mkl puts his money where his mouth is?
Poll
 | 1 vote (2.32%) | ||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| No votes (0%) | |||
| | 1 vote (2.32%) | ||
| | 1 vote (2.32%) | ||
| | 1 vote (2.32%) | ||
| | 16 votes (37.2%) | ||
| | 17 votes (39.53%) | ||
| | 1 vote (2.32%) | ||
| | 5 votes (11.62%) |
43 members have voted
Quote: pcket5sObviously your IQ isn't high enough to realize that was a blast at you.... I'll give you half credit, incase you're not a sports fan and don't realize that LBJ is notorious for recanting absurd statements after the media bashes him and he realizes he made a mistake.. I think the situation is similar here.... but I would think you would be smart enough to realize I was being fictitious, you see Lebron James really doesn't think you recant statements too much, it was a fabricated statement.
And my understanding of the IQ test is there is no maximum score to it, it's not like the SAT with a max score of 1600. So it would be possible to have an IQ of 190.
Of course there's a maximum score. That would be the score given if you get all the questions correct.
And yes, I didn't understand why a quote from Lebron James would have any relevance to this "discussion". I still don't.
Quote: mkl654321Of course there's a maximum score. That would be the score given if you get all the questions correct.
And yes, I didn't understand why a quote from Lebron James would have any relevance to this "discussion". I still don't.
It was just a joke.. It's like if you were a harden criminal and I said Al Capone thinks you commit too many crimes. It's ironic because Al Capone is notorious for crime. But I regress... and BTW if u win the challenge I would congratulate you like a man and accept the results and not sneer at them. But I only have an IQ of 85 so I must hate you cuz I'm not smart. I've said what I had to say... I hope you take the challenge like you offered, and not find a way to back out of it.
Quote: mkl654321Of course there's a maximum score. That would be the score given if you get all the questions correct.
I have questions:
1. don't they use time as a condition anymore? IQ tests used to basically award bonus credit for how quickly the questions were answered (95% success in 30 minutes is better than 95% in 60 minutes).
2. The tests used to return an indeterminate score if they were truly aced. Your IQ is effectively set by the questions you miss, not the questions you make. If you haven't missed any, then your IQ is undetermined, but higher than _____.
I'm not sure about the timing of the challenge. If it could be delayed until WONcon and all parties will be attending, my girlfriend (a certified testing school psychologist) could administer the exam.
Quote: SOOPOOIf you said you tested at 190 20 years ago then I would back you up. And I disagree with you. If you take an agreed upon test and score the agreed upon number then you would win the bet and the money. And I can assure you, it is not because you are smart that some people 'hate' you here. It is because your constant bickering with JL and others leads to numerous hijacked threads and many unpleasant threads. And saying 'dumb people hate smart people' is just wrong. 'Dumb people' hate smart people who act condescending, rude, etc... I won't use the word dumb, but I know many people with lower IQ's that truly appreciate what the 'smarter' people can add to society, and don't hate them at all.
I'm the only one who argues with JL and other posters who shall remain nameless? Come ON.
And I disagree with you---I would get crapped on no matter what the outcome of the challenge was. People here would say that I faked the results, that the test wasn't accurate, that I had my robot pal help me, etc. etc. And if I scored even SLIGHTLY lower than the threshold, people would start throwing stinkbombs for that reason, too. So I don't feel I have anything to gain here--the $100 wouldn't be worth it. Particularly since no one seems to be willing to accept the fact that it very well might not be POSSIBLE to score higher than 150 IQ on a standardized test, which throws the whole wording of the "challenge" into doubt.
And of course, if anyone who "accepts" the challenge insists on unreasonable conditions that I don't agree to, then everyone will go "neener neener neener" and say I backed out. This is a no-win situation.
Quote: rdw4potusI have questions:
1. don't they use time as a condition anymore? IQ tests used to basically award bonus credit for how quickly the questions were answered (95% success in 30 minutes is better than 95% in 60 minutes).
2. The tests used to return an indeterminate score if they were truly aced. Your IQ is effectively set by the questions you miss, not the questions you make. If you haven't missed any, then your IQ is undetermined, but higher than _____.
I'm not sure about the timing of the challenge. If it could be delayed until WONcon and all parties will be attending, my girlfriend (a certified testing school psychologist) could administer the exam.
