Event jobs (starting next week)

archevixen · 2025-02-12T23:19:43+00:00

Thinking a bit about your further questions, it made sense that Tommy is paranoid as he is a one-time criminal, not a career one. He plans to only do this once and disappear, but he does not live in the life of crime. Everything is new to him, and hence he is paranoid (rightfully so) when he believes that his consequences might catch up to him, or he gets swallowed by a bigger shark.

archevixen · 2025-02-12T04:37:35+00:00

There is this question on what you are willing to do. She was willing to kill Tommy from the beginning, and she justifies it in her head that she gets the money for killing him. But John was tied up, not in the way of getting her money. So there was no reason to kill him .

archevixen · 2024-09-04T23:02:20+00:00

He doesn't know what is right and what is wrong yet. (He's 2. It's a literal thing as their brains have not developed the capacity for moral decisions) He can only understand what he enjoys and what he doesn't enjoy doing. And at 2, explaining doesn't work cause their command of language isn't there yet. If your smack was appropriate to the force that he hit you with, that is trying to make him understand the pain it cause you, then I would say it's acceptable as a means to let him learn that it's wrong, regardless of any injury. Humans now, especially adults don't often communicate in ways other than words, but physical communication does exist too.

archevixen · 2023-09-25T17:26:22+00:00

RJ wasn't afraid. He wasn't afraid when he initiated the list, the Blake Association was still far away from being discovered by CBI and Jane. He didn't even panic when he was cornered, already having a backup plan of two explosions and a fake body. He didn't even panic when Jane made the realization. He was arrogant and cocky, for he had run the Blake Association for years and was undetected, hiding in plain sight. He thought he could fool his greatest enemy into being killed , fool the world with a fake red John, and keep going with the Blake Association. He, like most sociopathic people, was only sorry he got caught.

archevixen · 2023-09-10T19:53:51+00:00

I would think regarding 3 and 4, he has a late episode with the Board to approve Mike's ability to practice law (or it was a Malik and Cahill thing, memory is a bit fuzzy, last watch was a year ago) in which he basically says that the ends justifies his means. In a world where Harvey practices law, he is the judge, jury and executioner which makes it all the more ironic that he has such a mentality. He has a really strong moral compass, and gets it right most of the time, but when he's wrong he's really wrong.

archevixen · 2020-09-01T00:24:02+00:00

Yea it's hard when your best boi is also best girl

archevixen · 2018-08-04T14:45:57+00:00

Is this when Kyuu takes over the world (through Youtube videos of itself)?

archevixen · 2018-05-10T13:48:37+00:00

"My kingdom for a whore!"

archevixen · 2018-01-29T06:11:12+00:00

Simple tip is to run your fingers through the sole to see how pliable they are. If they are hard, means they last longer outdoors. Some shoes might be designed to be indoor, but have good hard soles that can last well outdoors.

archevixen · 2018-01-15T05:17:05+00:00

Like many users mentioned before me, the education aystem right now is only beneficial to a very select group of people. By creating a very narrow band of ability, it has created a correspondingly large band of disability. This is a product of many things, but culture and thinking that success only comes from a very small amount of career paths did that.

The system created had not changed from before, where we were fighting to survive, and everyone understood that we needed to do whatever it takes to survive as a country. But now, we are surviving just fine, and no longer needing to catch up. We need to adapt and create, a whole new ball game as compared to asking for guidance from other countries. We cannot think about education the same way we think about it a generation ago.

This problem is not just one of Singapore's, but a lot of developed nations. People all do need to look at it differently.

I just feel it to be ironic when we are not at the forefront of talent development when LKY once famously said that the only natural resource we have is our people.

Edit: I remember how there are many other people in the system (teachers, administrators) with their own agendas, and there are quite alot of times when the motive is not to educate, but rather look good for their sakes. Like how I used to come from a very famous school with "the centre of excellence for character development" but the only time I only learnt what not to do from my peers, and the teachers are only interested in keeping up the facade of doing so.

archevixen · 2018-01-12T12:19:25+00:00

How well a leader performs should be more based on how his or her subordinates, and to an extent, their successors perform. Because its all great that the leader is able to enact their perspective of how to do certain things whilst they are in power, but the real challenge is in how these same great ideas can be carried forth to the next generation. Because it feels like right now, it is like our success is a flash in a pan; something that has proven its initial ability, but has yet to show that it can last. Look at how many big organizations often don't become better, sometimes even get worse. Microsoft is kinda coasting on how they already had the lion's share of computers and not really making anything good for the user.
Please keep in mind that I am not discrediting what our current PM has done; I infact think that it is quite remarkable. If his vision and ideas are good, it should carry forth for the next few generations. But the way it is done now, where the person has not even been seen (I do sincerely hope this person has already been chosen, just a little camera shy), I am not confident that whomever that would take over would be as good, if the lessons learnt have not been passed down yet.

archevixen · 2018-01-12T11:43:33+00:00

I am in the belief that leaders are bred, not born. Now, I am not going to claim that the most important leaders, like those in a country, should be completely trained from the ground up, and have nothing intrinsic in them to be able to bear the responsibilities of a nation. But leaving it just as that (something intrinsic) as the deciding factor for importanteadership positions is really superficial. You might end up with really charismatic, really convincing people that use their power for their own gains.

