Pointless work.
‘The word failure should never be used in education.’ Discuss.
The word ‘failure’ gives one the feeling of incompetency, and the use of the word on any prideful human being would results in strong emotions within that human, that of resent over the aggressor. How the ‘victim’ uses these emotions to his advantage (or disadvantage), however, is entirely up to himself. Since the use of that word is double-edged, and the effects differ from person to person, can it really be said that the word ‘failure’ should never be used in education?
We think that the use of the word ‘failure’ at times serves as a reality check. For example, should Alastair be unable to pass his GP essay, he would be scolded by Mrs. Chng. Should Mrs. Chng use the word failure on Alastair, he would be forced to wake up from his dream state, because Mrs. Chng is his revered teacher and being scolded by her wrought a change in him—that would be to work harder for GP. In this instance, we can see that Alastair has changed positively because of he was chided by Mrs. Chng.
In this instance, we can see that Alastair has changed positively for Mrs. Chng after being scolded a failure by her.
However, let’s consider the case of Alastair being a prideful child. Mrs. Chng scolds Alastair, and his self-esteem took a blow. The use of that strong a word made Alastair withdrawn, and even less receptive towards GP, or any subjects in general. Can we say that the use of the word ‘failure’ was called for here?
If these two incidents are performed by the same teacher, and in the same manner, why is there such a profound difference between the impacts on the child at stake?
The answer is maturity. The use of the word ‘failure’ on a student who is emotionally unstable, or at least unreceptive, could possibly lead to a self-degradation of the student. Perhaps the student would give up on himself in the course of his study, while a more matured student would soldier on and think of it as nothing but incentive to work harder to not be looked down upon by the teacher, or not bother about that comment at all.
Derogatory terms should not be used against people who are less matured, as these comments could leave emotional scars which may take years to heal. However, such resolve-hardening words can be used against teenagers, as they are about to step into the working world, where the atmosphere is much harsher than schools, and where bosses rule their lives. The ability to tolerate humiliation is a virtue enviable of.
There is a case study done on the effects a teacher’s attitude towards students can bring about. In the experiment, the teacher was given 50 average students, and was told that they were academically brilliant. This same teacher was given another 50 students, who were academically brilliant, and was told that they were only average. After about a month, these 100 students were given a test, and the average score was about the same. This gives rise to the question—why is it that average students can do as well as people who were academically brilliant? The answer lies in the teacher. The teacher treated the average students like as if they were academically brilliant, and this in turn brought about a positive change within the students, and without having to scold them or use derogatory terms on them, they achieved better results than the class with academically brilliant students.
If such is the case, is there really a need for the use of such a strong word as ‘failure’?
We conclude that although the use of the word ‘failure’ may be justifiable, it should be used with discretion, and that it would be best to not be used at all, because it does not need to be used.
-- 4/29/2009 11:26:00 PM
Very sudden urges.
Many of you might have felt, or at least heard, the sudden gust on Thursday night. Or Wednesday night, my memory is of the phail.
It reminds me of monsoon canals, which can be flooded in minutes.
Or perhaps of random dams from remote areas in the world, which gets filled suddenly and the pressure rises and they break, or at least have to release the water at a high pressure.
Look at those majestic dams and the water they hold.
And think about waterfalls.
Then imagine your anus being the floodgates of an overflowing dam, and that you're a sitting waterfall. Not in the pee-sense.
Yes, I sexperienced that just now.
I was just lazing around in front of the computer, which means that I'm that lazing around at all because of the many stuff I have to do in front of the computer, like Runescape, Travian, and Restaurant City, when a sudden wave of Force/Area hit me. Recall those clunks in your brain when you finally understand an abstract mathematical concept, it's very similar to enlightenment, and that's what my rectum felt.
I had to tell Zap to help me sit for Travian, not unlike dying people who have to utter their last words. Or people who are going to war and have things to say to their loved ones.
And then huat ah! and the resultant mixture looked like laksa.
