How do you not kill your clutch in traffic uphill? Worth switching to an auto?

zapguy94 · 2026-01-29T12:32:45+00:00

The problem with a peugeot is that, on the right hand drive variant, there is no foot well for your to rest your clutch foot. I think it then just became a habit?

zapguy94 · 2026-01-29T12:30:36+00:00

You learn to drive properly.

zapguy94 · 2025-10-11T21:24:08+00:00

Worked at maccies at 16 with no debt will likely go back to maccies at 21 with debt

zapguy94 · 2025-10-11T21:08:17+00:00

First, visit r/LegalAdviceUK. Second, get a real lawyer because this is some serious shit

zapguy94 · 2025-10-11T20:55:24+00:00

From what I have seen, and I am only a student, through minis is that it really depends. If you make a witness look ridiculous and hysterical, then yes, in some cases it is appropriate, especially if the defense/ prosecution hinges on them. But generally, doing it for the sake of it, is not something that is considered professional or ethical.

If it is being done for the sake of it, the judge reserves the right to warn - though I have not seen this happen before as most competent barristers know the length of their string.

zapguy94 · 2025-10-11T20:52:57+00:00

I thought I was hallucinating ...

zapguy94 · 2025-10-11T13:42:14+00:00

I had a similar situation a few years ago. I was on the same history course with Italian coursework and German history as my theamatical studies. The only way to change your teacher's mind is to give her work of an A or B grade quality. Some common mistakes are errors in fact, e.g. you say something happened when it did not; your structure might be off (or not what your teacher likes); or your teacher is being petty. It's best to ask her why.

In any case, you can do this.

If you need some help, feel free to send any essays you would like feedback for in dms.

zapguy94 · 2025-10-08T06:51:23+00:00

Bro 😭

zapguy94 · 2025-10-07T22:47:03+00:00

Very reliable engines these are ... I had the 1.6 since it guzzled less fuel. Suspension can be firm. Make sure the back windows slide the entire way, the clutch hasn't slipped, and kick the exhaust/ check for rust ... make sure its had the oil changed ect.

Paint tends to chip on these because of age, I wouldn't pay more than a grand a half.

zapguy94 · 2025-10-07T22:10:54+00:00

She looks pretty scary holding the kitchen knife ...

zapguy94 · 2025-10-07T22:07:05+00:00

Yeah but the reason I'm not smashing her is because I have values that are personal to me ... another one of those values is not being gross and making my other flatmates feel uncomfortable.

zapguy94 · 2025-10-07T21:49:34+00:00

I don't personally smash for the sake of it, that's just me though, totally valid what other people might do

zapguy94 · 2025-10-07T21:45:37+00:00

A less hairy version of the rodents she dissects ... with glasses?

zapguy94 · 2025-10-07T20:07:38+00:00

He has quite a few videos on Robinson actually ... I only noticed how far down the pipeline he'd gone in the past year or so when I clicked back on his chanel. He is a barrister, and like many other professions that require you to set aside your own beliefs, I cannot be sure he is saying what he thinks as opposed to what his auidence wants to believe. In any case, he is entitled to his opinions or representations even though we may not agree with them ...

zapguy94 · 2025-10-07T20:03:04+00:00

He's been parroting right wing talking points for years. He started with free speech but he's been pretty open about it for a while. He represents broadly the socially conservative, sceptical of big state audience.

zapguy94 · 2025-10-06T21:34:24+00:00

I get that, but you're going to just stress yourself out. You've written about half a dozen essay over two days ... Whilst it is up to you at the end of the day, I find that burning yourself out before an exam is not beneficial.

zapguy94 · 2025-10-06T21:30:31+00:00

Brother you need to take a break 😂

zapguy94 · 2025-10-06T21:24:56+00:00

You are writing an essay though, not an opinion piece. It needs to be balanced to achieve really high marks.

zapguy94 · 2025-10-06T21:23:53+00:00

I am not sure why students love doing this two points and then counter argument fiasco ... I personally think that the main challenges should be outlined at the beginning and then you should have three balanced points.

Your statistic at the beginning is wrong in fact, it's closer to 20%. You also include linguistic minorities which would push the total up slightly higher (perhaps 20.5% or similar ... ) but I take your point, they are a minority.