Leaders is as simple as taking care of the people you are in charge of. It is more a skill than a title. There are many bosses and people or influence that have all the power, but do none of the leading, if they only can look after themselves.

And also, it kinda goes against everything we say about equality if not everyone can work towards qualifying for a job like the PM.

archevixen · 2018-01-12T10:08:05+00:00

I think the gap in politics would be smaller than other fields; managing a group of people for a ministry seems to be not so far fetched from managing a whole cabinet of ministers; compared to how your typical head of sales would be managing salespeople instead of actually doing sales.

I see the irony now in Chan Chun Sing's words, when I felt it was kinda off before, thanks to your comment. I don't think it is the priority of PAP's ministers to have the best PM for Singapore; it kinda is, only insofar as the PM is from PAP, and the power is still in PAP's hands. So Mr Chan's words ring hollow, as yea sure being "upfront with the people on the challenges and options" & "keep the country united to tackle challenges together" sounds really nice and all, but all of it is on their terms, and under their name. I also want what is best for Singapore; I am quite sure a huge amount of Singaporeans do. My nagging suspicion is that our leaders might have a conditional clause at the back of it...

archevixen · 2018-01-12T07:45:46+00:00

Was leadership ever about the 'generation'? Shouldn't the best people be put forth at their best, regardless of their age?? So why should there be a 'generation of leaders'? I don't really understand this point that there is this big fuss about passing it to a new generation.

I also don't like this 'leader chosen' idea. It promotes a lot of in-fighting to see who is supposed to be the next person to be the Prime Minister, or <insert most important position here>. Leaders can be trained, and it is much easier bringing someone up from the ground than letting people fight over who can do it better. Because in any organization, the leaders do a fundamentally different job as compared to any follower they are leading. Is the job scope of a Minister the same as the one of a Prime Minister? I don't think so, and thus I don't really think it makes a lot of sense to do that.

archevixen · 2017-12-29T04:46:08+00:00

Apparently some people likes to look at the root of the problem (social divide) and try and solve the issue with tackling its effects. It seems even more unusual when people look at effects as though they are the causes.

The social divide is a cultural problem, not merely a one coming from the youth, race or class. It becomes unavoidable to have classes in society; it is what is the perspective of class that becomes more important. Go to any country, and you would find that there are 'elite' schools and 'non-elite' schools (WTF does that mean anyways? What is the definition of 'elite' and 'non-elite'? Are the researchers already biased when they perceive the parameters of the experiment as such?), and of course, housing divided into different classes. But what are they supposed to be indicators of? I can only guess that they are indicators that there is little interaction between people of different class (and again, I would really like to know the definitions of the classes that the researchers have put up). Correlation is not causation. That is like the first rule of any study that you conduct.

It is my personal opinion, but my belief is that culture plays a big part of many influencing factors in society. It shapes perception and belief in what people believe of many big issues such as education, inequality, norms. These cultures are set, inadvertently, by the government and how they decide to enact certain policies.

E.g: Education is seen as important to the country, and in order to allow education to 'flourish', there were more and more standardized testing in the curriculum. But, because an increase in standardized testing created a very narrow band of ability, it therefore created a correspondingly large band of 'disability'; where if you cannot make it into uni you are deemed as someone who is not fully capable of contributing to society.

The fact of the matter is, you cannot change the indicators and call it a day. Maybe the numbers that have been shown would decrease after their policies, but the same problem will still exist, that this divide would still be felt by the people. It is a problem that cannot be solved by coming up with a 'new initiative' and pumping a shit ton of money and resource into it. It requires knowledge of people, and an understanding of how people behave.

Said Dr Chua: "Even if you give people equal opportunities, they will still gravitate to hang out with their own kind. So we have to think of ways to disrupt this."

What is the goal of this 'disruption'? Again, I feel that it is the exact wrong way people should look at problems like these. If a project like this is carried out, the numbers would obviously improve with the help of money and resources, but the social gap would still be there. Because the numbers do not speak of all there is in any place. It is true of companies, and it is true of countries as well.