Heh you've just witnessed the glory of my post-shitting post.
-- 4/26/2009 12:41:00 PM
The more(of what?), the better.
I reformatted my computer several days back. Sunday to be sexact. And now it works perfectly, and the start-up time is orgasmic.
No more laggy computer. And I jizz in my pants.
So now I'm completely in love with the computer.
Which reminds me of how I think that there's no such thing as 'selflessness'.
Take for example, a young girl trapped in a burning house. Normal humans would give their all to save the girl. But why, even though they don't know her? Because they won't be able to live with the knowledge and guilt that they watched a girl burn to death. Or disfigurement followed by suicide as we live in a cruelly vain world.
In that case, the term 'selflessness' doesn't exist at all. It's only guilt, and perhaps 'conscience' that makes us want to save the girl.
As I was talking about me loving my computer, my computer decided to lag out a few times, and now I don't like it as much as I did already.
So now let's talk about how people in love always talks about impossible, corny, yet supposedly 'touching' stuff like 'I would die for you!!!111!!!'
Humans are above animals because they are calculative. First, take for example the girl trapped in a burning house. I am her boyfriend. I love her to bits and pieces because I'm one-dimensional and she allows me to play with her body as much as I like.
I realized that if I lose her, I'd probably lose my only possible sex toy as most other girls are not as naive as her. So, for the sake of my dick's sextisfaction and fulfillment, I decided to risk my life for her by charging in to save her.
If I were to die saving her, at least my conscience would be clear--I did try to save her. I mean, after all, she's my girlfriend.
If I were to survive and she remains alive, the possibility of her loving me, and sexpressing her love in the way I want it, would increase.
So, did I save her to have a clear conscience, or did I save her because I wanted sex? Or is it because of the 'commitment' I have for her as a boyfriend?
Like I mentioned, humans are calculative creatures. They would calculate which option would benefit them the most in a very short period of time(that's the reaction time for humans, the 0.3seconds. Or 0.03 seconds, I'm not very sure), and do it.
Thus the 'selflessness' doesn't exist. Conscience, guilt, benefits, all those are the stuff that defines a human's actions.
I'd do good stuff, like carry stuff for a kid/old people, but I think that's for a sense of fulfillment for my soul, and not because I truly wanted to help the other party. It's a feel-good factor in one's life, and many people become self-righteous because of that. Which is rather stupid.
Since we're on the topic of selflessness and love, we might as well talk more about relationships. When I say relationships, I mean boyfriend-girlfriend/girlfriend-girlfriend/boyfriend-boyfriend.
Before I stepped into JC, I've always known it as something rather boring, a status that I won't want to be in. After I step into JC, I confirmed my knowledge.
What I see is men after men getting tied down and shackled by the women of their choice, to do crazy stuff like hold hands, walk around the school, watch movies.
Is that all there is a to a relationship? I asked a rather close friend of mine who has a boyfriend, and she told me that being in a relationship would mean you can speak your mind to him, and you can walk around holding hands and stuff like that. That intimacy is leagues apart from a close friend.
I mean, you can always tell a close friend everything in your life. So what's the difference? The holding hands, blah blah blah, all with a close friend. And that's something characteristic of an intimate relationship.
Is it romantic to be holding onto sweaty palms? That idea repulses me. And won't you get tired of doing the same thing all the time? Why not hold onto my dick instead? I mean, it has a better grip(or it's better to grip) than my hand.
Is that all a relationship is about? And after you get tired of each other, you guys just move on? I've seen too many break-ups, or heard of them. It's not that fun, and I don't really like the relationship.
I mean, it's OK to be in a state of love, but it's another thing to have a status of being a boyfriend of someone you like.
I don't like the idea of commitment, because it's scary. I hate making promises because I know I can't keep to them. So why make promises only to break them?
I'd rather stick to the feeling.
And I think that SYF is unhealthy. I know that there are schools which treats 'Gold' as a form of humiliation, because gold with honours is what matters. If you don't have GWH, you're nothing, and all your hard work is denied.