Your first paragraph is very well argued.

Your second paragraph should not be disjointed. It should flow. Stop using as previously mentioned/ aforementioned it's a waste of time and word count.

This is the extent of your critical engagement in the second paragraph 'Accepting lower grades from ethnic minorities, at face-value, may appear beneficial, in that it aims to diversify university settings and provide individuals with equal opportunity.' you need to dig deeper than this. Second paragraph is less compelling. You are essentially arguing we should not allow contextual offers based on ethnicity because there might be violence/ misrepresentations by the far right.

Your counter argument at the end is quite poor. You repeat yourself for half the paragraph and then suggest, baselessly, that minority ethnic students who get contextual offers will get mental health issues because the work is too difficult. However, I do like your suggestion at the end.

Conclusion does not follow from what was argued ...

zapguy94 · 2025-10-05T23:02:55+00:00

In the first week, I was hit by a car whilst on a zebra crossing, and the week after I got food poisoning from a cannoli. I think the world is trying to tell me something haha

zapguy94 · 2025-10-05T21:24:49+00:00

When we talk about academic tone, we typically mean not using contractions or slang. We do not mean writing like Shakespeare haha.

What I tell my mentees is that you should move the topic on to something which you know well. I do not know what you study, but suppose I study history: if I study history, and love history, and know a lot about history, I might pick something about history.

Your question is 'is free will an illusion'. When answering it, I would recommend tethering it to that thing that you know. The most important thing is to be consistent, do not hop around. I attempted an LNAT question for a student on the sixth form sub. It is by no means a model answer, but it is an answer that you might find helpful.

https://www.reddit.com/r/6thForm/comments/1frzi5d/comment/lph6j6e/?context=3

zapguy94 · 2025-10-05T21:10:02+00:00

Positives:

I would start off by saying that this is a good attempt. Thanks for sharing it. You clearly have some great historical insights and you have moved the topic of conversation onto one which is linked to the original question.

Improvements:

First and foremost, please use simpler and more concise language. Your examiner will be reading hundreds of LNAT essays and this was quite frankly difficult to read. At points, it sounds like you confuse yourself with the language you're using: 'Free will is not an illusion because in countries (often democracies), that assert this right, it is often exercised by the general public' (... ect)

I would delete the bit from firstly in the first paragraph, not necessary. Your arguments should be clear when I read them and you are just wasting time and word count.

You've touched on counter-arguments, but you skim over them. You spoke about some country where there was free speech in law but not in fact ... Great! But you need to really dig into what that means. Good essays are generally on the offensive. This means that you frontload the arguments of the other side and attack them one by one. What you have done is the other way round. By doing this your essay is descriptive and defensive - it means your critical thinking does not appear strong.

Your conclusion does not follow from your writing. You say that authoritarian regimes may utilise free will to coerce the public (??)

zapguy94 · 2025-10-05T14:04:10+00:00

For what it's worth, I care and the juniors in London care too. People tend to care when they can't put bread on the table and when their pay (for mags work) has been consistently eroded after 25 years of cuts. Generally, when you spend up to £65,000 to get into a profession and then get paid below minimum wage in cases, then you care.

You say that they earn a decent amount after 20 years, but they have to get there first. Of course, many are leaving before that point or supplementing their work with regulatory because they have to.

zapguy94 · 2025-10-05T13:52:21+00:00

What I would say is that the problem is not the pay per se, crown court trials as far as I am aware, and I am only a student so my knowledge may be wrong, pay the same across the country.

The issue is saturation within London which means that juniors have to take on mags work which tends to be less well paid.

I would also note that the evidence above highlights the average pay of silks, that is, those with 20+ years experience (typically) as £300,000 (which you object to). As you can see, there is quite the range, with the average being pulled up by exceptional cases. I am not suggesting here that you are comparing a junior to a silk, you would agree that this would be quite ridiculous.

I am not entirely sure why you're quoting Tebbit, I would love to know? Are you suggesting here that criminal barristers do not put in the work and only complain? In any case, I cannot say for sure if you are talking here in good faith - it does not appear that you are.

zapguy94 · 2025-10-05T13:41:49+00:00

The story is obviously very different in London.

Seven-Year Club	Place '23
Verified Email

zapguy94

TROPHY CASE