28-04-2004 22:13									#31
	Support Apolyton buy from Amazon

quote: Originally posted by Oncle Boris If the facts he puts forward are indeed true, this paper is not all that bad. Give him a penalty for not citing them. I think he could squeeze a D and avoid failure.

Facts in papers are there to back arguements. Good facts in the service of poor arguments are not a saving grace.

	28-04-2004 22:18									#32
	Get a bigger avatar today!

PP1 Thesis

Thesis Statement: "Spotted owls are stupid"
Topic Sentence: "They can’t live anywhere that isn’t hundreds of years old and untouched by human hands and they breed themselves into extinction by mating with a natural enemy and potential predator, the barred owl"

PP 2 Habitat

PP 3 Mating Habits and Adaptation/Evolution

PP 4 Conclusion

---

Looks good to me, despite all the general opinion, lack of supporting facts, use of swear words, general threats, misspellings, and insults to mentally handicap... I'd give a C to organization, a B for being argumentative, a F for lack of support, and an F for the lack of professionalism shown in the paper = D+!!!

	28-04-2004 22:21									#33
	Get a bigger avatar today!

We will have to agree to differ, then, GePap.

I wish you the luck to avoid being dull while always supporting your well constructed arguments with well researched and excellently selected facts.

Also to avoid choosing teaching as a profession.

	28-04-2004 22:23									#35
	Support Apolyton, pre-order Civilization IV

quote: Originally posted by GePap some choice quotes from the paper: quote: My point? The barred owl is not a little ***** like the spotted owl, and it can take a few loggers walking around here and there without keeling over and dying. Massive exageration.

Its neither an 'exageration' (musta missed those U Chicago spelling B's eh?) nor an exaggeration, its an opinion, followed by uncited evidence why the author has such an opinion.

quote: Fails to show why loggers are different from people,

Unless you've managed to convince beavers or some other animals to be loggers, then loggers does in fact refer to people!

quote: unless he means the species is less likely to adapt to logging,

The meaning is pretty obvious. Why should the author be forced to write out every last word for the illiterate.

quote: and thus he failt to show why it is necessary to log. He gives no moral valuations for why logging should occur-not even economic ones.

Why on earth should he do that? This is a scientific paper not one about economics or ethics. I'd shoot any reviewer of my articles who said something so stupid with a ball of their own **** (and I have figuratively speaking)

quote: quote: The barred owl is obviously the “fittest” of the two species. So why then are we trying to save an animal that is naturally being killed by a stronger, more adept species? We do nothing to stop the barn owl from killing the spotted owl, only to minimize our interference with the process.

How do you know that? There are lots of cases where we interfere with natural selection in order to preserve one species from another.

quote: quote: Spotted owls, take note. You serve no purpose, I have a gun, and your feathers make a pretty neat hat. Massive BAM about the owls "purpose"

By 'BAM' I assume you're not referring to the Iranian city?

Do you mean opinion? If so why not say that? There's lots of opinion in science; many pretend that it is not though.

quote: quote: Spotted owls are stupid. They can’t live anywhere that isn’t hundreds of years old and untouched by human hands and they breed themselves into extinction by mating with a natural enemy and potential predator, the barred owl. They are simply stupid, and out of all animals, they are quite possibly the ones most deserved of an untimely death. The entire intro is one long BAM,

Ibid

quote: has no topic sentence or thesis sentence. The thign that comes closets to this, the last one, is never backed up, since he only compares Spotted wols to barn owls and people. He does not bring up any other creatures. .

I agree that the writers style is rather 'free form'. Your comments remind me of my grade 12 english teacher who felt it necessary to tear apart poetry line by line - to look for 'deep hidden meanings'. Sometimes the total is greater than the sum of the parts.

EDIT: I didnt win any spelling B's either but at least I correct them when I spot em.

