中文歌詞! (4 Viewers)

[(^o^)]

Originally posted by Ragerunner
I've given up on my Chemistry section. I don't even need to post anything now since CM_Tutor is there. He is awesome!

Ah... you just reminded me thatI have a chemistry test in 2 weeks... hmm.. Does anyone know where to find good chem notes (especially on Metals, Module 2)?

 

[Frigid]

Originally posted by Ragerunner
I knew a lot.

I now know nothing

ditto... all my chem was gone after babydoll made me smell her chloroform hankyy...

Originally posted by (^o^)
Ah... you just reminded me thatI have a chemistry test in 2 weeks... hmm.. Does anyone know where to find good chem notes (especially on Metals, Module 2)?

sorry never made notes for yr11 chem... i barely passed it... but i got 92 for hsc chem yay

 

[babydoll_]

Originally posted by (^o^)
Ah... you just reminded me thatI have a chemistry test in 2 weeks... hmm.. Does anyone know where to find good chem notes (especially on Metals, Module 2)?

HERE

duh

Originally posted by Frigid
all my chem was gone after babydoll made me smell her chloroform hankyy...

hahaha, i got most of UNSW with that hanky

 

[xiao1985]

Originally posted by babydoll_
*feels the love*

lucky bastard. i still have a job to do.

^^

well, in a way it's good... good thing to put on ur cv =p

Originally posted by (^o^)
Ah... you just reminded me thatI have a chemistry test in 2 weeks... hmm.. Does anyone know where to find good chem notes (especially on Metals, Module 2)?

i don't think alot of pplz make prelim summary... but u should make one urself, if u r serz abt doing prelim alryte... i personally don't think there's any necessity, but i tried my best any way in prelim... i didn't even use my text book :$

but if u have questions, bos is the way to go... esp with cm_tutor around... he is a valuable resource not to be missed =)...

i wish he's here last year, when we were doin our hsc =(


btw tryin to get addicted to twins "kite and wind"atm... apparently, a fwnd recommended me that song ^^

edit: oh yea... watched elva live concert yesterday (yes, the day before my acct exam).... ELVA'S SOOOOOOO HOT!!!!!

 

[(^o^)]

Originally posted by xiao1985
^^



but if u have questions, bos is the way to go... esp with cm_tutor around... he is a valuable resource not to be missed =)...

i wish he's here last year, when we were doin our hsc =(


btw tryin to get addicted to twins "kite and wind"atm... apparently, a fwnd recommended me that song ^^

Oh is cm_tutor always around here? the Chem forum> good stuff... I might just buy the excel chem book to see how i go first. Wait, is the excel chem prelim book good? Anyone got it?

btw tryin to get addicted to twins "kite and wind" song??? Er why? Well I was singing K in hk 2 years ago when that song came out.. lol my friend and I sang that song like 5 times!

 

[xiao1985]

lolz... only 5 times?? =p nah, that fwnd's addicted to it... therefore i try to get to addicted to it too =)

excel uhm... depends... personally, i don't recommend that book... too briefed... u want either conquerin chem, context or pathway...

 

[(^o^)]

Chemistry Context? LoL our school is using that book if we are talking aboutthe same book..
We sang only five times cos I ain't much of a Twin's fan. But Jay Chou for sure *grins*
Is he gonna have a concert in here?? I think he should!! >_<

 

[xiao1985]

yea... i heard from tsa that he's prolly *~doubts~* having a concert here around june~julyish =)

cant' miss that one ^6

 

[Winston]

Originally posted by xiao1985
yea... i heard from tsa that he's prolly *~doubts~* having a concert here around june~julyish =)

cant' miss that one ^6

Those people at the jay chou forums said there wouldn't be one this year.

 

[xiao1985]

Originally posted by Winston
Those people at the jay chou forums said there wouldn't be one this year.

WOA!!! ='(

*sobz~~~ how could they !!!

sigh~~ oh wellz... guess i can always rely on my other idols to cum here ^^ *read my sig if u dun noe who they r =p

 

[(^o^)]

Originally posted by Winston
Those people at the jay chou forums said there wouldn't be one this year.

OMG you might be kidding V_V~
Oh well, that lets me save money to get the front row ticket ^_^

Jay chou forums? at BOS here? Never knew there's one.