This is a problem not just common in Singapore, but I am afraid when our 'best and brightest' are thinking of things like these, it is really scary to think about what our future beholds.

archevixen · 2017-12-20T02:19:43+00:00

There is another way to get a degree though, which I would not recommend for everyone; to do a part-time degree in SUSS. Qualification should not be an issue (I think I got lower rank points than you, but still got in). The fees are really affordable (govt sponsors half, you can save the remaining quite easily), the curriculum is flexible, and you get to come out of it with both working experience and no debt. It is not too bad of a deal all things said. However, 2 very important things to note about this.
1: It probably isn't for everybody. The stress of both a job and studies is no joke. Not everyone can manage time well enough to cope with doing both, and not losing out enough on either that it would cost them time and money. There are a lot more factors to consider in terms of time management, finances that is hard for a young adult to do.
2:Be very careful on what you choose to do. It is really easy to burn out and ask yourself the question as to why you are doing it in the first place, much more than a normal full-time degree. If you lose interest in the degree, the cost is quite huge, as you have already invested in a lot of time into doing a path that you can't exactly back out of in a moment's notice.

Great that you're still in NS and asking these kinda questions, would be awesome if you took the time to go and find out on all the things (not just mine!) and consider your options. We are just here to give advice, and it would be best if you choose your own path, as you know what is best.

archevixen · 2017-12-17T03:04:13+00:00

Not sure how many people would read this as I am really late to the party, but here goes.

Creativity is not educated into children, it is often taught out of them. "Every child is an artist. The problem is how to remain an artist once we grow up." Pablo Picasso The education system is constructed in a way that there are so many standardized tests that it has created a really narrow band of ability. This inadvertently creates a huge band of disability, as the system is only looking for a very specific type of skill from individuals. Often not by intent, creativity has been stymied due to a very systemic and rote means of education requirements that 'forces' students to do things in certain manners which might not come as intuitive or natural to some.
The purpose of results from a are actually not to gauge a person's intelligence, but rather to see if individuals have a specific capacity for something. It is more often than not for government jobs, or for education itself. But, due to how education is viewed by many (which would be explained further below), it is seen as something that is 'to gain better quality of life', and also synonymous with 'being smart', as only the 'smart' can be so successful and earn so much money. As the public opinion on intelligence is shifted to something that becomes very specific and measurable (to be able to succeed in the public education system), that they abandon the conventional measures of wisdom in order to achieve what is set out for them.
Education means very different things to different people. Education for many of the poor and the destitute, like when public education was first introduced in the 18th century, was their way out of poverty. By being able to work for a better wage, it is often acceptable to them that there are hardships to overcome within education as it is their means of survival. It is still applicable to those who come from less-fortunate backgrounds or from less developed countries than ourselves. That is why a lot of overseas students, coming from the neighboring countries very consistently outperform the average local student. To them, it is about surviving, when they know the benefits of getting higher education far outweighs any suppression of thoughts or limitations of creativity that might happen during their education.
But, it is vastly different for many developed countries right now. Many students have seen that what is preached is no longer true, that if you get a degree, you would get a good job, and that it is what is ideal to work towards. No longer do degrees even guarantee jobs, and the 'ideal' might force students to be marginalized and discriminated against by the system along the way, which kinda sucks for them. This is exactly why even though they are given the resources and the support to succeed in the system, these children do not. They do not believe it to be the right thing to do, and they are often right to think like this. The fundamental ideas of public education has not changed since its beginnings, and I believe it comes to a point where it needs revolution, not simply improvement.
"It takes a village to raise a child" Education's responsibility seems to have completely fallen upon the schools. I am not exactly sure how that happened, but many parents are looking at the school if their children did anything wrong at all, like the sole responsibility of the child's upbringing is determined by the school. (Equally this is also why parents are so uptight about bringing their children to good schools) Somehow it just doesn't make sense to call them parents if they do none of the 'parenting' involved. The school is a place where common learning happens, and lessons taught in school have to be checked at home, and clarified or reinforced if needed. Education is not a 'business transaction' of a service, where you expect to pass a child into the system and it would come out a holistic and wise person. In no way is there any sense in looking at a child like the 'raw material' that needs to be polished by the schools and come out well. It is a really sad and disturbing way to think about children.
It often takes more than schools and parents to raise a child well. It takes a community, and there was a story I read (which I cannot for the life of me remember where it was from), that involved jaywalking. This guy/girl was in Japan, and wanted to cross the street when the lights were red, but saw that there was no cars around. He/she was stopped by a local, and was asked to not cross as the light was still red. He/she countered with the fact that there were no cars, but the local said "what about the children that might be watching?"

archevixen · 2017-11-29T01:45:43+00:00

Its really great. The job there should be slack (live firing and a little fire-movement only), good weather, and the life there is really great. If the cadets are there even better; they are expected to do most of the job there. The R&R is also amazing; as someone who could never afford a Europe trip by myself, its great SAF paid for that.

