Which of these subjects belong in a trade school?

Eoin Macollamh

Which of the following subjects have no 'business' in a university?

Dave!

what's with all the silly threads lately?

singingstranger

If this is a Commerce swipe...

Paul Tergat

I'm still waiting for the list of subjects.....

Blowfish

Why have you not added any arts type subjects? Some of those could easily be interpreted as belonging to an art college. Each of the subjects above has as much of a right as the arts ones to be taught in a university.

singingstranger

Blowfish wrote:

Why have you not added any arts type subjects? Some of those could easily be interpreted as belonging to an art college. Each of the subjects above has as much of a right as the arts ones to be taught in a university.

Hear, hear! This seems utterly pointless. If anyone votes, all it will display is whichever of the subject areas that the Boards.ie populace has a bigger collective interest in. And we're a pretty small niche group, tbh.

pretty*monster

The is a strong argument that says that none of them 'deserve' to be in a university (that's not to negate their use and such, which in our current economic climate is undeniable).

The elevation of a university degree to a status symbol to be attained regardless of what ones field and so forth.
Whe (philosophical) question of what 'university' means.
The threat of courses that are ordered around skills, productivity and the like to the ideal (certainly cardinal Newman's ideal) of a university as a community of scholars.
The complete and utter loss of the idea that the goal in the accumilation knowledge is wisdom

They're interesting arguments that one should not discount, though my personal opinion is that it's far too late to turn back the tide.

*Eoin Macollamh is my new favourite poster*

singingstranger

What? Kate?! Are you telling me that you think there's absolutely no merit in the knowledge of the first six subjects in the poll other than careerism?

I'm deeply offended.

pretty*monster

singingstranger wrote:

What? Kate?! Are you telling me that you think there's absolutely no merit in the knowledge of the first six subjects in the poll other than careerism?

I'm deeply offended.

No Gav, I did say that at all.

Firstly, I was mostly playing devil's advocate in pointing out that there are (good) arguments against them being taught in a university (which is not at all the smae as claiming they have no value, or even that they have a lesser value than subjects that 'should' be taught in a university).

(I'm not totally up on the argument so if you find a flaw in it fair enough, it's not my argument)

There is, I'm sure you'll agree, a difference between studying something that leads to a definite career and studying something that, though it will mostly likely aid ones career path, is primarily useful for the sake of learning in itself, if we want to get idealistic, it is learning in pursuit of wisdom.

With me?

There's a (dying) school of thought that says that it is those pursuing wisdom that belong in a university.
Those seeking to learn 'skills' for the expressed purpose of employment, those learning a trade, if you will, belong in a trade school.
To mix both those types of students in one big university inevitably leads to the skewing of the university's focus, biasing it to one side or another (this part I do agree with).
The argument should (if it is to avoid ridiculous intellectual snobbery) acknowledge that the pursuit of a trade is of comparable value to the pursuit of knowledge.

I think the argument has merits, but I don’t know enough about it to come down on one side or the other, so status quo it is.

Blush_01

God, I am so not getting involved in the philosophical implications of the OP. I voted for Midwifery, for a number of good reasons, none of them pseudo-intellectual, nonsensical or intellectually elitist, but rather because of the nature of the job.

My mother, when she trained as a nurse, trained in a hospital. She never got a college degree in nursing. Nursing wasn't a college course. Instead she lived in accommodation with the other trainee nurses and trained in the Jervis St. hospital (it's not a hospital anymore, by the way). She also trained as a midwife in a hospital in Scotland (don't ask me where, I'd ask her but she's asleep). She worked in Holles St., the Regional in Limerick and a number of different hospitals around Ireland over the years. Last year she went back to education, going into a college setting, and did her H.Dip in Public Health Nursing and now works as a PHN. I love her to bits, but she's not a paper intellectual. Her course last year was essay based, and if it had been exam based she probably wouldn't have been able to pass, simply because she's not very good with academic pressure. Yet I couldn't think of a more competent nurse who is more suited to her profession. Alright, so I'm biased, but in this case, it's deserved.

Nursing and Midwifery are vocations, not just jobs. To do them well, you have to have the personality for them. Being able to write an excellent technical paper will not help you to deal respectfully and in a caring manner with the people who rely on your assistance. So many excellent potential nurses lose out on the opportunity to pursue nursing (I have a particular person in mind here) simply because they don't perform well academically in exam situations.