Then you get all PMS-ey and stuff, because you feel that the judges are cockeyed/eared, and that they denied you the rewards for your efforts.
But is that the case? Isn't it an event that is supposed to promote the interest in whatever you're performing? OK I'm not into such artistic stuff because I'm a boor, but I think that getting all that upset and uptight and upskirt over such stuff is just..stupid.
You've done your best, you've made the effort, you don't really have to care about the results. You've already done what you could, and if that doesn't please the judges, then it just doesn't. No point whining over that fact, because whining doesn't change anything. So what do I propose? Get used to it.
I think that competitions are more of self-fulfillment, and that even if you can't achieve the best award possible, at least you enjoyed the process.
Such competitions makes it seem as if the end-point is all that is important. Principals see that if you get a silver, you aren't putting in enough effort because you're supposed to get a GWH!!11!!! Then they deny all the effort you put in. That's rather unbecoming of the education system, that results are all that matters. I don't like it when people deny my efforts(which are probably almost insignificant anyway) with a single sentence. >(
Let's talk about tit-ration. There is an end point for the reaction, but if you achieve it that quickly it would make the sexperiment boring, right? Like, you first must pour this, then you must measure that amount, then you must jizz in your pants, then you slowly tit-rate drop by drop.
Even if you don't get the accurate results, as long as you do well consistently, or that you are satisfied, that is enough.
Getting to the point straightaway takes the fun out of life. OK actually the sexample wasn't that good.
Aiya, it's just a competition, it doesn't define anything about your true calibre. So there.
Disappointment is part and parcel of life, but letting it get at you isn't too healthy.
I know people who get bronze and are happy with it. So why are people whining about gold?
Oh yea and let's talk about sexuality in kids.
No, as far as I'm concerned, I'm not a paedophile. You can say that I'm attracted to the innocence of children, but that doesn't translate into any form of sexual desire for them. I just enjoy watching them at work. It probably sounds weird coming from me, the part about watching(people might attribute that to voyeurism), but I can assure you that I remain flaccid whenever I see kids.
So anyway, I've been seeing 2 young girls on my way home. I can't see how they are older than primary 5, but I can see almost the whole of their thighs. It's almost as if they are trying to challenge the limits of modesty. You can see their butt spilling all over the pants when they walk.
I was at Yishun bus interchange just now waiting for 812(the bus to SAFRA Yishun) when we saw a group of girls. The oldest one had some white, dang short pants on. At the butt/anus/asshole, there was a picture of a mouse, or at least I saw the word 'mouse'. So there I was, recalling the fact that I'm from Cat High, therefore I'm a cat, and cats catching mice isn't an unnatural phenomenon.
Trust me when I say that I don't enjoy those sights, nor do I particularly want to be in that situation whereby the butts of people spills all over, but it's tough when you're walking with 2 girls wearing such body-hugging pants. I didn't get tough of course. It's just scary how they are(almost) baiting paedophiles.
In the past, women showing off their forearms were considered immoral. Or at least the act of showing off your forearms isn't something socially correct. I remember reading somewhere that in the past, women went to swim, fully clothed to the neck.
The more you cover, the better.
Now, bikinis are all over the place. I remember Zhang Zi Yi sunbathing naked, got her picture taken, and then getting lambasted by the Chinese netizens for strutting her stuff(or lack thereof).
The more you reveal, the better.
Kids these days are getting too used to such fleshy sights. And parents dress them up to make them look cute, and in the eyes of the parents, cuteness comes in a revealing form.
It is no wonder that kids are growing up to become more and more sexual.
It is no wonder that paedophiles are getting more and more rampant.
Please, for fuck's sake, cover up.
-- 4/22/2009 08:32:00 PM
审美观
This may seem a bit late, but make no mistakes--it is late.
