View Full Version: It's Official

Craccum > Uni Related > It's Official

Pages: [1] 2


Title: It's Official
Description: The university are fucktards......


SheDevil - August 29, 2005 04:58 AM (GMT)
Seeing as Aunty Helen will be wiping my interest for me i thought it pertinent to once again enjoy the wonderful thing known as living costs, so i dutifully rang studylink happily thinking of the wonderful things i could now afford to purchase.

I excitedly informed the studylink woman that i wished to recieve living costs, she looked up my student status, and then my plans all turned to shit.

Apparently i am not full-time, therefore not eligible. Since when was doing three fucking papers not fulltime?

Apparently you need a grading of 0.8 to be full-time, i have a grading of 0.715, or something stupid like that, so she told me to ring the university and check how much my papers are worth (grade wise) so i dutifully rang the university and the guy put me through to the fees office??? Why i do not know, but they weren't there, so they asked to leave a message, so i hung up.

FUCKERS! :vangry: I want my goddamned money!

Has anyone else had this problem, can you help?

Steveo - August 29, 2005 05:00 AM (GMT)
What the hell! I thought part time was like 1 or 2 papers. This is just stupid :(

El Matador - August 29, 2005 05:01 AM (GMT)
I thought it was three papers per semester....honestly...wtf.

SheDevil - August 29, 2005 05:01 AM (GMT)
You're telling me, plus i went on to ndeva to check how much my papers are worth, it didn't say BUT it did say that i am fulltime. Seriously, WTF?

Dr_Steve - August 29, 2005 05:13 AM (GMT)
its three papers per semester if you sign up for the whole year at once, or four papers if you're just signing up for one semester at a time.

at least thats what the studylink guy told me back in first year

SheDevil - August 29, 2005 05:23 AM (GMT)
Ah, that could explain it, i did two papers last semester. I'm considered fulltime by Ndeva, but obviously not fulltime enough to meet the stupid requirements to borrow money that i'm going to have to pay back anyway!

Happy Ahmed - August 29, 2005 05:26 AM (GMT)
I tried to get an independent circumstance allowance but they don't count work weeks you have completed while receiving a student allowance.

So let's see....

You're obviously poor to qualify for an allowance. You are working to support yourself. But NO INDEPENDANT CIRCUMSTANCES ALLOWANCES FOR YOU.

As soon as I had been working without getting an allowance for long enough they abolished the fucking thing.

Faggots.

SheDevil - August 29, 2005 05:30 AM (GMT)
I could understand them being picky about free money, but money you have to pay back? I mean c'mon, fucking stupid. And obviously if you are applying for ICA you do need it, they are basatrds.

Yeliah - August 29, 2005 05:41 AM (GMT)
They're all money pinching (or in this case, witholding) bastards.




Let's spork them.

SheDevil - August 29, 2005 05:47 AM (GMT)
Spork them?? Sounds painful, what exactly is sporking?

the oob - August 29, 2005 05:48 AM (GMT)
It's hard to get something for nothing? What a cruel world we live in.

Yeliah - August 29, 2005 05:55 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (SheDevil @ Aug 29 2005, 05:47 PM)
Spork them??  Sounds painful, what exactly is sporking?

A spork is a hybrid of a fork and a spoon.

Sharpened to the right point, they can be very painful when inserted up one's orifice.

I mean, so I've heard.

Anyway, the point here is that yes, it is painful, and thus yes, we should definitely look into it. :ninja: (...imagine he's holding sporks...)

SheDevil - August 29, 2005 06:00 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (the oob @ Aug 29 2005, 05:48 PM)
It's hard to get something for nothing? What a cruel world we live in.

It's never for nothing, there is always some sort of hidden cost involved with everything, actual, metaphorical or whatever, it'll make itself known maybe not today, maybe not tommorrow but someday. ^_^

I had a feeling that's what a spork was, they give them to you when you eat at hello food. We need a spork brigade, sort of like the goon grey-shirts, they can be armed with sporks!

Yeliah - August 29, 2005 06:05 AM (GMT)
Fuck yeah. The Spork Brigade.

Rawkin'.