	28-04-2004 22:24									#36
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by Japher PP1 Thesis Thesis Statement: "Spotted owls are stupid" Topic Sentence: "They can’t live anywhere that isn’t hundreds of years old and untouched by human hands and they breed themselves into extinction by mating with a natural enemy and potential predator, the barred owl"

Having a limited range and specific niche is not an arguement for being stupid. You can't breed yourself into extinction (unless he is talking about so grossly overpopulating the given area resources collapse and the species dies) that way. Unless Spotted Owls are raping barred owls, or barred owls refuse to nurse mixed chicks, the spotted owls still get to pass their genes, an obviously the barred owls find something useful in the pairings. He needs to present evidence to counter both the lines of argument I have presented.

quote: Looks good to me, despite all the general opinion, lack of supporting facts, use of swear words, general threats, misspellings, and insults to mentally handicap... I'd give a C to organization, a B for being argumentative, a F for lack of support, and an F for the lack of professionalism shown in the paper = D+!!!

Man, you are an easy grader- lets blame grade inflation on YOU!

	28-04-2004 22:26									#37
	Get a bigger avatar today!

quote: Originally posted by East Street Trader We will have to agree to differ, then, GePap. I wish you the luck to avoid being dull while always supporting your well constructed arguments with well researched and excellently selected facts. Also to avoid choosing teaching as a profession.

I have already been a teacher, and I have had many Teachers are there to teach. NOT entertain. Whomever imparts the most facts and best methods by which to build knowledge is the best teacher, even if dull.

	28-04-2004 22:31									#38
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations

quote: Originally posted by GePap Facts in papers are there to back arguements. Good facts in the service of poor arguments are not a saving grace.

GePap, stob being a leftist reactionary.

What if he made a paper about the urgency of saving spotted owls? and supported it by demonstrating their numbers are decreasing, citing the hordes of evil forest-exploiting corporations ready to annihilate them?

He had an original point: the disappearance of spotted owls won't change anything, and it can be countered by the proliferation of a rival specy. How is that a poor argument? Invoking the laws of evolution to defend the idea that a specy is due anyway is not all that bad for an argument. It's probably even better than all those Green hacks who want to save animals because, well, because, ahem... "we have to".

Give that guy a D and let the thing go.

	28-04-2004 22:32									#39
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

quote: Originally posted by GePap If I saw someone post a paper on fluid dynamics, it could very well come from a creative writing class, NO? Yes, IN THEORY it could be. Not by far even a reasonable assumption to make though. IN making an unreasonable assumption, it is for you to come up with evidence.

A creative writing class would be a more reasonable assumption than a fluid dynamics class.

Clarification: Speaking here of the undergrad level, since it's obvious that's where the originally posted paper came from.

	28-04-2004 22:33									#40
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH Its neither an 'exageration' (musta missed those U Chicago spelling B's eh?) nor an exaggeration, its an opinion, followed by uncited evidence why the author has such an opinion.

to the first dig (get with the program old man).

As for the second part, it is tied to your next worthwhile line:

quote: The meaning is pretty obvious. Why should the author be forced to write out every last word for the illiterate.

The illiterate would never be a possible audience for an essay, 1. Second, it is clear that to say "they drop dead i loggers walk around" is an exaggeration-that he did it for comedic value or emphasis does not matter, and he should not have done it period.

quote: Why on earth should he do that? This is a scientific paper not one about economics or ethics. I'd shoot any reviewer of my articlaes who said something so stupid with a ball of their own **** (and I have figuratively speaking)

He has no plae then to be making value judgements if that is the type of paper.

quote: How do you know that? There are lots of cases where we interfere with natural selection in order to preserve one species from another.

Which is irrelevant unless he can show that is the case HERE in this case, since he is not writing about protecting species in general (given it seems he only hates the "stupid ones").

quote: I agree that the writers style is rather 'free form'. You're comments remind me of my grade 12 english teacher who felt it necessary to tear apart poetry line by line - to look for 'deep hidden meanings'. Sometimes the total is greater than the sum of the parts.

If we follow the line this is a science paper, which is most liekly is, comparisons to poetry are meaningless.

	28-04-2004 22:34									#41
	Tired of ads?

quote: Originally posted by Solomwi A creative writing class would be a more reasonable assumption than a fluid dynamics class.

No, it would not, if the paper is all about fluid dynamics.

