are handed out like confetti. Yet it is a widely-held belief that
there would be a shortage of maths and science graduates applying for
teacher training, presumably because so very few applying today have
reached the 2:2 standard.

This is a result of 13 years of Labour's dumbing down, contrary to
Tony Blair's oft-repeated mantra that "Education, Education,
Education" was his No.1 priority.

On 10/10/2010 20:44, Bruce wrote:
wrote:
On 10/10/2010 19:54, Brimstone wrote:
wrote in message
...
wrote:

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.


My thoughts, exactly.

I don't know which is worse - people who do not care how wrong they
are, or people who do not know. In either case, the teaching
"profession"* has an awful lot to answer for.


[* Never was the word 'profession' so inappropriately applied.]

What is worse are the people with nothing better to do that scribble
interminably over a couple of mistakes. Quite obviously you and the PP
believe that people who make honest mistakes, in a totally unimportant
passage, should be shot. **** knows how you would react if it was a
similar error in a multi-billion pound contract.





Well, it would probably negate the contract, which demonstrates exactly
why such things are of the utmost importance! Unless, of course, you can
afford to throw billions of pounds by virtue of your ignorance or
stupidity. Still, being a good Socialist (if there can be such a thing),
it wouldn't worry you, would it, as it would be someone else's money anyway.


It's pretty clear he doesn't give a toss either way, which very
effectively demonstrates the monumental arrogance of the profoundly
ignorant. He doesn't know, he doesn't care that he doesn't know, and
he doesn't care about the consequences of not knowing.

Not a winning combination. One can only hope that he is never placed
in a position where his ignorance could cause harm to others.


Superb succinct comment.

--
Moving things in still pictures

On 10/10/2010 20:58, Bruce wrote:
wrote:
On 10/10/2010 19:41, Bruce wrote:
wrote:

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.


My thoughts, exactly.

I don't know which is worse - people who do not care how wrong they
are, or people who do not know. In either case, the teaching
"profession"* has an awful lot to answer for.


[* Never was the word 'profession' so inappropriately applied.]


Strange that you should say that, as I hesitated over whether or not to
use the word "profession", relating to teaching, in an earlier posting.


As if we needed to be reminded of the very low quality of the average
"trained" teacher, a recent proposal that only people with a 2:2
honours degree (or higher grade) would be accepted for teacher
training was shouted down on the basis that hardly anyone with a
maths- or science-related qualification would then apply.

None of my secondary maths or science teachers had a degree that was
lower than a 2:1. About half had Firsts. And that was in the days
when achieving a 2:1 required a far higher standard than now, and a
First was very rare indeed.

Today, a First is very common indeed, 2:1 is the norm and 2:2 degrees
are handed out like confetti. Yet it is a widely-held belief that
there would be a shortage of maths and science graduates applying for
teacher training, presumably because so very few applying today have
reached the 2:2 standard.

This is a result of 13 years of Labour's dumbing down, contrary to
Tony Blair's oft-repeated mantra that "Education, Education,
Education" was his No.1 priority.



Unfortunately it pre-dates those lost 13 years. My secondary education
was from the mid-1950s, when "reading ritin' and riffmatic" were crucial
to one's progress. It DID matter in those far off days.

Ah well, it's the price of progress. As long as we dumb down the
brightest of our children in the interests of equality, we'll have
nothing to worry about, will we?

LCD rules, OK!

--
Moving things in still pictures

"®i©ardo" wrote in message
...
On 10/10/2010 20:44, Bruce wrote:
wrote:
On 10/10/2010 19:54, Brimstone wrote:
wrote in message
...
wrote:

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in
contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.


My thoughts, exactly.

I don't know which is worse - people who do not care how wrong they
are, or people who do not know. In either case, the teaching
"profession"* has an awful lot to answer for.


[* Never was the word 'profession' so inappropriately applied.]

What is worse are the people with nothing better to do that scribble
interminably over a couple of mistakes. Quite obviously you and the PP
believe that people who make honest mistakes, in a totally unimportant
passage, should be shot. **** knows how you would react if it was a
similar error in a multi-billion pound contract.





Well, it would probably negate the contract, which demonstrates exactly
why such things are of the utmost importance! Unless, of course, you can
afford to throw billions of pounds by virtue of your ignorance or
stupidity. Still, being a good Socialist (if there can be such a thing),
it wouldn't worry you, would it, as it would be someone else's money
anyway.


It's pretty clear he doesn't give a toss either way, which very
effectively demonstrates the monumental arrogance of the profoundly
ignorant. He doesn't know, he doesn't care that he doesn't know, and
he doesn't care about the consequences of not knowing.

Not a winning combination. One can only hope that he is never placed
in a position where his ignorance could cause harm to others.


Superb succinct comment.

Which is sadly inaccurate.

On 11 Oct, 11:25, "Brimstone" wrote:
"®i©ardo" wrote in message

...



On 10/10/2010 20:44, Bruce wrote:
*wrote:
On 10/10/2010 19:54, Brimstone wrote:
*wrote in message
m...
*wrote:

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved" A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in
contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of social
equality in dumbing everybody down.

My thoughts, exactly.