Maybe I'm naive, but I think a return to hospital teaching for nursing staff would be a good idea. Nurses, like the rest of the medical profession, do work placement, which often necessitates moves away from the college of their study, placing innumerous burdens on them - financial, social, personal et al. If they were linked to a hospital from day one, this would be easily solved. They'd be more intimate with their profession. They'd "get" the job more.

Or summat.

hullaballoo

What the hell is this? If you start another thread like this Eoin Macollamh, you'll end up on my wrong side.

Just because UCD has university status does not give anyone a right to look down on anyone's career choice.

I'm actually so annoyed about this that I'm stuck for words to express it, and anyone will tell you that this is probably the first time for that.

You're supposed to be a lecturer; why don't you start to act a bit more like an educated person then?

Locked.

hullaballoo

Okay, thanks to Red Alert, I've decided to give this thread a second chance.

I will add one fairly serious caveat, and that is that the first sign of biggotry or elitism will have consequences.

The type of discussion that pretty*monster and Blush have started would be an ideal direction to take this thread.

humbert

Why not just remove the poll, doesn't make a lot of sense as it is!

TheVan

Ha.....Humbert I have it from reliable sources that that is not the most popular post ever! :eek:

humbert

Well the title of the thread doesn't make a lot of sense with the poll the way it is!

Eoin Macollamh

Sorry, this was a direct response to a thread about cutting back on Arts.

Why is that OK but suddenly it's off-limits to post something similar about other fields?

Highly-educated people everywhere have contempt for the way professional training and applied research (as opposed to the pure pursuit of knowledge for its own sake) have taken over universities everywhere. It's a perversion of The Idea of a University (not to coin a phrase). It results in mindsets like that in evidence in the "Cutting Back on Arts" thread, one shared by the yes-men on the GA, who only understand one thing: money.

In the end, if that attitude prevails, the University will be nothing but a producer of obedient worker drones for big business.

One final thought: the sort of censorship you're engaging in, Hullaballoo, is inimical to the spirit of open inquiry at a University.

anonymous_joe

Eoin Macollamh wrote:

Sorry, this was a direct response to a thread about cutting back on Arts.

Why is that OK but suddenly it's off-limits to post something similar about other fields?

Highly-educated people everywhere have contempt for the way professional training and applied research (as opposed to the pure pursuit of knowledge for its own sake) have taken over universities everywhere. It's a perversion of The Idea of a University (not to coin a phrase). It results in mindsets like that in evidence in the "Cutting Back on Arts" thread, one shared by the yes-men on the GA, who only understand one thing: money.

In the end, if that attitude prevails, the University will be nothing but a producer of obedient worker drones for big business.

One final thought: the sort of censorship you're engaging in, Hullaballoo, is inimical to the spirit of open inquiry at a University.

Boards is very heavily modded. You get used to it.

humbert

One final thought: the sort of censorship you're engaging in, Hullaballoo, is inimical to the spirit of open inquiry at a University.

I'd say a little more of an explanation would have helped, it may have come across as an invitation to ridicule certain subjects.

TheVan

Conspiracy theorists of the world unite!

Of course the GA cares about money....if a college is bleeding money (as UCD used to) then neither the Government nor philanthropists will want to invest in the college.

Also, Ireland's educated workforce in areas such as engineering, the financial services and IT are a huge part of the reason the Celtic Tiger occurred.

The college exists to educate Irish people and it is doing that. Whether you have a personal fondness for a particular area or not is not relevant to this debate.

Now, its fair enough to not be happy with a cutback in arts. I too would be bothered if that was my area of interest and occupation. However you must also acknowledge that there is huge demand for graduates of other areas. Commerce, engineering, medicine etc keep seeing their points increasing.

Having restrictions in place on a discussion board in order to prevent the discussion descending into insults is not undue censorship. Also may I note he re-opened the thread.

Jeez, no wonder Brady doesn't listen to ya! (a lighthearted bit there....don't worry its all in jest!)

tintinr35

Eoin Macollamh wrote:

Hullaballoo, is inimical to the spirit of open inquiry at a University.

ha lucky this is not a university then!!!

humbert

I think the question is should colleges be there to educate people primarily for a career or for purely academic reasons and do some of the courses mentioned indicate that things are moving toward the former and away form the latter. Is this a good thing?

hullaballoo

Right, I don't think for a second that I need to justify the way I moderate at all, but if you want an explanation, I'll give you one. Some of this will be familiar to Red Alert, so sorry about that.