	28-04-2004 22:36									#42
	Help yourself to an AD-FREE life

Yes, it would, since fluid dynamics classes at that level rarely, if ever, require papers.

	28-04-2004 22:40									#43
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by Oncle Boris GePap, stob being a leftist reactionary. What if he made a paper about the urgency of saving spotted owls? and supported it by demonstrating their numbers are decreasing, citing the hordes of evil forest-exploiting corporations ready to annihilate them? He had an original point: the disappearance of spotted owls won't change anything, and it can be countered by the proliferation of a rival specy. How is that a poor argument? Invoking the laws of evolution to defend the idea that a specy is due anyway is not all that bad for an argument. It's probably even better than all those Green hacks who want to save animals because, well, because, ahem... "we have to". Give that guy a D and let the thing go.

this is a poor paper not becuase of what ideological slant he takes, but becuase it does not meet the standards of a good academic essay period. To grade an academic paper based on anything other than what a good academic paper is is simply wrong. If standing up for integrity in grading in our universities is being a "left wing reactionary", then GOOD.

	28-04-2004 22:42									#44
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization III: Complete

quote: Originally posted by Solomwi Yes, it would, since fluid dynamics classes at that level rarely, if ever, require papers.

It would still be more reasonable since unless the class was full of physicists and taught by a physicist what basis would a writing teacher use to grade papers on fluid dynamics?

	28-04-2004 22:44									#45
	Suffering from ads?

don't you think you guys are taking this shite too seriously ?

	28-04-2004 22:45									#46
	Remove this text

That paper reminds me of something Laz once said about Pandas.

	28-04-2004 22:45									#47
	Inflate your Upload Space

Am I the only one that finds it much more amusing that Gepap is going into a long lengthy debate about the fact that the paper is crap than the paper itself?

	28-04-2004 22:46									#48
	Inflate your Upload Space

Structure, persuasiveness, grammar, whatever the purpose of the paper is. For example, I gave an expository speech on use of psychrometric charts in undergrad public speaking. I was the only one in there, teacher included, who had heard of such before, but grading my speech didn't seem to be a problem.

The point is that the teacher may well not care what the topic is, other than specifying that it be interesting enough to hold the reader, perhaps.

	28-04-2004 22:48									#49
	Increase Your PM Length

"don't you think you guys are taking this shite too seriously ?"

It IS GePap afterall

Besides, I think what GePap is beginning to argue is a rather important topic; grading systems and what is demanded out of students. You constantly hear parents and students complain that their kids have too much work. Is this a good thing or a bad thing? I think that the standard of work is increasing and that is good, but at the same time the mentality and social aptitude of kids is decreasing. I think encouraging the kind of creative writting seen in this paper is worth of such and should not be just tossed aside for bad Schematics...

	28-04-2004 22:51									#50
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

Japher: I don't know, it wouldn't hold for swedish students in social sciences at least, the level of their work such gigantic elephant balls. Maybe the trend is better elsewhere where the system of higher education isn't used as a modern version of autobahn-constructions in the 1930s.

	28-04-2004 22:56									#51
	Enter the AD-FREE zone

I am arguing becuase I hear people saying this is a great paper. Call it funny, call it witty, fine. BUt a great paper? NO, for an academic piece it is **** and anyone who turned this in to a teacher deserves to get a failing grade on it and the prof is right to post it as an example of what NOT to write.

quote: The point is that the teacher may well not care what the topic is, other than specifying that it be interesting enough to hold the reader, perhaps.

Since you posted it, what class was it for?

	28-04-2004 22:57									#52
	Support Apolyton or Terrorists Win

Why assume its bad Schematics (should that word really be used in the context of writing)? It appears to be 'stream of conciousness' but perhaps the author carefully chose each word and skillfully constructed the piece in order to provoke just such a reaction as GePap has given.

	28-04-2004 23:00									#53
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by GePap Since you posted it, what class was it for?

No idea. You have as much information as I do about this one. That, though, isn't what I'm arguing with you. If you'll notice, I also provided a link to the page where it's found.