April fools:
http://edition.cnn.com/2009/US/04/01/april.fools.pranks/index.html
It is the only day in which you can crap about stuff and get away with it. You can even proclaim your love for someone on April Fool's and laugh it off as a joke if it phailed.
Lies hide within the truth, and the truth hides within lies. That is mist. Or something along those lines, I can't be bothered rewatching an entire episode just to get that part(which might be loosely translated).
I remember getting one of those messages and it shocked me quite a bit. =.=
April fool's is just another day at AJ. Dang boring as usual. Oh well. Some things can't be helped. Heard about crazy stuff other JCs did, but I'm glad I didn't get scammed too much.
Something random:
'Lecture' is an euphemism for 'lullaby'.
Let's talk about 审美观.
In the past, women found hairy men attractive. Now, they don't. That's because they redefined 'beauty'. I still don't understand why are females disgusted by leg hair and stuff though. It's normal for guys to dislike other testosterone-filled guys, but it's not normal for females to do that.
Which is why men these days are becoming sissies, all to fit the woman's taste. This is because the vision of beauty has changed.
Women these days are more 'empowered' in a way. It's like they are seen to be capable of climbing up the corporate ladder(which is possible), and there are the 'career women', and the like. So they are supposedly 'stronger', which is simply a repeat of what I've already said.
So now they have the ability to make demands, one of which is that their male partners must be cleanly shaved. I don't know why are they so against hair and testosterone. After all, testosterone makes males men, and hair all over the place is a mark of high testosterone level. Not that people without hair all over their body is of lower testosterone level, but that it's not obvious that they have a high level of that hormone.
Since men are seen to be more manly with hair, why do women cringe and scream stuff like 'ZOMG SO DISGUSTING!!!111!!!' when they see hair?
I don't understand what my protein did to repulse girls, and I'd really prefer wearing my Cat High pants just to strut my stuff.
I think that the concept of 'beauty' is really warped.
The same goes for females. In the Tang dynasty, fat women are beautiful in the eyes of the Tang males. Now, skinny is sexy. I don't feel the need to love lipids(or lack of).
Perhaps the day would come when 'ugly' of now becomes 'beautiful' of later, because the concept of beauty is subjective and more or less evolves.
Moral of the story? I love my leg hair and am proud of my high level of testosterone(which sexplains my almost-perpetual boners), and saying that my leg hair is disgusting makes won't cause me to shave, because I don't care enough to shave.
I'd just be a bit disappointed, because of the aggressor's lack of ability to appreciate the wonder of leg hair and testosterone.
And they say it with such self-righteousness, too: 'Eeeyer it's so disgusting!'
They say it almost as if I should epilate because of their unimportant comments.
Here's how I see it: Don't look, or just get used to it. I'm not redesigning my leg for anyone. At least not yet =\
So take that and shove it. I like my testosterone and leg hair as they are.
The world gets more warped with each passing day. Definitions have all changed, and people acting as if their definitions are correct. Of course, there is no correct definition of beauty except mine, and I say that my leg hair looks good.
OK I sorta lost my point.
As many of you probably already know, the winner of this year's CSS was a small little boy. I can't help but wonder: how long more can he carry on singing before his voice breaks? After his voice breaks, can he still sing as well?
More importantly, can he even sing in the first place? I've never watched this year's CSS. Come to think of it, the only CSS year I watched was its first one. Then it all got boring. It's the same shit and stuff. Kids singing, and kids who can't sing singing, well yeah you pretty much got the point.
I think this year's worse though. Why do they cry on every installment? Is there really a need to cry? What are they trying to prove by crying--that they 'feel', or that they are hypocritical pieces of human flesh?
Audience: OHHH SHIT SHE'S CRYING ZOMG WE MUST CHEER HER UP AND THE ONLY WAY TO DO THAT IS TO VOTE HER IN!!!!111!!!
Or: Oh she's crying because of blah blah blah, this means that she 'feels', and therefore we must vote her in because she's human.
What the fuck is this?