I did take into consideration the fact that the thread had started to pick up some momentum, with valid arguments precipitating. However, I thought that the opening post was inciteful and biggoted.

I will tell you this: we university students are not an elite group. We are not intellectually, socially or otherwise superior to our tertiary level counterparts, and there is no way I can see my way clear to allowing snobbery to manifest itself in such an insidious way.

However, I am interested in people's view of the purpose of a "university" as against another tertiary insitution from a philosophical point of view. You may have noticed that I am a proponent of the ideology that education is about learning, and not gearing towards a particular career, and a discussion of other people's standpoints would be interesting.

That said, I don't see how, given the opening post, and the poll attached to it, the thread would maintain an academic level of insight. In other words, I don't know to what extent people would be able to remain detached and mutual in their discussion. I would fear that the thread would descend quickly into a flame-war.

In addition, I found the thread to be an elitist and high-minded thread on what courses do not "belong" in a university. Every course has its place in an educational institute, and practically speaking, if any college is to be competitive, it will have to offer vocational courses.

If you think that I'm censoring this forum, Eoin Macollamh, then you are correct. That is the job of a moderator. The opening few posts in this thread should give you an indication that you got on a few people's nerves by opening this thread the way you did.

The problem I had with this thread wasn't anything to do with the substantial subject-matter, it was more to do with the manner in which you chose to start it. I have no doubt that you fully intended that your opening post was to look as condenscending as it does. For a lecturer, you have a very narrow view on this University.

I would further suggest that you desist from bringing my methods of moderation up in this forum. Anyone who has dealt with me before with regards to my moderation will know that I view it to be inappropriate to address it in the fora I moderate when there is a PM facility and a Feedback forum for such things. If you have any further issues with me (and this goes for humbert too), please take it to either PM or the Feedback forum.

Blowfish

I hope you don't mind me going off topic by saying this Hullaballoo, but from that post alone, I can see exactly why you were chosen as the new mod, and why it was a damn good choice:)

The_Minister

Eoin Macollamh wrote:

Sorry, this was a direct response to a thread about cutting back on Arts.

At least in my thread I bothered to say why I selected those subjects.

Eoin Macollamh

I'm afraid I'm no longer interested in participating in discussion under these conditions.

blondie83

Any chance we could see the initial subects that were in the poll? Would make this thread a lot less confusing!

Dave!

jayzis, didn't know boards HAD 38 million members! :eek: I think the poll speaks for itself -- 'Have you' gets the most votes!

hullaballoo

I can't remember the initial options. They were all career orientated subjects, so just go with what subjects do you think would be more suited to a vocational college as against a university.

I think it was things like accounting, finance, marketing, animal science and others. Perhaps the OP will grace us again with his options to save some of the confusion.

Blowfish, thank you, sincerely.

humbert, apologies for your inclusion in that post, I misinterpreted your previous post in this thread as being directed at me. Post amended.

Eoin Macollamh, sorry if open discussion where there is no time given to prejudices does not suit you. It would be better to get your side of the story into this discussion too, but no moderator would allow you to start an inflammatory thread like this, and not be pulled up on it.

the evil lime

Arts is what all the other subjects are based on, if you go back far enough.

However, certain courses that could be considered vocational, and I'm going to take Commerce as an example as it's the only one I'm at all qualified to speak on, are a blend of Arts subjects and a few other things.

I've just finished 1st year commerce, and it was composed of:

Accounting - Business

Maths - Arts

Quantatitive Analysis - Statistics - Arts

Economics - Arts (same modules as Arts students)

Organisational Behaviour - Sociology / Psycology - Arts

Computers - Science-Business hybrid

Managment - Business

Applied Business Compentencies - Business

my electives:

Contract I & II - Law

French - Arts

See, you can find a lot of Arts in other degrees.

I must also admit to attending a few History lectures.

Eoin Macollamh

hullaballoo wrote:

Eoin Macollamh, sorry if open discussion where there is no time given to prejudices does not suit you. It would be better to get your side of the story into this discussion too, but no moderator would allow you to start an inflammatory thread like this, and not be pulled up on it.

It's hard to know where to begin with so much double-speak.

1) "Open Discussion": Accusing me of not wanting to participate in "open discussion" is positively Orwellian, coming as it does from the censor whose actions I object to.

