1. Forums
  3. Incoherent Babbling
Post Reply

IB is my personal blog #6

Pages 123
0
BagMan
12 years ago
I have a very vague understanding of what this question is angling at but, being british and not having a constitution, it's a little hard to wrap my head around. Is it basically asking why something being contrary to the governments plan is better than something being unconstitutional? Or is it more to do with the different bodies that are declaring the statute contrary/unconstitutional? Or am I completely lost already?
0
PumpJack McGee
12 years ago
The wording is so very awkward and cumbersome. But being open-ended and vague makes meeting that word count a cinch. Could easily double it if you went into detail and looked back into the development and histories of the High Court and Supreme Courts, administration, and levels of authority they hold and whatnot.
0
Sgt.broski Where's the futa Jacob
12 years ago
Good luck homes,
0
devsonfire 3,000,000th Poster
12 years ago
leonard267 wrote...
Poorly worded question! I share your anger, devs. It is like reading a leonard267 post!

Let me break it down for my own pleasure. Thank you devs for giving me the opportunity to hone my skills in making sentences easier:

i. A High Court Decision deemed an statute enacted by the government unconstitutional or against the law.

ii. The government sees this as a very serious setback to their attempts to change the way laws are made (legislative reform).

iii. It is more serious than a decision by a State Supreme Court judge.

iv. That decision is to interpret the law (or to be more precise a key statement in a statute) differently from the Government.

v. We know this because a minister made a speech about how the Government interprets it.

Summary:

1. High Court deems Government action (or to be more accurate, an enacted statute) as unconstitutional.

2. State Supreme Court interprets Government action differently from the Government.

3. Why 1 is worse than 2 in the eyes of the government in terms of trying to change the way laws are made?

PS: I think the answer is already given. It has something to do with the Government's ability to carry out legislative reform. Now the challenge is to use 1000 words to talk about it.

Spoiler:
PPS: I wouldn't want to disagree with the premise that 1 is worse than 2.

PPPS: I think if I were the person who set the question I may as well write the question in the manner of the 'summary'.

PPPPS: Supposing that I am given this assignment, I will build an effigy of the person who set the question and holler at him, demanding why he chose to set the question like how leonard267 writes.

Strategy:

a. Explain the interests of the Government.

b. Explain what happens when a court says that a statute is unconstitutional.

c. Explain what happens when a court interprets a statute differently.

d. Explain the difference between a High Court and a State Supreme Court decision.

(Explanations for b,c,d must reflect the how it affects the ability of the Government to enact legislative reform)

e. Conclude why is it worse for the Government.

ED: I am not a Brit but I am from a former British colony. For my part, that attempt is amateurish. I know little about Business Law (I am taking a Marketing module though) but I love to pick apart sentences. This is my take on it. I hope that when the professor is consulted, he would concur with whatever that was written in this post.


You just saved my life. Tell me what you want and I'll do my fucking best to fulfill it!
THANK YOU!

[size=4]I spoiled your PS because it was too long. It's very helpful though![/h]
0
devsonfire 3,000,000th Poster
12 years ago
Odamust wrote...
Fuck. 1000 words is a little too less if you got lots of key points but you can't condense them further.


It is indeed. But, I don't know if it's too much or too little since I'm not even sure about what key points I'm gonna have to talk about here.

PumpJack McGee wrote...
The wording is so very awkward and cumbersome. But being open-ended and vague makes meeting that word count a cinch. Could easily double it if you went into detail and looked back into the development and histories of the High Court and Supreme Courts, administration, and levels of authority they hold and whatnot.


I mean, I have no problem understanding each word, but it's just the way he wrote the question confuse the fuck out of me. I don't despise vague questions that much, it's just annoying.
0
Loner the People's Senpai
12 years ago
THANKS DEVS FOR MAKING MY BRIAN HURT!
0
devsonfire 3,000,000th Poster
12 years ago
Loner wrote...
THANKS DEVS FOR MAKING MY BRIAN HURT!