Or the 'Oh shit now I'm one of the only 2 left, so it's either me or him/her. Now's the time to act sporting and start crying and prepping for what to say when I get in because of my apparent larger family support and start acting like a hypocrite and cry for the other person who didn't get in.'
This is just wrong. Kids these days are getting more and more scheming and learning the ways of the world. Not healthy.
Another thing about CSS is how it hypes up the schools the contestants are in. Like the small little boy and how his school is 'proud of him'.
OK he can sing, or he got voted that he's able to sing, BIG DEAL. It sounds like the sort of thing one would say in an argument he/she is losing: Oh we lost here and there and here and there and almost everywhere, but never mind. It is OK for me to be less intelligent and less successful in life, BECAUSE I HAVE A BIGGER CHEST/PENIS AND THAT'S ALL THAT MATTERS.'
Screw off.
-- 4/12/2009 12:57:00 AM
Tigers have high sex drive.
Went to watch 'The importance of being Earnest' yesterday at NLB. It was quite disturbing being the only male in a group of 6, and being the only one in school uniform is weird.
I don't like the NLB. Actually, I don't like high-class places in general, especially the NLB for what it contains. It seems like the kind of place where she'd go, and I don't like that feeling of proximity, the kind of 'she could've been here' kind of thing.
It's disturbing, to say the least, and it's even more lamentable when you know that she's not there with you.
I just don't like high-class places in general, I am a poor thing after all, and my food choices are limited.
Speaking of food reminds me of 'table manners' and 'etiquette'. I've always thought that eating is a barbaric process, to the point of violent. After all, the process of getting the food to your table is filled with violence(killing the animal for the meat).
Holozoic nutrition is such--we aren't plants after all. So why do we bother with all the eating weapons when you can use your hands? Why are humans always trying to differentiate themselves from the other species of animals? Like, tigers just eat their food raw and arrrmph away, but we have to cook the food and eat at places with abstract ideas like 'ambiance', and paying through your nose just to eat at a place deemed fit to eat at.
Doesn't make sense. Just eat lah. It's food, it's simply MEANT TO BE EATEN, and perhaps appreciated but not the the extent that you spend hours simply looking and admiring its aroma.
People say that I look barbaric when I'm eating like it's a bad thing. I'm just being primitive (;
I'm not blogging in any order already, but come to think of it, there's hardly any other when I type.
Well, there are times in your life when you come across something. Like, a deep conversation with a friend whom you've never thought you'd have a deep conversation with, which reveals a lot about him/her. Or when you get to do something rather exclusive with a friend whom you're not that close to, like watch a movie with him/her when you aren't all that close with that person.
Then, after the incident, you and the person never talk about it ever again. You're left floundering, wondering whether those incidents occurred or not. Did they really happen, or were you just dreaming? Why are you the only one thinking about it? Does this mean that you're looking forward to another experience of similar intensity with that person? What does that denote?
Humans are too absorbed by handphones these days. It is so easy to tell your friends that you'd be late for a meet-up, so you see no need for punctuality. So you don't try to be punctual.
This is bad, and bad things always happens.
I think I'm too sexual. It's like I can link everything to sex, and sex, and sex, and more sex. Even walking around Popular brings out the sex in me, and cute innocent little stuffed toys aren't that innocent in my mind.
Tigers have high sex drive. How do I know? Because I am one.
-- 4/10/2009 11:21:00 PM
I'd give her all the A's in my name.
I have 3 A's in my name. Yet all those A's stand for nothing--they aren't on her certificate.
I wish I could be an A printed on her certificate, so I could make her happy. =\
The angel in distress. There's something beautiful behind that melancholy, but I'd rather she be happy.
Dang.
I'd give her all the A's in my name.
-- 4/10/2009 01:23:00 AM
U.Fucking.O.-s
Don't know what's wrong with movies these days, always pulling in the alien-factor when they can't organize a plot well enough that doesn't need something as far-fetched as extra-terrestrial stuff.