I won't be at WoVCon--I have to work.
I don't know about the time thing, but that wouldn't be a very good test of intelligence per se. Also, it would have to be adjusted for age to make it fair.
2. Mensa in the U.S. will give a pass for fail grade only. I know because I took their test several years ago -- and failed it. When I asked why I couldn't get an actual figure the lady who tested me said they used to, but somebody disagreed with his/her score, and sued Mensa. So now they play it safe and just say you passed or didn't pass. Maybe it is different in other countries.
3. I have met mkl and can vouch that the correct person will take the test. Much like the JL=RS challenge, I'm sure a skeptic could argue that mkl foresaw this challenge over a month ago and paid a very intelligent actor to meet with me. Let's not go down that road.
4. I will probably suggest taking the test at UNLV. The Mensa woman who tested me said they do official IQ tests there, which Mensa would accept. So I would take it too, hoping to score in the top 99%, but I would bet against it.
mkl, I'll post again (or send you a PM) when I come up with something you may find acceptable.
EDIT: I see that the Wizard was posting just as I was composing this. Thanks Wiz and I'll keep you in the loop. Perhaps I'll take the test as well and we can put together some sort of reciprocal bet based upon score.
Quote: Mosca[X] It doesn't matter what his test score is, anyone who gets himself roped into a discussion about his intelligence is obviously not very smart.
Ouch! That might have left a mark.
That reminds me of a few gems I have seen in the past:
"It is better to remain silent and be thought a fool, then to speak and remove all doubt." -- unknown
Mayberry called, and they want their idiot back.
Quote: Wizard1. I am willing to hold the funds if both of you come to a deal. I'm going to stay out of the negotiations.
2. Mensa in the U.S. will give a pass for fail grade only. I know because I took their test several years ago -- and failed it. When I asked why I couldn't get an actual figure the lady who tested me said they used to, but somebody disagreed with his/her score, and sued Mensa. So now they play it safe and just say you passed or didn't pass. Maybe it is different in other countries.
3. I have met mkl and can vouch that the correct person will take the test. Much like the JL=RS challenge, I'm sure a skeptic could argue that mkl foresaw this challenge over a month ago and paid a very intelligent actor to meet with me. Let's not go down that road.
4. I will probably suggest taking the test at UNLV. The Mensa woman who tested me said they do official IQ tests there, which Mensa would accept. So I would take it too, hoping to score in the top 99%, but I would bet against it.
Do you know what the test given at UNLV is called? I would suspect that the testing center here at the University of Oregon has the same test available. It would be far easier for me to take the test here, and the result would be produced far sooner, given that I won't be back in Vegas until March at the earliest. But of course, people would say that I'd faked the test or bribed somebody or something--unless, of course, I didn't score high enough to win, in which case everyone would accept the results unquestioningly.
Too bad about the Mensa test. That would have been the easiest to arrange and most readily available.
If anyone wants to accept the challenge, they'll have to accept my conditions, which are not exactly onerous, that in order for me to win, my score has to equate to an IQ of 150. That's only realistic, given that many tests won't even return a score that high. The ball's in the skeptics' court now, and as soon as you inform me that you've received the funds, and the basic rules of the challenge are agreed upon, I will send you a matching amount and take the test in whatever format and at whatever time is agreed upon.
Quote: Wizard.... So I would take it too, hoping to score in the top 99%, but I would bet against it.
Not to worry, Wizard, you're much too modest even considering such a wager. I doubt that any of the rest of us here would ever suspect there could be fewer than 1% scoring below you. ;-)
Different tests have different scales. Cattel III B for example has the highest of 161, you just can't get higher than that. Ravens matrices test is capped around 150 (don't remember the exact number).
It also matters which test mkl allegedly took that scored him 190 (because without knowing that, it is not possible to establish the equivalence). If it was 20 years ago, it is likely to have been Stanford-Binet (the one that scored Marylin von Savant 228 back when she was 10). There was a lot of controversy around it, and the Binet itself meant for the scores to be capped at 170.
Quote: weaselmanIf you are serious, you have to select the test before you start talking about the particular score threshold.
Different tests have different scales. Cattel III B for example has the highest of 161, you just can't get higher than that. Ravens matrices test is capped around 150 (don't remember the exact number).
