- All Debates
- Popular Debates
- Active Debates
- New Debates
- Open Challenge Debates
- My Challenge Debates
- Accepted Challenges
- Debate Communities
- Argument Waterfall
- New People
- People by Points
Your profile reflects your reputation, it will build itself as you create new debates, write arguments and form new relationships.
Actually, we were just talking about this in Calculus the other day, the teacher thought it had something to do with the lesson... Forgot what that was... I'm pretty sure it was dubbed "The Creepiness Quotient".
But in reality, it's a pretty realistic formula.
That's ridiculous. I could understand someone not liking a short name, I only go by Andrew, never Andy, but I would never send two emails telling someone not to call me by another name, let alone 19.
If someone takes themselves that seriously, though, ever, I would just have to poke the bear and call her "Liz" just to prove a point.
Most politicians seem to check their brains at the door when they get elected, anyway. It's all you can expect when someone's already been about as successful as they can be in the business world and then they just... Move on to bigger and, well, I guess you could say better things. Not all of them, remember, I'm not saying all of them are like this, it's just that it seems like many politicians are moving on to something more powerful.
So you say you're going to be a cop. I think that's pretty cool, but you really can't ever know for sure.
What if you don't pass the test? What if it's a psychological thing that you really just can't change?
Are you going to specialize your early life so much that you only have two options: police officer or ditch digger?
You need to diversify your options, as always, just in case.
No. They shouldn't.
I had a summer course last year, and that math teacher had one of the best systems for grading I've ever seen:
You do the homework the first time around. You go up to her desk and show it to her, and she would grade it in front of you, marking off the mistakes and grading you based on your answers. If you got them all right, you got an A. If they were all wrong, you got an F. But then, after she graded it the first time, you could go back and redo the problems you got wrong an unlimited amount of times that day until you finally went back up and got an A on the work. Each time, she would go into the records and change the grade. Once you hit a grade you were comfortable with, you could stop.
This method truly holds both effort and achievement high, and if a student wants to work harder to get an A, the student will understand the subject better. If it's a kid who doesn't care, he or she will just go up once and not take the time to keep fixing the work.
That is seriously the best method I have ever seen.