I went to watch the movie preview(with my sister) of 'Knowing', the latest Japanese show starring Nicholas Cage.
The movie was screened at Shaw Centre or something, at 9PM, which sexplains my absence from Runescape. So that place looked like a potential zombie hideout, the kind which I'd ambush people in if I were a zombie/vampire. It's dark, and ulu, and there are hardly anybody around. Which actually defeats the purpose of 'ambush', but oh well.
Not the point.
So anyway, the show was rather cool at the beginning, brings out feelings of despair in the middle, and the sentiment of having wasted your time surfaces towards the back of the movie.
The despair = the kind which you know the future, but you can't do anything to change it. Which can be really quite disturbing, which is why you shouldn't want to know the future. I'd rather keep stuff a suspense. Things are more orgasmic this way.
The having wasted your time = having wasted your time--I didn't want to watch a movie which eventually ends up with the Earth getting destroyed and the children getting picked up by aliens and UFO-s and getting flown to 'another Earth'. Flown, or transported, whichever you prefer.
I'm glad it's a free preview, because my sis won the tickets at some..I don't know either, those call-ins during radio programs or something. So it's free, and I'm glad it it because if not I'd have been rather self-reproachful for the waste of money. This is the kind of movie which should be played as 'Stay-home Saturday night movie' or something along those lines. It's entertaining enough to be on air, but not entertaining enough to be a movie.
Coz I really hate aliens. OK, they may exist, but they shouldn't exist in movies. I mean, keep the plot of a movie to a reasonable threshold. Don't, y'know, cook up some far-fetched shit about how aliens came in to save the human race.
Which is why I didn't like 'The day the Earth stood still'. It was even more lame than 'Knowing'(which could actually be quite cool minus the shit about aliens). Urgh.
I'm just anti-aliens.
Went to the Marriott hotel(don't know how to spell, and that rhymed) after the movie to wait for my mum to come fetch us home. There was this pub like thingy in the hotel itself, and I saw women strutting their stuff. It was dimly lit, but the door was wide open and there were China-looking women wearing body-hugging dresses(not the kind I like, too) and stoning. Some looked unhappy that they haven't gotten a kill yet, while some are enjoying the company of many testosterone-driven males.
I like drinking. I mean, I like alcohol and stuff, but it doesn't mean that I have to go to a pub to drink alcohol. Stuff could happen, and I really don't want any STDs.
People do stuff for a reason, and people would go pub for a reason. Besides getting laid(and there's even a hotel), I can't think of a better reason to visit a pub.
I'd love to enter one though, get to see stuff.
Got home at 11plus. Didn't get enough sleep.
Now, let's talk about competitiveness, and insecurities about dick size. Any resemblance to any person, living or dead, is simply coincidental.
Lecturer A lectures, finishes his lectures, and doesn't tell his tutorial groups anything about 'mind maps'.
Lecturer B lectures after lecturer A's topic, and talks about mind maps, and calls people out at random, not to humiliate them but ti keep the whole lecture group awake. If the called people are unable to answer questions he poses, they have to submit a mind map.
At the end of his lecture topic, Lecturer B talks about how nice the mind maps are, and shows some samples.
Then Lecturer A makes everyone in his lecture groups stay back after that same lecture in which Lecturer B showed the mind maps, and talks about how 'it is automatic for you guys to come up with your own mind maps after every topic'.
Don't know what to comment about lecturer A.
I just think that people shouldn't do stuff they won't normally do just to 'keep up' with others. Do things at your own pace, and have sex your way. You're the one that'd experience your own orgasm, not others, so why bother learning the way to orgasms from other people?
If your engine is Toyota, it is Toyota. If your engine is Ferrari, then your engine is Ferrari. Some people like is slow and steady, some want it hard and fast. Sex has no 'universal-way-to-teach', and so is teaching.
Time for orgasms.
-- 4/08/2009 08:36:00 PM
'Taupok can die one.'
Well, so there I was minding my own business in AJ when I got pulled down to the ground and taupok-ed.