2) "Prejudices": my views are not "prejudices" (anymore than are the views of the poster who wants to discuss where Arts should be cut back). They are considered judgements cultivated over the course of half a lifetime in academia. I can point you to any number of very deep thinkers of the sort one never encounters in Business School who share my views, starting with Cardinal Newman himself (oh, the irony). And I'm prepared to defend them with evidence and argument if need be. An Arts degree (or three) prepares you for such things...

3) "My side of the story": You want my side of the story at the same time that you want to dismiss it as "prejudice." Needless to say, I can't make a lot of sense out of that.

4) "Inflammatory": I started this thread precisely because I was "inflamed" (relatively) by the arrogance and stupidity of the thread about cutting back on arts. I note the double standard: that thread passed with nary a whimper from you and continues to exist today. But a thread questioning the appropriateness of practical disciplines where thinking is, uh, an afterthought (rather than essential) is somehow beyond the pale. That's a double-standard I'm afraid. Note: I'm not for one minute saying the other thread should be censored.

5) It's pretty clear to me what I'm dealing with here: resentment. You resent your lecturers ("who are they to grade me?") and so here you are in a position of a little power over one (finally!) and you intend to get payback. It wouldn't have mattered what I said or posted, you would've found some pretext to censor me. Sorry, I'm not into the working out of your master-slave games and that's why I'm not interested in continuing the discussion (beyond this post, obviously).

If I know anything about you, I know you'll censor this too, so I hope somebody quotes it before you see it.

Red Alert

Eoin Macollamh wrote:

5) It's pretty clear to me what I'm dealing with here: resentment. You resent your lecturers ("who are they to grade me?") and so here you are in a position of a little power over one (finally!) and you intend to get payback. It wouldn't have mattered what I said or posted, you would've found some pretext to censor me. Sorry, I'm not into the working out of your master-slave games and that's why I'm not interested in continuing the discussion (beyond this post, obviously).

I don't harbour any serious resentment for any of my lecturers, I wish more of them would come on here from time to time. If you don't break any rules of the forum Eoin nobody can ban or censor you.

Eoin Macollamh

Red Alert wrote:

I don't harbour any serious resentment for any of my lecturers, I wish more of them would come on here from time to time. If you don't break any rules of the forum Eoin nobody can ban or censor you.

I haven't broken any of the rules of the forum. Unless, of course, the rules are whatever a mod says they are and therefore can't be known in advance. But if that's the case, then it doesn't matter what I say: they can ban or censor me whenever they like. Sorry, but no lecturer is going to put up with that.

I really must be going...

panda100

humbert wrote:

I think the question is should colleges be there to educate people primarily for a career or for purely academic reasons and do some of the courses mentioned indicate that things are moving toward the former and away form the latter. Is this a good thing?

Yeah I think this is true. I think it would be really sad (wipes tear away) if college was just about courses with set job for life at the end of them. I think its unhealthy if all courses would have a set career path at the end of it. Lots of people dont know what they want to do when there 17/18 and so having open-ended courses such as arts have lots of carrer options at the end. That is why I did medicine because I knew I wanted to do something sort of medically related and medicne gave me a good grounding so I can go into medica jornalism,medical law or anything I want pretty easily when I qualify.
During the exams I studied out in Smurfit quite a lot and it has a really career focused,not nice vibe out there.Thats how I imagine UCD to be if some of the non career courses were to be dropped.....horrible environment!

the evil lime wrote:

I must also admit to attending a few History lectures

This I also ADMIT.I went into a greek (geek!) and roman lecture with one of my friendS once and it was really intresting and a few psychologys ones too.

singingstranger

Eoin Macollamh wrote:

2) "Prejudices": my views are not "prejudices" (anymore than are the views of the poster who wants to discuss where Arts should be cut back). They are considered judgements cultivated over the course of half a lifetime in academia. I can point you to any number of very deep thinkers of the sort one never encounters in Business School who share my views, starting with Cardinal Newman himself (oh, the irony). And I'm prepared to defend them with evidence and argument if need be. An Arts degree (or three) prepares you for such things...

Oh, of course. You're not at all prejudiced. You just think that you can prove that every single one of the 200+ staff whose names appear on the wall in the Quinn School are more shallow thinkers than you. Of course.

You, Sir (or Madam), are emblematic of the self-perpetuating elitism that hinders any chances of development or evolution that Brady's reforms might allow, regardless of the added bureaucracy that comes alongside.