I'm going to go and find a picture of a lethal looking spork.

Scuzza - August 29, 2005 01:00 PM (GMT)
The new 360 degrees structure has something to do with this, I believe.

The 3 papers is part time thing has caught out a lot of people - they really needed to publisice that fact more.

Steveo - August 31, 2005 12:21 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Yeliah @ Aug 29 2005, 06:05 PM)
Fuck yeah. The Spork Brigade.

i.e Yeliah & Steveo
:flame:

SheDevil - August 31, 2005 04:44 AM (GMT)
I've got special happy ending for you!

I'm on the phone with studylink, they're giving me ma money, ooooh yeah! First payment of $150 next week, turns out it was studylink that were the fucktards. They guy i spoke to was so nice though, basically they were operating on a full-year loan case rather than semesterly, they had closed my 2nd semester case which just had to be re-opened. All very confuzzling but yay, happy ending! :)

Hauser - August 31, 2005 12:57 PM (GMT)
Good stuff, She Devil! :D

I had the same problem actually. Studylink denied my student loan this semester because I was apparently a part time student: I rang them up, and it turned out they only put in two papers for me weirdly at the place, the dude on the phone was really nic and worked it all out for me too. Viva Studylink!

SheDevil - August 31, 2005 11:01 PM (GMT)
Viva free-ish money! :P

Dr_Steve - September 1, 2005 12:03 AM (GMT)
So what happens now if National gets in?

emo - September 1, 2005 12:16 AM (GMT)
Apparently next year we'll have to do four papers each semester to qualify as full-time. That's just ridiculous. Luckily they'll keep my allowance up even doing two papers, because you qualify as full-time if it's your last semester. It's all so confusing to ensure most people won't bother. And those people too lazy to bother obviously don't need the money anyway.

Boy Wonder - September 1, 2005 04:01 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (emo @ Sep 1 2005, 12:16 PM)
Apparently next year we'll have to do four papers each semester to qualify as full-time. That's just ridiculous.

In my opinion, full time study is at least 7 papers per year.

Steveo - September 1, 2005 04:49 AM (GMT)
FFS 8 is insane. Im not looking foward to doing 4 stage2/3 papers in 1 semester :(

Hauser - September 1, 2005 05:20 AM (GMT)
Agreed Steveo. This year i've done three each semester, the first because I arrived three weeks late, and this current one because I'm doing two difficult stage two papers for Spanish (I have not done Stage one in it) in addition to a politics one.

Fuck, that means I still have to do EIGHTEEN more papers to finish my humble doublemajor BA.

Mr Lanky Bobs - September 2, 2005 04:16 AM (GMT)
i'm doing 4 a semester now but thats only cos i thought you had to do 7 a year and i failed one last semester...

Synopsis - September 2, 2005 04:49 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Steveo @ Sep 1 2005, 04:49 PM)
FFS 8 is insane. Im not looking foward to doing 4 stage2/3 papers in 1 semester :(

It's fun! fun fun fun! Fun like hernia!

YOU WILL ENJOY IT! IF YOU ARE NOT SUFFERING YOU ARE NOT JAPANESE!!!

El Matador - September 2, 2005 05:53 AM (GMT)
I did five last semester and four this one, if you cant the two law papers separately.

It was more than I could handle and my grades suffered as a result.

SheDevil - September 2, 2005 10:02 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Dr_Steve @ Sep 1 2005, 12:03 PM)
So what happens now if National gets in?

I'm fucked either way, under labour i'll be slightly less fucked. I will owe, when I finish at the end of this year, about $35,000. My interest under the current scheme will end up being somewhere around $36,000. My total loan would end up costing me over $70,000 and take me over 20 years to pay off........now that is ridiculous, that's why i'm hoping Labour get in!

This whole paper re-structuring they are doing is insane, I don't think the university realise that 4 papers a semester is a fairly heavy workload, especially when you get to stage 3. I can hardly manage two papers a semester!

maniacnymph - September 3, 2005 12:03 PM (GMT)
$70,000. there is no fucking WAY we are getting $70,000 worth of education, or close to. geez, go become a Shamans apprentice and learn the ways of the universe for a foot massage and mug of tea a day.