 

[Winston]

Originally posted by (^o^)
OMG you might be kidding V_V~
Oh well, that lets me save money to get the front row ticket ^_^

Jay chou forums? at BOS here? Never knew there's one.

no...

www.jay-chou.net

 

[(^o^)]

oh that, haha I'm a member of that forum too.. haven't been there for ages tho =/

 

[bubz :D]

i love your siggy, winnie justin timberlake, be my slave.

i registered at that jay forum when it first started and haven't posted nor visited since

am currently completely screwed for essay due on monday
also have english essay due on friday
and presentation on friday....... :'(

winnie ar, lei gor auntie jubie sei duc lar LOL

state library, bubz graces you with her presence once again....

 

[Frigid]

Originally posted by (^o^)
Oh is cm_tutor always around here? the Chem forum> good stuff... I might just buy the excel chem book to see how i go first. Wait, is the excel chem prelim book good? Anyone got it?

i've got the excel chem book... its okay... remember that its a study guide, so use it for that purpose. it is not the be-all and end-all resource in chemistry... not even your chem textbook is. but then again, prelim chem, who really gives?

Originally posted by (^o^)
Chemistry Context? LoL our school is using that book if we are talking aboutthe same book..
...
But Jay Chou for sure *grins*
Is he gonna have a concert in here?? I think he should!! >_<

Chem context is one of the best books. for yr12 try to get that AND conquering chem.

jay chow is never gonna have a concert in australia, bcoz australia is like woopwoop.

Originally posted by bubz
justin timberlake, be my slave.

am currently completely screwed for essay due on monday
also have english essay due on friday
and presentation on friday....... :'(

winnie ar, lei gor auntie jubie sei duc lar LOL

state library, bubz graces you with her presence once again....

so i'm not your favourite anymore? *bin jou*

haha not that you're gonna study at state library or anything... state library is just an excuse to perve on various specimens of the opposite sex... stay home and do the work properly bubz! i'm fucked for accounting now... gonna try to rape in mpo debate but might not have enuf time to study fucking 7 lectures of accting... damn fuck damn!

 

[Frigid]

if anyone cares to read (namely mark), the first part of my MPO debate, that "Good leaders are born, not made." (i'm negative):

Ladies and Gentlemen:

Leadership what an important word it is, especially in our current climate of global instability and change. Some may even argue that the world is wanting of good leaders, but politicians are all that we get. However, what is more important in this debate, that is, the question of how do good leaders become good at leadership?, remains unanswered from the other side of the house. Before the negative progresses to rebuke the oppositions case, we would like to briefly review the definitional framework, the thesis and the supporting arguments raised by the opposition in order to refresh your minds about where this debate stands currently.

They have raised the definition that leadership is the processes of influencing the actions of an individual or group to reach goals and leadership is measured by success and effectiveness. We have assumed, since the affirmatives framework was unable to clarify in this area, that success and effectiveness is the distinction that separates leaders of a mediocre kind and the good leaders. In other words, success and effectiveness is the hallmark that differentiates good leaders from the other leaders.

Their thesis was relatively simple to grasp: that leaders are born and not made and that [the most important characters found in all good leaders] are encompassed in a persons [sic] genetic composition which cannot be taught or learned [sic]. To demonstrate this, the opposition raised two main arguments: proof from genetic biology and the Great Man Theory. Further, they gave three more supporting examples, namely, social potency, Nelson Mandela and cognitive capacity. That, ladies and gentlemen, is the repetitive verbosity of the affirmative boiled down to relatively concise terms.

Now, we would like to begin by looking at the oppositions definition and expanding on it. There are two reasons for this: firstly, they have not provided us a clear link between the words leadership and leader and secondly, they have given you a quite stock definition of leadership and we believe we can provide a more-rounded, more-apt definition.

We agree with the Robbins (2001) definition of leadership as raised by the affirmative, but we would to consider in addition the following definitions:

Lead 20) to act as a guide.
Lead 15) to aim and fire a firearm ahead of (a moving target) in order to allow for the travel of the target and time of flight of the bullet or shell in reaching it.

(The Macquarie Dictionary)

Before the affirmative jumps on our selection of the second definition as irrelevant or absurd, we would like to justify its addition into the context of this debate. The reason for the addendum of the aiming connotation is because we believe a leader has to define the location of the goal, to the account for each environmental situation in which he is leading and to take into consideration the amount of time and effort his subordinates would need to exert in order to reach that goal. A leader is a guide, not just one who possesses ability and influence. These connotations, to us, are a more expanded, yet still reasonable, interpretations of Robbins definition.

Secondly, in terms of defining the framework, they have not given us a clear link between leadership and leaders. While there is considerable debate on that link alone, we as the negative would like to simplify and accept Robbins (2001) definition, that leaders consistently exhibit leadership.