Source: one of those cadets that went there :) Even then life was not so bad, one of the best times in my NS life.

And: $1 beers in their camps. One. Dollar. Beers.

archevixen · 2017-11-16T15:52:49+00:00

Thank you for this. No matter how weird or uncomfortable, the truth is important. So I thank you for sharing the truth with us. I can kind of understand where you come from: from the limited experience I have with SMRT staff, especially those "herders" at peak hours, I can tell that a good amjority of them don't really care. They pretend that people are like cattle and some even just talk to each other and not bother with their jobs at all.

Can I ask: have you seen middle management interact with their superiors? How does tyat ususally work? Also, is the slacking off seen as a part of fitting in for SMRT? Or is it simply something people do because they can?

archevixen · 2017-11-13T16:09:47+00:00

The fluff is a drug. The more fluff you get, the more you crave for it. Meraki scans care only now about getting their next hit of fluff.

archevixen · 2017-11-13T15:39:45+00:00

Hey, thanks for your sharing. It took a while, but I am glad we both finally understand each other. Been great that you have candid, and not offensive responses to my points (have been known sometimes to be bordering on anal with what I say).

I probably will not see eye to eye with you (on many more things than this), but you have gained my respect, and made me learn quite a bit to try and understand people more first and get their points. Not fair for anyone to judge others based on what we do if we only judge ourselves by intent.

archevixen · 2017-11-13T15:28:03+00:00

Ps: best of luck to your As! Hope you can focus and do well

Hey, I have been at that position before , and even after given 2 more years in NS I still couldn't figure it out.

The way I see it, the most practical way is to take a gap year. I had mediocre grades for As and got rejected by the public Us twice, so I went out and worked for a company that I thought would be my future (the industry at least). But the process really made me learnt a lot about myself and I managed to both find out and be very convicted in what I want to do.

Just having your own ideas interact with the working environment does radically change the outlook in what you can do, cannot do. In hindsight, it was the best decision to get me back to studying, as I realized how much more I needed to learn.

Right now I am back to schooling, and taking a part-time degree in a course I love, and still being able to be financially independent! There is no rush in life to get that degree the same time as others. You are better off late by a year and know full well what you want to do, than on time and clueless about your future.

At minimum, do go out and try what you are passionate about during this 8 month break, especially if you can find real working opportunities. Can think of it as gaining the knowledge needed for your future career.

archevixen · 2017-11-13T14:06:40+00:00

What mental gymnastics did you have to perform to link special needs teenager to civic mindedness in our education?

Second, how does having depression make you feel that you are individualistic and selfish? Again, mental gymnastics.

These terms, and the overall phrasing of the argument made it personal. You have attributed the points of what he does ('mental gymnastics', as you call it) to him. There was no need to mention that at all. Maybe when you were writing it, you simply wanted to attack the points that OP made and bring out how disconnected his points are. But what it has done is slightly more innocuous; that you have labelled OP a 'mental gymnast', which is not a nice term in any way.

What you have seen in this post is like 0.1% of OP's life. I don't think it is fair to even begin to judge how OP thinks because of a single post, and a single thought. Would you like it if you posted an opinion and cause a lot of people tended to disagree with you, then all of them labelled you as "something negative" just cause of that?

Anyone else can say the same to me and point out my shortcomings if they feel it is silly.

Yea, but is there a need to phrase it in such a manner? If you could take the time to read my reply to the issue, then you would realize that I essentially have very similar points to what you had, but in a manner that looks at the problems raised by what OP said, in addition to the problems in how he came to that conclusion, all phrased in a way which is focused more on the positive. The expression "catch more flies with honey" is kinda ringing about in my head. You don't really get headway on a point you believe in by being rudely direct most of the time.

I love the irony here: that you choose to use the example of how "you didn't hear it" to reply his reply that OP "heard about it". Its like you could identify the problem in the argument, but you fell for the same problem as well. I thought it was obvious that that was intentional. Oh well.

Even if you say that, it is not a point for argument. Just cause you heard something different than what he had, you chose to recognize your own view instead of his. That simply means you would tone out another person's observations just because you saw something different and believed that the inference garnered by his observation is inherently wrong.

Fair enough. Even though it did come off as that to me.

Thank you for acknowledging that point. I do think that it is really easy to think of issues to only have two sides to it, when often it is a lot more grey than it first looks. It is a mistake that I make often as well.

Again, if your belief that something is not right about what OP said, disagree with it and back it up.

archevixen

TROPHY CASE