Surely someone with three varying Arts degrees would consider themselves bigger than mirroring insults back, but all you're prepared to do is flame the entire School of Business just because somebody else decided that the various courses in Arts weren't their particular cup of tea. I'm appalled that my University contains such academics as those who, despite triplicate qualification, still revert to petty eye-for-an-eye arguments. Do you honestly think you're better than Firespinner by doing that? Because all you're doing is spitting on the notion that knowledge is its own reward by showing that you're on the same intellectual plane as Firespinner, an undergrad, is. In fact, even lesser, because you didn't attempt to justify why the subjects you chose have a lesser contribution to the world.

Whatever about recruiting student support for resistance against the clearly unpopular reforms - which is of course acceptable, I for one will not be sorry to see the back of you.

The_Minister

Eoin Macollamh wrote:

4) "Inflammatory": I started this thread precisely because I was "inflamed" (relatively) by the arrogance and stupidity of the thread about cutting back on arts. I note the double standard: that thread passed with nary a whimper from you and continues to exist today. But a thread questioning the appropriateness of practical disciplines where thinking is, uh, an afterthought (rather than essential) is somehow beyond the pale. That's a double-standard I'm afraid. Note: I'm not for one minute saying the other thread should be censored.

As I pointed out above, you provided no arguement as regards each subject, you merely stuck them up and left. I at least was trying for serious discussion, but this thread is nothing but a petty attempt at a comeback. My thread was long and showed some sign of thought, yours showed none. It is not the fact that your thought was beyond the pale but that you made no arguement to back it up. It is not a double-standard, your post was just exceptionally sub-par.



Also while Hullabaloo has only modded us a while, he has been a fair mod throughout. He never posts against lecturers and it is small-minded to try and put his modding down to merely resentment.


EDIT: SS Please don't drag me down to his intellectual plane. He feels so impotent that he had to compare Hugh Brady to George Bush.

Eoin Macollamh

singingstranger wrote:

Oh, of course. You're not at all prejudiced. You just think that you can prove that every single one of the 200+ staff whose names appear on the wall in the Quinn School are more shallow thinkers than you. Of course.

That's not what I would call a charitable description of my view. Is it perhaps just possible that I was making a claim about the disciplines in the Quinn School and not the individuals in it?

You, Sir (or Madam), are emblematic of the self-perpetuating elitism that hinders any chances of development or evolution that Brady's reforms might allow, regardless of the added bureaucracy that comes alongside.

Regression is not evolution. So, yes, I will attempt to hinder evolution if it involves turning the university into something other than a place where students can broaden their minds and shed their provincial mindsets (I mean this in the sense that all of us start out with provincial mindsets) and habits of thought through encounters with the great minds of the past. That experience--rubbing up against great thinkers--is the opposite of elitist: it is humbling and broadening. And I think everyone should have that experience. To fail to make it a primary part of education at UCD is to fail to educate. By and large it does not happen in the Business School. If it does, it's by accident.

Surely someone with three varying Arts degrees would consider themselves bigger than mirroring insults back, but all you're prepared to do is flame the entire School of Business just because somebody else decided that the various courses in Arts weren't their particular cup of tea.

OK, so I'm flaming but they are "deciding that [those courses] weren't their cup of tea." Why is it not the other way around? Why am I not simply "deciding that Business courses aren't my cup of tea"?

I'm appalled that my University contains such academics as those who, despite triplicate qualification, still revert to petty eye-for-an-eye arguments.

I'm not sure why you think I'm the petty one rather than the overzealous mod.

Do you honestly think you're better than Firespinner by doing that?

I never said any such thing.

Because all you're doing is spitting on the notion that knowledge is its own reward by showing that you're on the same intellectual plane as Firespinner, an undergrad, is. In fact, even lesser, because you didn't attempt to justify why the subjects you chose have a lesser contribution to the world.

I was ready to offer such a justification (and you will find one post on the first page where I made a start), when I found that my views had already been ruled beyond the pale. How was I to continue then? The original poll subjects had been erased yet I'm expected to justify their inclusion? The only reason I didn't was because discussion had been shut down.

singingstranger

Frankly I haven't the time to go through the rest, but I can't go back to study without taking you up on this one.

Eoin Macollamh wrote:

Is it perhaps just possible that I was making a claim about the disciplines in the Quinn School and not the individuals in it?