It's a college student who skipped class for 6 weeks, got drunk and found out about a paper due, then wrote what turned out to be pretty funny. No more, no less.

	28-04-2004 23:17									#54
	Increase Your PM Length

quote: Originally posted by SpencerH Why assume its bad Schematics (should that word really be used in the context of writing)? It appears to be 'stream of conciousness' but perhaps the author carefully chose each word and skillfully constructed the piece in order to provoke just such a reaction as GePap has given.

Well, if he is so thoughtfull drunk, maybe he could have attempted to do the paper well-unless he is an ass.

	28-04-2004 23:19									#55
	Increase Your PM Length

I seems to me like it could have been an essay for a class in moral philosophy.

	28-04-2004 23:33									#56
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization: The Boardgame

i'd give him an A for having hte cajones to turn that in.

	28-04-2004 23:36									#57
	Tired of ads?

So if a student handed you a turd in shrink warp, would you give him an A for having the guts to do it?

	28-04-2004 23:38									#58
	Increase the size of your Attachments

quote: Originally posted by GePap this is a poor paper not becuase of what ideological slant he takes, but becuase it does not meet the standards of a good academic essay period. To grade an academic paper based on anything other than what a good academic paper is is simply wrong. If standing up for integrity in grading in our universities is being a "left wing reactionary", then GOOD.

OK, the ideologic part was a tease only. Seriously, this guy HAS an argument: the law of evolution shows that the specy is unfit for survival, and that therefore we shouldn't care for it. He tries to demonstrate it with two sub-arguments: it's being overcome by another specy of owls, and it needs an untouched habitat.

It's a poor paper, but it does have some of the characteristics to make it academically viable (a structure with a thesis and sub-arguments, some facts, an introduction and a conclusion), a fact you are blatantly ignoring to make your point. What I think is that your reaction towards the paper is biased because of the familiar tone and the 'neo-thrash' ideology behind it. As I said in my previous post, you would not have had the same, overly hostile reaction towards a paper who defended the opposite point of view with similarly weak arguments; you would simply have said "weak, C-" or something.

	28-04-2004 23:55									#59
	Support Apolyton, buy Civilization 2

Dammit, he ain't gettin a "D".

I will not settle for one wit less than a "B-".

And he gets to read it to the class as an example of how much better it is to speak with your own voice than in some stilted, over-coached fashion.

I had another quick read through and changed my mind. It probably is genuine.

Although if that is wrong and it is, after all, written by a professional for some purpose of illustration then B- is way off. We get into the realms of distinction or outright aclaim. One or two of the devices are really good. I mean not Mark Twain or anything, but really good none the less.

And I am still a bit torn. Look at that change of pace into facetiousness at the end. Real easy to think that is a pro rather than a kid.

Anyway, thanks for posting it. Lots of fun.

	29-04-2004 00:45									#60
	Support Apolyton, buy Galactic Civilizations: Deluxe Edition

quote: Originally posted by Oncle Boris OK, the ideologic part was a tease only. Seriously, this guy HAS an argument: the law of evolution shows that the specy is unfit for survival, and that therefore we shouldn't care for it. He tries to demonstrate it with two sub-arguments: it's being overcome by another specy of owls, and it needs an untouched habitat.

I don't think logging, which is certainly NOT part of natural selection, counts.

quote: It's a poor paper, but it does have some of the characteristics to make it academically viable (a structure with a thesis and sub-arguments, some facts, an introduction and a conclusion), a fact you are blatantly ignoring to make your point. What I think is that your reaction towards the paper is biased because of the familiar tone and the 'neo-thrash' ideology behind it. As I said in my previous post, you would not have had the same, overly hostile reaction towards a paper who defended the opposite point of view with similarly weak arguments; you would simply have said "weak, C-" or something.

Wrong. when it comes to essays, I am NOT going to give mercy points. Looking at summer interns and having to read their writen samples, which I told them could be examples of their best writing, I have seen the poor quality of college level writing today. For example, one person used the word "filmic" FILMIC! Its CINEMATIC for god's sake!

The guy's laguage is good, but the substance is ****, and a big fat failure.