It also matters which test mkl allegedly took that scored him 190 (because without knowing that, it is not possible to establish the equivalence). If it was 20 years ago, it is likely to have been Stanford-Binet (the one that scored Marylin von Savant 228 back when she was 10). There was a lot of controversy around it, and the Binet itself meant for the scores to be capped at 170.
That's why I simply reported the score, and how long ago it was generated, rather than saying my present IQ was 190. In fact, I took the Stanford-Binet when I was nine years old, and tested at 210, but I didn't consider that relevant, for the reasons you mention. I really don't remember what the test that I took twenty years ago was called; I only know that it was administered by the Army.
You are virtually the only one here who seems to understand that a threshold score of 150 to fulfill the challenge would actually be very difficult to achieve, and therefore my modification of the challenge to recognize that is only reasonable; you CAN'T, as you say, score much higher than 150 any more.
Since I said that I would allow anyone making/accepting the challenge to choose the particular test, or to let the Wizard choose the test, which test chosen is beyond my control.
Quote: mkl654321
You are virtually the only one here who seems to understand that a threshold score of 150 to fulfill the challenge would actually be very difficult to achieve,
That's not quite what I said.
I said that the number "150" is meaningless without a reference to a particular test you are going to take.
I am pretty sure, I heard about tests out there that score up to 200, and there are also tests, that are theoretically unbounded, so I would not say it is impossible to get 150, but without knowing which test you are talking about that number simply doesn't mean very much (except that it is well above average - that, I think, can be said to apply universally).
I think, you are better off agreeing on a particular percentile threshold rather than an absolute number.
Quote: weaselmanI think, you are better off agreeing on a particular percentile threshold rather than an absolute number.
I agree, but many people here don't seem to think that that is valid. They are fixating on the IQ number.
From here
Quote: mkl654321It's not a matter of ego. I have a 190 IQ. I have two college degrees. I am a member of Mensa. I have read over 5,000 books. I am six feet tall. I live in Oregon. These are facts. I'm not bragging when I say I have a wide range of knowledge. I obtained that knowledge via eight years of college, a lifetime of reading, and a great deal of personal experience in a wide range of fields.
At any rate, JerryLogan makes Homer Simpson look intelligent.
Quote: mipletSomeone wanted the original post that stated an IQ of 190
From here
Thank you for digging this up. My statement about my current measured IQ was very likely incorrect, for the simple reason that my IQ hasn't actually been measured since 1989. I stand by the other statements I made.
I was also very likely incorrect about my current IQ being 190, because a "190 measured IQ" is much higher now than it was then, due to, as another poster pointed out, the different testing methods used, as in the Stanford-Binet, among others. I would like to add that I don't really know what my IQ would be if measured today. Again, my claim was almost certainly incorrect.
My measured IQ in 1989 (via the Armed Forces test) was indeed 190. However, the scales, tests, and testing methods have changed since then. For that matter, so have I. I doubt that I would score 190 today, especially since according to my limited research, it isn't even POSSIBLE to score that high today.
So I reiterate my statement that I would be able to score at a test level equating an IQ of 150 if the test were given today. Or, if you prefer, at a percentile equatibg to the proportion of the general population that had a measured IQ of 150 or higher.
Quote: mkl654321Quote: mipletSomeone wanted the original post that stated an IQ of 190
From here
Thank you for digging this up. My statement about my current measured IQ was very likely incorrect, for the simple reason that my IQ hasn't actually been measured since 1989. I stand by the other statements I made.
I was also very likely incorrect about my current IQ being 190, because a "190 measured IQ" is much higher now than it was then, due to, as another poster pointed out, the different testing methods used, as in the Stanford-Binet, among others. I would like to add that I don't really know what my IQ would be if measured today. Again, my claim was almost certainly incorrect.
My measured IQ in 1989 (via the Armed Forces test) was indeed 190. However, the scales, tests, and testing methods have changed since then. For that matter, so have I. I doubt that I would score 190 today, especially since according to my limited research, it isn't even POSSIBLE to score that high today.