Hauser - September 4, 2005 01:21 AM (GMT)
They need to set fixed prices for Uni, like 10 grand for every course at the end and then you can get part of that cut back for living in NZ for a while afterwards.

Stu McCutcheon is just saving all the extra money to pay for hookers whose arses he will sniff coke off and his next BMW convertible.

Aaron_von_Cock - September 4, 2005 04:43 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (emo @ Sep 1 2005, 12:16 PM)
Apparently next year we'll have to do four papers each semester to qualify as full-time. That's just ridiculous. Luckily they'll keep my allowance up even doing two papers, because you qualify as full-time if it's your last semester. It's all so confusing to ensure most people won't bother. And those people too lazy to bother obviously don't need the money anyway.

The workload is going to stay pretty much the same, actually. The content of all 2 point papers will come down a bit and one pointers will increase in content. Don't worry, the system will look after you

templar34 - September 7, 2005 03:58 AM (GMT)
From what little I picked up as class rep last semester (for a paper that I failed :dance:), you'll have to do 1/7th more papers (i.e. 8 rather than 7), but yes, they're cutting 1/7th of the coursework from each paper.

the oob - September 7, 2005 04:02 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (templar34 @ Sep 7 2005, 03:58 PM)
From what little I picked up as class rep last semester (for a paper that I failed :dance:), you'll have to do 1/7th more papers (i.e. 8 rather than 7), but yes, they're cutting 1/7th of the coursework from each paper.

In other words, you learn less in your useful papers, and have to do more useless papers.

Steveo - September 7, 2005 04:09 AM (GMT)
Awesome, less work for me!

Mr Lanky Bobs - September 7, 2005 06:41 AM (GMT)
but how will they be able to cut something out of papers like eco 101...shock horror...no market demand or supply...

Hauser - September 7, 2005 11:47 AM (GMT)
They can start teaching you damn pot-heads in commerce that a centrally planned command economy IS THE BEST FOR ALL OF YOU.

EDIT: It has the best gini coefficient result.

the oob - September 7, 2005 08:41 PM (GMT)
QUOTE (Hauser @ Sep 7 2005, 11:47 PM)
They can start teaching you damn pot-heads in commerce that a centrally planned command economy IS THE BEST FOR ALL OF YOU.

EDIT: It has the best gini coefficient result.

No government can allocate the supply of labour as efficiently as the free market, hence why economists, who have a tendency to only look at the economic side of a state while ignoring the social side, tend to favour right wing economics.

El Matador - September 8, 2005 12:46 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (the oob @ Sep 8 2005, 08:41 AM)
No government can allocate the supply of labour as efficiently as the free market, hence why economists, who have a tendency to only look at the economic side of a state while ignoring the social side, tend to favour right wing economics.

There is by contrast, no such thing as a 'free market'.

Maus - September 12, 2005 05:52 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (Mr Lanky Bobs @ Sep 7 2005, 06:41 PM)
but how will they be able to cut something out of papers like eco 101...shock horror...no market demand or supply...


They're not taking out content, but assessment. So, if you were doing a stage 1 arts paper which had two or three essays that totalled 3000 words between them, and a three hour, three essay exam that is supposed to total 3000 words, making it a 6000 word paper, it will be reduced to 5000 words. i.e. less in the assignments, and a 2 instead of 3 question exam.

It actually adds up to slightly less work, despite the extra paper. Mixed blessing I reckon; more bums on seats, and thus more money in the coffers, and broader, though perhaps shallower, education for undergrads. :shrugs:

Good for the pot heads anyways...

the oob - September 12, 2005 06:01 AM (GMT)
QUOTE (sloanie @ Sep 8 2005, 12:46 PM)
QUOTE (the oob @ Sep 8 2005, 08:41 AM)
No government can allocate the supply of labour as efficiently as the free market, hence why economists, who have a tendency to only look at the economic side of a state while ignoring the social side, tend to favour right wing economics.

There is by contrast, no such thing as a 'free market'.

Technically not, but you see my point.




Hosted for free by InvisionFree