I don't know which is worse - people who do not care how wrong they
are, or people who do not know. In either case, the teaching
"profession"* has an awful lot to answer for.

[* Never was the word 'profession' so inappropriately applied.]

What is worse are the people with nothing better to do that scribble
interminably over a couple of mistakes. Quite obviously you and the PP
believe that people who make honest mistakes, in a totally unimportant
passage, should be shot. **** knows how you would react if it was a
similar error in a multi-billion pound contract.

Well, it would probably negate the contract, which demonstrates exactly
why such things are of the utmost importance! Unless, of course, you can
afford to throw billions of pounds by virtue of your ignorance or
stupidity. Still, being a good Socialist (if there can be such a thing),
it wouldn't worry you, would it, as it would be someone else's money
anyway.

It's pretty clear he doesn't give a toss either way, which very
effectively demonstrates the monumental arrogance of the profoundly
ignorant. *He doesn't know, he doesn't care that he doesn't know, and
he doesn't care about the consequences of not knowing.

Not a winning combination. *One can only hope that he is never placed
in a position where his ignorance could cause harm to others.

Superb succinct comment.

Which is sadly inaccurate.

I've been struggling to work out why not learning punctuation at
school is more likely to cause harm to others than not learning
geography, or anything else that one might not have paid attention to
in lessons or been taught badly.

It's the worst hyperbole ever.

"MIG" wrote in message
...
On 11 Oct, 11:25, "Brimstone" wrote:
"®i©ardo" wrote in message

...



On 10/10/2010 20:44, Bruce wrote:
wrote:
On 10/10/2010 19:54, Brimstone wrote:
wrote in message
m...
wrote:

We'll be getting the "well, you know what I mean" response when it
is
pointed out that, by virtue of their illiteracy, someone has
written
utter scribble. When I used to lecture on English contract law I
was
forever telling the gormless scrotes - all of whom had "achieved"
A*
GCSE English, of course - that what they'd written meant something
completely different to what they thought it meant. This, in
contractual
terms could have meant an utter disaster. Yet, throughout their
schooling years punctuation and grammar had been totally ignored,
perhaps because the students had been taught by illiterates.

Still, given that now, it seems, the educational norm is to be
illiterate - and innumerate, which is part of the same problem - I
suppose we'll have to accept the NUT has achieved a measure of
social
equality in dumbing everybody down.

My thoughts, exactly.

I don't know which is worse - people who do not care how wrong they
are, or people who do not know. In either case, the teaching
"profession"* has an awful lot to answer for.

[* Never was the word 'profession' so inappropriately applied.]

What is worse are the people with nothing better to do that scribble
interminably over a couple of mistakes. Quite obviously you and the
PP
believe that people who make honest mistakes, in a totally
unimportant
passage, should be shot. **** knows how you would react if it was a
similar error in a multi-billion pound contract.

Well, it would probably negate the contract, which demonstrates
exactly
why such things are of the utmost importance! Unless, of course, you
can
afford to throw billions of pounds by virtue of your ignorance or
stupidity. Still, being a good Socialist (if there can be such a
thing),
it wouldn't worry you, would it, as it would be someone else's money
anyway.

It's pretty clear he doesn't give a toss either way, which very
effectively demonstrates the monumental arrogance of the profoundly
ignorant. He doesn't know, he doesn't care that he doesn't know, and
he doesn't care about the consequences of not knowing.

Not a winning combination. One can only hope that he is never placed
in a position where his ignorance could cause harm to others.

Superb succinct comment.

Which is sadly inaccurate.

I've been struggling to work out why not learning punctuation at
school is more likely to cause harm to others than not learning
geography, or anything else that one might not have paid attention to
in lessons or been taught badly.

Language, written and spoken, is the only subject taught in schools [1]
which is used as a means of communicating information and ideas to others.
If one does not use a form of language understood by those with whom one is
attempting to communicate then one's efforts are not merely in vain they
could cause harm both to oneself and to others.

[1] For the sake of discussion I will accept that maths can also be used to
communicate.

It's the worst hyperbole ever.

In the case of those who "go on" at length about errors in a Usenet posting
when the overall context is clear, I agree.

On 2010\10\11 12:37, Brimstone wrote:

Language, written and spoken, is the only subject taught in schools [1]
which is used as a means of communicating information and ideas to
others. If one does not use a form of language understood by those with
whom one is attempting to communicate then one's efforts are not merely
in vain they could cause harm both to oneself and to others.

[1] For the sake of discussion I will accept that maths can also be used
to communicate.

Physics can be used to communicate too - the Yanks certainly got their
message across in Hiroshima.

"Basil Jet" wrote in message
...
On 2010\10\11 12:37, Brimstone wrote:

Language, written and spoken, is the only subject taught in schools [1]
which is used as a means of communicating information and ideas to
others. If one does not use a form of language understood by those with
whom one is attempting to communicate then one's efforts are not merely
in vain they could cause harm both to oneself and to others.

[1] For the sake of discussion I will accept that maths can also be used
to communicate.

Physics can be used to communicate too - the Yanks certainly got their
message across in Hiroshima.

I'm sure you'll correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't physics a maths based
discipline?