So I reiterate my statement that I would be able to score at a test level equating an IQ of 150 if the test were given today. Or, if you prefer, at a percentile equatibg to the proportion of the general population that had a measured IQ of 150 or higher.
mkl, you stated on Novemeber 07 2010 and I quote, "I have an IQ of 190". This is not in any way out of context. You made no caveat or qualification regarding this sentence. You may say, "I don't think I ever said I PRESENTLY HAVE an IQ of 190" but as you can see, you most certainly did. I understand that with the mountain of posts you've composed it is possible that something like this could slip your mind. It's nice to see that you've admitted that you were wrong and conceded that you can not possibly win the original bet you made. Don't worry, I don't expect you to pay me $100 for such a concession. Now we can proceed with a revised version of the original bet to account for any changes in the scoring of standardized IQ tests today. I do advise that you use more caution in the future when you make claims that can be refuted as easily as this one was.
Quote: mkl654321Quote: mipletSomeone wanted the original post that stated an IQ of 190
From here
Thank you for digging this up. My statement about my current measured IQ was very likely incorrect, for the simple reason that my IQ hasn't actually been measured since 1989. I stand by the other statements I made.
I was also very likely incorrect about my current IQ being 190, because a "190 measured IQ" is much higher now than it was then, due to, as another poster pointed out, the different testing methods used, as in the Stanford-Binet, among others. I would like to add that I don't really know what my IQ would be if measured today. Again, my claim was almost certainly incorrect.
My measured IQ in 1989 (via the Armed Forces test) was indeed 190. However, the scales, tests, and testing methods have changed since then. For that matter, so have I. I doubt that I would score 190 today, especially since according to my limited research, it isn't even POSSIBLE to score that high today.
So I reiterate my statement that I would be able to score at a test level equating an IQ of 150 if the test were given today. Or, if you prefer, at a percentile equatibg to the proportion of the general population that had a measured IQ of 150 or higher.
I've seen forum-scrambling but this one takes the cake. He's so rattled the professor even made a grammar error in his last sentence!
God bless him.
By the way, there's 3 votes for "mkl wins bet". That means he's using 3 identities as we speak.
Spelling, not grammar.Quote: JerryLoganI've seen forum-scrambling but this one takes the cake. He's so rattled the professor even made a grammar error in his last sentence!
God bless him.
Quote:By the way, there's 3 votes for "mkl wins bet". That means he's using 3 identities as we speak.
That's a horrible leap of logic. And you of course know it, wanting to get even more attention and get the pack barking some more.
How many identities are you using this week, anyways? Truck Driver or RV park owner?
**************************
Thank you, now it's actually both! I saw the spelling, but after the word "equating" the 1st time he used it, he left out the word "to".
I got booted at LVA as an RV park owner. Probably because none of them could afford an RV!
Quote: mkl654321I have an IQ of 190.
What he means, and what we're stupid for not understanding from what he said:
Quote: mkl654321Thank you for digging this up. My statement about my current measured IQ was very likely incorrect, for the simple reason that my IQ hasn't actually been measured since 1989. I stand by the other statements I made.
I was also very likely incorrect about my current IQ being 190, because a "190 measured IQ" is much higher now than it was then, due to, as another poster pointed out, the different testing methods used, as in the Stanford-Binet, among others. I would like to add that I don't really know what my IQ would be if measured today. Again, my claim was almost certainly incorrect.
My measured IQ in 1989 (via the Armed Forces test) was indeed 190. However, the scales, tests, and testing methods have changed since then. For that matter, so have I. I doubt that I would score 190 today, especially since according to my limited research, it isn't even POSSIBLE to score that high today.
So I reiterate my statement that I would be able to score at a test level equating an IQ of 150 if the test were given today. Or, if you prefer, at a percentile equatibg to the proportion of the general population that had a measured IQ of 150 or higher.
I wish I could sticky this post. It pretty much tells the story on what forum-chatting is like with the guy. Sheesh.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerWhat he says:
What he means, and what we're stupid for not understanding from what he said:
I wish I could sticky this post. It pretty much tells the story on what forum-chatting is like with the guy. Sheesh.
Yup! Whether it's cake-taking or face-saving, his inability to be able to hide a squirm is sure something to behold. When I see things from him like this, I try to imagine how hard it must be for his fresh men to hide it when they're laughing their butts off at him as he makes it up on the go, while actually believing he's got them all bamboozled.
Can this get any better?
