Re_ Problem with image in lab GPS-109.txt
From: "Ned Martin" <email@example.com>
Subject: Re: Problem with image in lab GPS-109
Date: Monday, 31 May 2004 10:39 PM
| But let me guess, you'd complain if the university increased HECS to pay
| for network improvements (and the staff and subjects that they will loose
| at the end of this year due to a rapidly declining budget). (I could rant
| about this much more, but the following is much more interesting).
No, not at all. A justified fee increase, where necessary and if utilised
correctly, is fine by me. For what it's worth, I was one of a few students who
went to the recent "resist a 25% HECS increase/IRAQI occupation is bad/Support Gay
Rights/Random Other Issues attempting to capitalise on the publicity" protest, and
protested against the motley collection of fools there attempting to blockade and
prevent the senate meeting. I suppose I should add that I'm not particularly
political, and mainly went to have a look-see.
| Sure, I too have had to put up with a lot of less than perfect working
| conditions at the uni, but I've put up with it.
| I'm pretty upset with how COMP4102 has been run this semester (it seems
| that our year has been the guinea-pigs for a lot of other subjects too). A
| totally new course based on the assessment of an old course, inconsistent
| marking, poor organisation, and further ruined by somebody (we know who
| you are) who stole one of the development boards from the labs. (But, like
| just about everybody else in the subject, we don't really care any more)
| But therein lies the challenge: Can we make do (and do well) with what we
Which would improve this course more: You, and probably everyone else, accepting
that it was poorly organised but "not caring anymore", or a group of students
I don't think people should have to, or be expected to, put up with "less than
perfect conditions", as you put it. I see the very fact that people like yourself
not only accept less than optimal conditions, but apparently see them as a
"challenge", as condoning and supporting the degradation (or at least not
improvement) of those same conditions. People who take the extra step of actively
belittling those who aren't willing to quietly accept (what they feel are)
substandard conditions, or supporting those conditions (without justifying them),
are even worse.
| I'm sure ITIG and ELG do what they can to keep things running
| smoothly, and that they don't do these things on purpose just to upset
| students (or have bets on how long it'll take for the first support
| request to come in).
I've found there's a common conception that "they're doing the best they can",
"there's a workaround available", "they've insufficient funding/resources/hours"
etc. are somehow suitable excuses for unacceptable problems. People need to
understand that, as a user, I don't need to know, nor care, why something doesn't
work, or whether there's insufficient funding, or whether they're doing the best
they can to make it work. To me, as a user, none of that is relevant - I just know
that the thing isn't working, and that it should be. To put that another way - if
something isn't good enough, yet they're doing their best with the funding they
have, then perhaps they need to seek additional funding, not claim it's as good as
it can be. That's my attitude anyway, and I do realise that everything is a
balance and a fight, but I feel that the defeatist attitude shown by many in this
newsgroup isn't going to help.
| I've been in 109 just once, and that was to collect an assignment. 208
| used to be pretty bad too, especially with file protection errors. But all
| it takes is a polite email and things get sorted out pretty quickly.
My email was unjustifiably harsh, and for this, I have apologised.
Printed on 100% recycled electrons.