Lord Presents..What Made Your Day + What Ruined Your Day IV

[sledger]

Sounds like someone who'd perform a back-alley abortion.

Dr. Uppercut and Dr. Sledger just sound like a tag-team duo.

haha what a great team that would be.

 

[cpr]

Yeah. In my experience most are extremely risk-averse institutions in most regards, including in relation to decisions regarding hiring/firing.

Civil Service was just as bad, getting rid of a 'tard was pretty much impossible. In our case dealing with a union whos stance was 'well, you're the enemy, so instantly your decision is awful' made even the most obvious sackings a complete nightmare.

Yeah in pink spandex.

And this is why I tape up the webcam on my laptop....

 

[sledger]

Civil Service was just as bad, getting rid of a 'tard was pretty much impossible. In our case dealing with a union whos stance was 'well, you're the enemy, so instantly your decision is awful' made even the most obvious sackings a complete nightmare.




And this is why I tape up the webcam on my laptop....

Yeah, my sympathies. I think I've said it before, but around here you can literally just refuse to do key aspects of your job and suffer no consequences.

 

[dontcloseyoureyes]

haha what a great team that would be.

Debatable.

 

[sledger]

Debatable.

 

[sledger]

in b4

 

[cpr]

Yeah, my sympathies. I think I've said it before, but around here you can literally just refuse to do key aspects of your job and suffer no consequences.

I once had a member of staff who refused to turn up for work for 11 weeks because he was stressed that his mother in law had come to England for the summer and was living at his. I ended up losing my rag (and getting in **** for it) and told him that the only place he was guaranteed not to see her was at his desk. We all knew he was working elsewhere whilst claiming sick, but couldn't catch him in the act (read: I was actually banned from going to the shop I knew he was working in by my managers, because I could be seen as victimising him). He only came back on week 12 as that was the point I could bypass the sick absence guidance and start motion to dismiss. He then had a request to go part time approved.......


The near impossibility of sacking someone makes it all the more impressive they managed to boot me a year later, though admittedly I basically asked them to do it as I knew it'd involve a 5 figure payout to do it (genuinely thought they'd baulk at it, but nope, they called my bluff)

 

[stephen]

And here I am slaving away on the private sector getting in the **** because the project manager doesn't like technical improvements in a technology team.

 

[Daemon]

This is the best thing I have ever seen

 

[Gnske]

Ruined: Think I ****ed up my dissertation proposal I had to send to one of the faculty members who barely knows me. Was disgustingly half-baked. The only cultural heritage people in the Archaeology department are either retiring or going on leave beginning of next year, so I have to suck up to a person who only knows me from answering questions in completely the wrong fashion in first year.

I really don't want to wait til the end of 2019 to get this nonsense done.

 

[Athlai]

Gnske's out of character posts always give such interesting insight into his life.

 

[Gnske]

Gnske's out of character posts always give such interesting insight into his life.

Whining about my actual life on an online board dedicated to a sport where you hit a ball with a stick, I never miss the chance Athlai.

 

[sledger]

Tbh if it's half baked it'll still pass.

 

[Gnske]

Tbh if it's half baked it'll still pass.

I believe you on that, it's just getting the high-in-demand person to say yes. I mean I've seen what people write their theses on, it could be so much worse an idea I'm flogging 10-12k out of.

 

[sledger]

Sounds like you'll be fine.

Tbh with pieces of work that are in the 12k word range, if the author actually writes 12k words they will almost always pass. It's basically easier to pass than fail if you meet this criterion.

The only way to fail a 12k word dissertation if what you have written is indescribably poor, completely incomprehensible, or is massively short of the word limit.

Half-baked pieces of work that aren't great/a bit messy/mostly descriptive/very underdeveloped, but are not total shite will always pass. They might not do well, but they will pass.

 

[Gnske]

Sounds like you'll be fine.

Tbh with pieces of work that are in the 12k word range, if the author actually writes 12k words they will almost always pass. It's basically easier to pass than fail if you meet this criterion.

The only way to fail a 12k word dissertation if what you have written is indescribably poor, completely incomprehensible, or is massively short of the word limit.

Half-baked pieces of work that aren't great/a bit messy/mostly descriptive/very underdeveloped, but are not total shite will always pass. They might not do well, but they will pass.

Gotta get those post-grads moving out I guess. That's very, very interesting though and from what I've heard from mates, the threshold is just as low in this corner of the world.

Know what my Plan B is then, legislation review. Delicious.

 

[sledger]

Gotta get those post-grads moving out I guess. That's very, very interesting though and from what I've heard from mates, the threshold is just as low in this corner of the world.

Know what my Plan B is then, legislation review. Delicious.

Yeah, the general rule of thumb around these parts is that if a piece of work just describes the law/state of the art, and does so in a way that is mostly accurate and comprehensible, it will ordinarily be given a grade in the range of 50-55, which is basically the equivalent of a C-.

To get a grade in the 40s (which I guess would be a D) you have to basically do the same thing, but worse, with inaccuracies and less comprehensibility. "Basic but just about competent" is how work in this bracket is usually described.

To fail you have to do something really ****ing bad. We're talking about "a totally inadequate knowledge and understanding of the topic" and/or "almost nothing of merit" territory here.

 

[StephenZA]

Yeah, the general rule of thumb around these parts is that if a piece of work just describes the law/state of the art, and does so in a way that is mostly accurate and comprehensible, it will ordinarily be given a grade in the range of 50-55, which is basically the equivalent of a C-.

To get a grade in the 40s (which I guess would be a D) you have to basically do the same thing, but worse, with inaccuracies and less comprehensibility. To fail you have to do something really ****ing bad.

Less than 50 is not a fail?

 

[sledger]

Less than 50 is not a fail?

Less than 40 is a fail in the UK system.

Basically:

80-100 = Potentially a publishable piece of work

70-80 = First class

60-69 = Upper second class

50-59 = Lower second class

40-49 = Pass/Third class

30-39 = Fail

20-29 = A really bad fail

1-19 = basically nothing redeemable about this whatsoever

 

[Magrat Garlick]

reminds me of the eminently sensible Danish system

12: excellent
10: very good, only minor weaknesses
7: good, some weaknesses
4: pass, some major weaknesses
02: adequate, minimum required
00: inadequate
-3: unacceptable performance, no answer or totally irrelevant

who needs a 0 for a fail when you can use a -3