Quote: TheNightflyIt's nice to see that you've admitted that you were wrong and conceded that you can not possibly win the original bet you made. Don't worry, I don't expect you to pay me $100 for such a concession. Now we can proceed with a revised version of the original bet to account for any changes in the scoring of standardized IQ tests today. I do advise that you use more caution in the future when you make claims that can be refuted as easily as this one was.
I never said that I "could not possibly win" the original bet. I said that it was unlikely that there was such a test still in existence that would produce a result that would satisfy the conditions of the original challenge.
I would also like to point out to you that my claim has NOT, in fact, been "refuted", by you or anyone else. For all you know, and for all I know, my IQ actually IS 190. I certainly concede that it's highly unlikely, but that isn't the same thing.
I do advise that you use more caution in the future when saying that a claim has been "refuted" when all that has happened is that said claim has not been proved.
Quote: ItsCalledSoccerWhat he says:
What he means, and what we're stupid for not understanding from what he said:
I wish I could sticky this post. It pretty much tells the story on what forum-chatting is like with the guy. Sheesh.
I am so very sad that both you and JerryLogan don't like me, and that my views on religion upset you so much. Any correlation between the two phenomena?
Quote: mkl654321I never said that I "could not possibly win" the original bet. I said that it was unlikely that there was such a test still in existence that would produce a result that would satisfy the conditions of the original challenge.
I would also like to point out to you that my claim has NOT, in fact, been "refuted", by you or anyone else. For all you know, and for all I know, my IQ actually IS 190. I certainly concede that it's highly unlikely, but that isn't the same thing.
I do advise that you use more caution in the future when saying that a claim has been "refuted" when all that has happened is that said claim has not been proved.
I was going to get MKL a new shovel for his birthday, but I now see that he has the biggest and best one available already!
Quote: thecesspitSpelling, not grammar.
That's a horrible leap of logic. And you of course know it, wanting to get even more attention and get the pack barking some more.
How many identities are you using this week, anyways? Truck Driver or RV park owner?
Jerry doesn't understand grammar OR spelling (see his mistaken post where he misunderstands the difference between "equating" and "equating to"). And the error referred to was obviously a typing error, not a spelling error; I never said I could type. Pointing out typing errors is a childish and stupid thing to do, but that's what Jerry's reduced to.
Note that he can't answer any of the many questions about his multiple identities, contradictions, and inconsistencies in his posts. He wants us to believe that he lived in two places at once, held two full-time jobs at once, gambles but doesn't gamble, tips but doesn't tip, plays video poker but doesn't play video poker, and parrots everything Rob Singer says, but isn't Rob Singer.
At least he'll be out the back door again very soon.
Quote: Mosca[X] It doesn't matter what his test score is, anyone who gets himself roped into a discussion about his intelligence is obviously not very smart.
YES! Thats what I said way back when he first said his IQ was 190. I would never in a hundred years tell people my IQ, how much I make a year or how big my manhood is. You are opening a can of worms that you can never close and you look silly in the process. No thanks.
Quote: TheNightfly
mkl, you stated on Novemeber 07 2010 and I quote, "I have an IQ of 190". This is not in any way out of context. You made no caveat or qualification regarding this sentence.
Not only that, he defended it again and again when I called him Will Hunting and at other times. Its only since he's been challenged to prove it that he's dusted off his trusty tap dancing shoes and started the lonnnnnnng explanation of what he 'really' meant. We went from 190 to 150 to just being in the top 1%. My question now is, why would a really 'smart' person (190 IQ) even want to be involved in the fiasco this whole thing has become. Answer: He wouldn't.
It doesn't. An IQ shows you how good you are at doing IQ tests (and how well you've learnt to do them). Smart people do dumb things... all the time.
In this case... it's been an interesting dance... obviosuly WoVcon's first event should be a simultaneous IQ test... or perhaps y'all should do the Wonderlic?
Quote: EvenBobQuote: Mosca[X] It doesn't matter what his test score is, anyone who gets himself roped into a discussion about his intelligence is obviously not very smart.
YES! Thats what I said way back when he first said his IQ was 190. I would never in a hundred years tell people my IQ, how much I make a year or how big my manhood is. You are opening a can of worms that you can never close and you look silly in the process. No thanks.
if memory serves, Bob, you did EXACTLY that a few posts ago.