We didn't think of it as a life-endangering kind of workout, because we've been doing it for 2 years plus(on me) and so far I'm still here, healthy and living. Maybe not-so-healthy, but still mobile, intact, alive.
Which is why I cannot understand why someone can be so pissed with me getting taupok-ed:
Fuck lah can you all grow up or not?
Or something along those lines.
I can't help but feel insulted. I know he's 17 this year. Who is he to call us immature? Then I thought about it and I realized that it's something to do with a lack of childhood.
Like, if I play with marbles with my friends when I'm 5years old, and X doesn't have money to buy marbles, he'd say something like 'Marbles niah'. Evidently a case of sour grapes here.
Or maybe it's because he was secretly hoping to be taupok-ed himself, but he doesn't get what he hopes for, so he deems it as an 'immature' act, simply because he doesn't get it.
Is he being very matured by calling us immature? The way I see it, when someone calls another person immature, the aggressor is trying to put himself in a better light, in the sense that he is 'more matured' than the person he is trying to victimize. After all, critics are critics because they've achieved a certain standard in the subject they are judging on.
Perhaps his rebut would be something along the lines of 'Like I care about a guy who doesn't even dare to say such stuff in my face.' Or maybe 'Who cares about people who blog?' Or maybe he won't even bother rebutting. But it's not like I'm trying to teach him something(seeing as he can't be taught--he is, after all, 'higher up' as compared to me and my small dick).
Don't think he'd have much fun in life though. Children have loads of fun. I like playing. Everyone does. Seems like he doesn't, or that his idea of fun differs from ours, and he wants us to conform.
Perhaps, fun to him would mean sitting with friends at a round table, playing poker 24/7, because poker is a game for matured people. And people at funfairs should never play taupok, but should all walk around, chitchat talk cock bond, play grab-ass, run around chasing each other, BUT NEVER TAUPOK. The more I think about it the more I think he's jealous that his friends are unwilling to taupok him. There's a difference between asking for a taupok and getting a taupok forced down your throat, and since he has too much ego to ask for one, sour grapes occur. Yea, the more I think about it, the more I think he's jealous.
Heard that he's supposedly a muscle-man. I saw his biceps. Not as impressive as Kai Jie's. Nothing good to say about him.
Eat shit.
The funny part: His female friend was beside him, and she was like 'Don't taupok, can die one. Someone died from taupok before.'
I've heard of countless of people dying in their sleep, so don't sleep. Some people get knocked down by cars when they cross the road, so don't cross roads. Some people die after they exercise(there's this guy who died after running 2.4km, blood vessel in his brain burst), so don't exercise. Some people get stroke during their orgasms, so don't sex. Some people get retrenched/sacked at work, so don't work. Some people get expelled from school, so don't go to school. The list goes on.
If I were to stop having sex because some guy suffered a stroke/died while having an orgasm, I might as well not carry on living. What's the point of living a life without so much fun when life is a gamble?
Humans speak weirdly. Observe the speech between friends, good friends, and people who don't know each other well. Fillers are always present.
Consider the cases below:
First case:
A: Ah that girl in class Blah had sex with me.
B: Really?
As we can all see, A's claim sounds outrageous. It's no wonder B asks 'Really?'
Second case:
A: Ah that girl is in class Blah.
B: Really?
Is the notion of the girl being in class Blah so hard to believe?
Don't think so. Which leads me to the conclusion that the 'Really?' is patronizing, and although it's polite to give a response to anything that comes your way, well, we can infer that politeness =/= best of friends. Being polite is being careful, and people are hardly careful when they are around with close friends, because they know each other too well to piss each other off.
But it's understandable, this kind of reply always happens.
In an MSN conversation, smileys/emoticons are used to fill up the lapses in conversation. If you don't have anything good to say, or if you don't know how to put something across such that it sounds friendly, you put a smiley.
Can you put a smiley in real life?
-- 4/05/2009 10:33:00 PM