YOU HAVE BRIAN? OMG I THOUGHT YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANY!
0
Loner the People's Senpai
12 years ago
devsonfire wrote...
Loner wrote...
THANKS DEVS FOR MAKING MY BRIAN HURT!


YOU HAVE BRIAN? OMG I THOUGHT YOU DIDN'T HAVE ANY!


I DO HAVE BRIAN AND ITS BIGGER AND BETTER THEN URS!
0
animefreak_usa Child of Samael
12 years ago
Headline Melbourne Daily pooper.
Hooker Killed for Heart of Gold.
0
leonard267 FAKKU Non-Writer
12 years ago
Spoiler:
devsonfire wrote...
leonard267 wrote...
Poorly worded question! I share your anger, devs. It is like reading a leonard267 post!

Let me break it down for my own pleasure. Thank you devs for giving me the opportunity to hone my skills in making sentences easier:

i. A High Court Decision deemed an statute enacted by the government unconstitutional or against the law

ii. The government sees this as a very serious setback to their attempts to change the way laws are made (legislative reform).

iii. It is more serious than a decision by a State Supreme Court judge.

iv. That decision is to interpret the law (or to be more precise a key statement in a statute) differently from the Government.

v. We know this because a minister made a speech about how the Government interprets it.

Summary:

1. High Court deems Government action (or to be more accurate, an enacted statute) as unconstitutional.

2. State Supreme Court interprets Government action differently from the Government.

3. Why 1 is worse than 2 in the eyes of the government in terms of trying to change the way laws are made?

PS: I think the answer is already given. It has something to do with the Government's ability to carry out legislative reform. Now the challenge is to use 1000 words to talk about it.

Spoiler:
PPS: I wouldn't want to disagree with the premise that 1 is worse than 2.

PPPS: I think if I were the person who set the question I may as well write the question in the manner of the 'summary'.

PPPPS: Supposing that I am given this assignment, I will build an effigy of the person who set the question and holler at him, demanding why he chose to set the question like how leonard267 writes.

Strategy:

a. Explain the interests of the Government.

b. Explain what happens when a court says that a statute is unconstitutional.

c. Explain what happens when a court interprets a statute differently.

d. Explain the difference between a High Court and a State Supreme Court decision.

(Explanations for b,c,d must reflect the how it affects the ability of the Government to enact legislative reform)

e. Conclude why is it worse for the Government.

ED: I am not a Brit but I am from a former British colony. For my part, that attempt is amateurish. I know little about Business Law (I am taking a Marketing module though) but I love to pick apart sentences. This is my take on it. I hope that when the professor is consulted, he would concur with whatever that was written in this post.


You just saved my life. Tell me what you want and I'll do my fucking best to fulfill it!
THANK YOU!

[size=4]I spoiled your PS because it was too long. It's very helpful though![/h]


It's time to get time greedy then. ( >=) ) Because I have thought of many things I would like you to do.

1. I wonder if you could ask your professor if my interpretation of the question is correct? Bagman's and Pumpjack's analyses appear to be similar to mine (and I hope your professor's.)

2. Is it all right if you can describe to us what is Business Law about in one or two sentences?

3. Is it true that in Business Law, the examiners will do their very best to cram everything into one sentence even though they could convey meaning much better if they write the question in three sentences? Reading a statute in any Constitution seems to give me this impression.

4. Is it all right for you to continue to post academic questions on Threads titled IB is my Personal Blog? Thank you for posing this question to us!

5. 'Writers' like me have earned a horrible reputation for badgering other people to read their work. If their work is criticised, hysteria would be an understatement to describe how they would react. I would like you to be entertained by this: https://www.fakku.net/forums/incoherent-babbling/should-i-do-poetry-or-books

6. After you are done with 5, feel free to click on my signatures linking you to the Writing Contest Entries that I have posted. Do compare what I have written with how the question is worded. I think you'd find Business Law a walk in the park after reading my work!

Spoiler:
7. This is opening a can of worms, but I may as well say this. Can I PM you my Skype account?


8. Know that September the 13th is Friday the 13th. That is not the scary part. The scary part is the fact it is my birthday on that day.
0
devsonfire 3,000,000th Poster
12 years ago
leonard267 wrote...

