swensens' offer is over..

no more cheap ice-cream and discounted meals.. let's wait and see when the next offer will be.. but i went to eat for e last time (of e promotion) today.. omg e swensens half of it is like TPJC canteen.. all tpjc students.. -.-..

(1/23)(1/22)(1/21)= 1/10626.. this is e probability of male 1, female 1 and female 2 being in the same group..

(1/23)(1/22)(1/21)(1/20)= (1/212520).. this is the probability reynold tan is in the same group as the 3 of them..

congrats reynold.. u're a lucky man today.. :P


more on male 1.. it seems *drumroll* that we have our very own barber in 04S13.. and a highly skilled one in that sense.. not only is he able to cut hair, he can cut his own hair using a pair of scissors (of course) and snipping away in front of a mirror.. Round of applause for our very own TAN JUN YUAN (-.-).. he's without a doubt a teenage prodigy.. :O

more about hair and male 1, after much intense and throughout interrogation in class today, we've come to a conclusion for his UNIQUE hairstyle.. it seems he deems people who spike their hair as AH BENGS.. :O .. omg.. derrick is a gangster.. and he comments that reynold's hair is quite spiked (so reynold is categorised as hooligan too..).. when questioned as to why he refuses to spike his hair, he says he has no money.. is there quite a link there?? i think he thinks that u've to go to a saloon to get ur hair spiked.. oh well.. also, when tan² and yeo volunteered to aid him to spike his hair for nought, he refused.. i guess he's still stuck with our ancestors' conventional and traditional mindset.. quite zzz..

in addition, reynold, from his throughout interrogation, also arrived at a very wise conjecture.. :O.., that jun yuan uses liquid paper to highlight his hair (thus explaining the numerous strands of white hair.. LOL..

ok i'm jus doing a factual report of what happened on class today.. jus in case u start flaming me.. :P


sometimes i wonder why some people can get somewhat quite upset over somethings that somehow do not affect them to even some extent.. why flame the whole world for such minute stuff?? yes, many of us constantly dun go cme.. yes, jiang jing is very kind, yes, jiang jing wun tell on us.. but if u think about it, it really isnt the main reason we're skipping cme or chinese (b4 we dropped).. i mean come on man/woman.. let's be realistic; since people nowadays (esp students) are realists, they arent really bothered with subjects that do not have real importance on their lives (results).. we're not abusing his kindness to us, its just that his classes are unimportant.. + some of us jus do see e need to go to class to learn some morals values which we are quite certain we will not pick up and inculcate.. so clearly there's no point.. speaking about chinese.. frankly many of us knew we were anyway not going to retake it, why then would there be a point to go for lessons? sure, u would say we could surely pick something up.. but let me bring u back to reality again and back to the realist argument and the million dollar qn : WOULD IT AFFECT OUT RESULTS? i would think not for most..

and btw, if u say we abuse his kindness, then kindly explain why in the build up to last year's AO chinese paper, hardly anyone played truant? obviously it agains bring us back to the same million dollar question.. but with a slight variation to the ans.. last year, the answer before AO paper was a "YES".. now.. doesnt things make more sense now? i mean seriously.. if jiang jing taught lets say chem (well try to imagine at least), i doubt many pple qould pon..

i'm not here trying to justify that its perfectly ok to pon lessons.. of course we all know its not fine.. yes, its our duty to turn up blah blah blah.. but seriously, it is ultimately e choice of e student himself.. (quite apparently)..

and anyway, i think the only people who have a right (at all) to criticize people who pon are those who have NEVER pon-ned before.. those who pon b4 dun really have a right to tell others off.. they too have commited e 'sin' b4.. take e following analogy.. i kill 100 people, and u kill 1.. (with murdurous intent).. so will the judge say, ok, since u only kill 1, i'll let u go.. but for kenneth's case, since he killed 99 more than u, i'll have to hang him.. clearly that isnt the case.. well readers shd be able to imply what i mean..

thats all.. wow.. damn alot.. lol.. jus my 20 cents worth..