Eoin Macollamh wrote:

very deep thinkers of the sort one never encounters in Business School

Don't let the virtual Boards door hit you on the way out.

Eoin Macollamh

singingstranger wrote:

Frankly I haven't the time to go through the rest, but I can't go back to study without taking you up on this one.

Eoin Macollamh wrote:

very deep thinkers of the sort one never encounters in Business School

Uh, that was a reference to the curriculum, not the lecturers. Very few of the lecturers (certainly not me) count as very deep thinkers of the sort I had in mind.

the evil lime

And I think everyone should have that experience... By and large it does not happen in the Business School. If it does, it's by accident.

Have you possibly considered that while we may be studying a slightly more career oriented curriculum, some of us may wish to avail of the University to learn more than just the assigned materials?

I've used the library to study history, English, French and computers. This was entirely voluntary (my French course did not revolve around grammar on the level I was reading it). Were I in a trade school or some other third level institution, I would not have been able to access such materials.

I've attended Arts & Law lectures I didn't have to, also simply to pick up some extra knowledge for knowledge's sake.

Consider for a moment that the student is not defined by the subject, and that perhaps the benefit of inter-mingling the faculties rather than splitting them into different institutions - we can each gain from the other.

TheVan

Added to that, such a comment about the business school shows ignorance.

At the moment I am studying for an exam in Globalisation, Post-Fordism and employee relations in general. Accounting increases your awareness of your own personal finances, skills everyone should have. I could go on...

blondie83

Eoin Macollamh wrote:

5) It's pretty clear to me what I'm dealing with here: resentment. You resent your lecturers ("who are they to grade me?") and so here you are in a position of a little power over one (finally!) and you intend to get payback. It wouldn't have mattered what I said or posted, you would've found some pretext to censor me. Sorry, I'm not into the working out of your master-slave games and that's why I'm not interested in continuing the discussion (beyond this post, obviously).

This may be the case in Arts (although I doubt it) but it certainly not the case in Engineering. As Red Alert pointed out we would have a certain level of respect for our lecturers and welcome the chance to engage them in discussion on fora such as these. I see no reason that Arts should be any different, or indeed B&L as in the case of Hullaballo. The "who are they to grade me" comment is silly - of course your lecturer in a subject is going to grade you, who elese would! (I'd imagine everyone posting here is able to accept this as well) Eoin I think you need to understand that we're not in primary or even secondary school any more where that may perhaps have been the attitude of certain individuals. Also everyone gets censored at some stage or other on boards, its necessary for a rake of different reasons and isn't something you should take so personally :cool:

Red Alert

It could be the smaller classes too and the projects - you do really get to know at least two or three lecturers quite well by final year in Elec. I know a couple well enough that they'd stop for a chat in the corridor etc.

Blush_01

Eoin, I can see that you might feel upset, but be realistic - nobody was setting out to attack you personally, but you seem to be so much on the defensive that you can't see that. Some of the remarks you have made were rather silly, really. Especially regarding the paranoia with relation to lecturers. We're not silly little children when it comes to that kind of thing -for the most part anyway.

I have to agree with Hulla. The opportunity for turning this into one big messy fight full of accusations and aggro would have been picked up by someone. Also, there's no need to "retaliate" to Firespinner's thread. He's sometimes a bit misguided, but never intended to offend, I'm sure.

This is ridiculous (especially coming from me!) but jeez, could everyone just relax?

The_Minister

Blush_01 wrote:

He's sometimes a bit misguided, but never intended to offend, I'm sure.

Would you please stop ruffling my hair, and give me my lollipop?

hullaballoo

Hmmm, this thread isn't really getting anywhere is it? I think it might be better to just be shot of it unless it gets back on topic fairly soon.

Eoin Macollamh

That's rich. Not unlike the parricide who asks for clemency on the grounds that he's an orphan.

Or maybe a better analogy is Joe Pesci and Robert DeNiro in Goodfellas putting the poor guy in the boot of their car "out of his misery." On humanitarian grounds, of course.

ozt9vdujny3srf

Eoin Macollamh, it has already been pointed out to you that this thread is not the place to complain about the moderation on this board, you have also been directed to where you can complain about it.

Yet, you continue comment on it despite the fact that the thread has in fact been left open and you have been left free to make your point.

If you want to have a discussion about what the true aims of a university should be, then start a new thread about it. I realise you had a point here, but you need to realise that this was the wrong way to make it.

Locked.