It's time to get time greedy then. ( >=) ) Because I have thought of many things I would like you to do.

1. I wonder if you could ask your professor if my interpretation of the question is correct? Bagman's and Pumpjack's analyses appear to be similar to mine (and I hope your professor's.)

2. Is it all right if you can describe to us what is Business Law about in one or two sentences?

3. Is it true that in Business Law, the examiners will do their very best to cram everything into one sentence even though they could convey meaning much better if they write the question in three sentences? Reading a statute in any Constitution seems to give me this impression.

4. Is it all right for you to continue to post academic questions on Threads titled IB is my Personal Blog? Thank you for posing this question to us!

5. 'Writers' like me have earned a horrible reputation for badgering other people to read their work. If their work is criticised, hysteria would be an understatement to describe how they would react. I would like you to be entertained by this: https://www.fakku.net/forums/incoherent-babbling/should-i-do-poetry-or-books

6. After you are done with 5, feel free to click on my signatures linking you to the Writing Contest Entries that I have posted. Do compare what I have written with how the question is worded. I think you'd find Business Law a walk in the park after reading my work!

Spoiler:
7. This is opening a can of worms, but I may as well say this. Can I PM you my Skype account?


8. Know that September the 13th is Friday the 13th. That is not the scary part. The scary part is the fact it is my birthday on that day.


1. I'll see if he would actually say yes or no, because by doing so that would mean 'I' am giving free interpretation of the question for thousand students that are doing Business Law.

2. Business Law, from what I have interpreted so far, is a study of Law that is relevant to any business major that you're planning on doing. Studying Business Law will show you a fine line of what to do and what not to do for you as an individual or as a business. It also protects you both as a business or an individual.

3. So far from what I have studied, the answer would be 'NO'. Because they actually answers a sentence long question with at least 250 - 300 words that can be understood by a student with little to no understanding in Law.

4. I'll try, but I don't want people here to see me as someone asking people here to do my homework.

5 and 6. I'll do it once my Assessment week is finished.

7. Please do so. Or maybe you can add me, either way is fine by me.

8. It could be your lucky day, who knows?
0
kengenerals
12 years ago
Forum Image: https://www.fakku.net/image-404/images/1822409-A80Q5Q4.jpg

But seriously though, this has nothing to do with business.

I'm taking up business law right now, contracts and obligations.

Not once did we have this kind of questioning.
0
devsonfire 3,000,000th Poster
12 years ago
kengenerals wrote...
Forum Image: https://www.fakku.net/image-404/images/1822409-A80Q5Q4.jpg

But seriously though, this has nothing to do with business.

I'm taking up business law right now, contracts and obligations.

Not once did we have this kind of questioning.


Ah, offer, acceptance, intention and consideration.
It doesn't, because this is a basic one. It talks about the legal system in Australia.
0
Drifter995 Neko//Night
12 years ago
Nop.

I do cars, writing crappy stories, and electrical stuff, not this fancy pantsy law stuff
0
Gallowloch
12 years ago
I can write this in one day. I just don't want to.
0
say what!
12 years ago
Understand it and it doesn't look difficult.
0
animefreak_usa Child of Samael
12 years ago
Refer to the groundbreaking case of Mad Max vs Thunderdome.
0
leonard267 FAKKU Non-Writer
12 years ago
say what! wrote...
Understand it and it doesn't look difficult.


You take Business Law too?!

[size=2]I am an engineering student though. [/h]
0
say what!
12 years ago
leonard267 wrote...
say what! wrote...
Understand it and it doesn't look difficult.


You take Business Law too?!

[size=2]I am an engineering student though. [/h]


Nope. Just have had similar essays assigned to me that I understand what to do first and it shouldn't be that difficult since it's just 1000 words.
0
Gravity cat the adequately amused
12 years ago
After much deliberation I have decided...

that you should throw your work out the window and say "Fuck this shit"
  1. Forums
  3. Incoherent Babbling
Post Reply
Pages 123