Given that we now have waded through and clarified the murky definitional waters that the affirmative have deceitfully used to trap this debate, we would like to consider their case. It consists of two main parts, the polarised belief that leaders are born and not made and secondly, that the main characteristics of good leaders are innate.

Before we are called petty pot shooters, we would like to argue that the first belief, leaders are born and not made is not even the topic proposed because they have clearly forgotten to include the minor, yet all-important word, good. They have been trying to argue a generic case, that leaders (in general) are born not made, a different matter to the topic altogether. However, we will dearly forgive the opposition for their faux pas, and we will continue to believe that the topic includes the word good.

To support their first thesis, the affirmative have enlightened you on the mysteries of genetic biology, namely the hormone serotonin. This wonderful hormone, they have said, improves sociability and controls aggression, and furthermore, its presence in leaders strongly argues the point that it is impossible to be trained or taught to have these biochemical mixtures, which attribute to effective leadership skills. Is that really so, ladies and gentlemen? According to a 2003 article in The Economist, the veracity of this claim can be argued by the study on serotonin itself: Michael McGuire, a neuroscientist of UCLA, who undertook the serotonin studies in high-rank monkeys has shown that the high level [of serotonin] appeared to be the consequence, not the cause of high rank. When a leader was removed from his troops, his serotonin level crashed. As a new leader emerged, his level started to climb until it was twice that of the next dominant male. Therefore, ladies and gentlemen, the oppositions reliance on Robbins has clearly caused them to be mistaken. In fact, they are indeed very misinformed on their claim, since Robbins (2001) even admits that the direction of causation isnt really clear. The affirmative are quite daring in that they selectively quote academics and make hyperbolic claims, yet what is peculiar is that they do not dare to present you with the full picture, ladies and gentlemen.

To support their second thesis, the main characteristics of good leaders are innate, the opposition have presented you with the Great Man (or Men) Theory, also known as the trait theory. The negative concedes that traits have an influence on the development of good leaders, and do not rebuke the existence of the Great Man Theory. However, we strongly oppose the affirmatives sole reliance on the theory, when even their main source, Robbins (2001), argues that traits only predict around 10 percent of what makes a successful leader. So where is the other 90 percent, we ask the affirmative? Surely there is something more to traits, as surely the Great Man has other things that make him great than his right of birth alone. The negative will explore more about this notion in our substantive matter.

Before we finish with our consideration of the affirmatives case we would like to review one more point: the lack of consistency and cohesiveness in their theses and subsequent supporting points. What the affirmative failed to realise is that their confused case is self-contradictory: on one hand they say leadership characteristics are entirely innate and hereditary, but on the other, they have said, the influences upon a childs birth and their childhood years has [sic] an impact in further years, whether or not he holds the characteristics of a leader. This, ladies and gentlemen, is their paradoxical (and probably unintentional) support for our argument, that there is more to good leadership than traits and birth alone.

In short, ladies and gentlemen, the oppositions case has left us with a few things, namely the following: one an incomplete definitional framework that required the negatives intervention in clarifying; two their theses were supported by claims which were subsequently rebutted by their own sources (a testament to our dear oppositions honesty in selectively telling the truth); and finally a self-contradictory case. They have neither accurately defined the debate nor their stance, yet they somehow pre-empted our case, saying it cannot be as clear, justifiable and factual as theirs. We do not know where they stand, ladies and gentlemen, but regardless their intellectual arrogance and deceitfulness are blatantly omnipresent.

 

[Winston]

Originally posted by bubz
i love your siggy, winnie justin timberlake, be my slave.

i registered at that jay forum when it first started and haven't posted nor visited since

am currently completely screwed for essay due on monday
also have english essay due on friday
and presentation on friday....... :'(

winnie ar, lei gor auntie jubie sei duc lar LOL

state library, bubz graces you with her presence once again....

haha thanks aunty ... are you going to his concert? ... he's ones gonna be good i think, the thing with him is, he doesn't mime, he can sing and dance really good... true talent


LOL i registered there right from the beginning... wait im the 13th member registered... just so i can leech the MV's ..

HAHAH good luck with the essay ...

 

[truly-in-bliss]

distance sucks

 

[Frigid]

Originally posted by truly-in-bliss
distance sucks

but without distance you'd be permanently attached; closeness will turn to habit, habit will turn to monotony, monotony will turn into disgust.

distance is the refresher that reminds us to cherish what we have, because it gives you a chance to experience what happens when you live without.

i think i know what you mean lin, though i'm not sure. newais, hope you're feeling okay

 

[babydoll_]

thanks to someone (*stares pointedly at Frigid*) i had to get a blood test today and my arm fucking kills