Quote: EvenBobNot only that, he defended it again and again when I called him Will Hunting and at other times. Its only since he's been challenged to prove it that he's dusted off his trusty tap dancing shoes and started the lonnnnnnng explanation of what he 'really' meant. We went from 190 to 150 to just being in the top 1%. My question now is, why would a really 'smart' person (190 IQ) even want to be involved in the fiasco this whole thing has become. Answer: He wouldn't.
The less smart YOU think I am, Bob, the smarter that means I actually am.
Quote: mkl654321Quote: EvenBobQuote: Mosca[X] It doesn't matter what his test score is, anyone who gets himself roped into a discussion about his intelligence is obviously not very smart.
YES! Thats what I said way back when he first said his IQ was 190. I would never in a hundred years tell people my IQ, how much I make a year or how big my manhood is. You are opening a can of worms that you can never close and you look silly in the process. No thanks.
if memory serves, Bob, you did EXACTLY that a few posts ago.
BZZZZZZZZT! Deflection. Let's stay on topic here. Much more fun tossing basketballs at barn doors.
Quote: mkl654321Jerry doesn't understand grammar OR spelling (see his mistaken post where he misunderstands the difference between "equating" and "equating to"). And the error referred to was obviously a typing error, not a spelling error; I never said I could type. Pointing out typing errors is a childish and stupid thing to do, but that's what Jerry's reduced to.
Note that he can't answer any of the many questions about his multiple identities, contradictions, and inconsistencies in his posts. He wants us to believe that he lived in two places at once, held two full-time jobs at once, gambles but doesn't gamble, tips but doesn't tip, plays video poker but doesn't play video poker, and parrots everything Rob Singer says, but isn't Rob Singer.
At least he'll be out the back door again very soon.
Squirming again? Let's show this to your fresh men and see what they think about it!
Quote: mkl654321The less smart YOU think I am, Bob, the smarter that means I actually am.
Yes, your true intelligence is leaking out in every post you make on this subject. Soon it will have all drizzled out and you'll have none left at all. Having to 'prove' your intelligence on a public forum; yessir, it doesn't get any more embarrassing than that....
Quote: SOOPOOmkl has publicly admitted that he was in error when claiming his IQ is now 190. I accept that, and suggest we move on.
Naah, EvenBob and Jerry will be chewing on it for weeks. Or in Jerry's case at least, until he's barred again.
Quote: mkl654321Naah, EvenBob and Jerry will be chewing on it for weeks. Or in Jerry's case at least, until he's barred again.
My guess is, that isn't going to happen.
Quote: MoscaMy guess is, that isn't going to happen.
Which? Jerry getting barred? That's inevitable, I would think.
Quote: mkl654321Naah, EvenBob and Jerry will be chewing on it for weeks. .
On what, you admitted your IQ was never 190? Where? Point to the post where you said that.
Quote: EvenBobOn what, you admitted your IQ was never 190? Where? Point to the post where you said that.
I never "admitted" or otherwise said that, Bob. Read my post on that topic for content, slowly and carefully this time--I can't keep holding the rest of the class back to let you catch up.
Quote: mkl654321I never "admitted" or otherwise said that,
Thank god, I was hoping this ridiculous farce wasn't over. The real question is, how long can a person make a fool out of himself before he realizes everybody is laughing at him. At this point it looks like the answer is 'forever'.
Quote: mkl654321Which? Jerry getting barred? That's inevitable, I would think.
And therein lies the problem: thinking. You're much better when you post the first four paragraphs from Wikiedia.
Quote: JerryLoganYou're much better when you post the first four paragraphs from Wikiedia.
To be fair, MKL doesn't always use Wikipedia, he has more imagination than that. Whats funny is, he thinks he's original in looking up everything before he posts. He didn't rise to the lofty heights of high school English teacher with a 190 IQ without being extremely clever, ya know..
Quote: SOOPOOWhoa, Bob! feel free to make fun of mkl, but leave high school teachers out of this. You cannot possibly imply that teaching is not a noble and invaluable profession.
I can't? Do you have any idea how many totally incompetent teachers are out there now? Thanks to the almighty teachers union, the days of 'noble' teachers is long long gone. Why do you think Johnny can't read a TV guide yet gets a high school diploma? My daughter is a college math professor and she constantly complains of the kids she gets right out of high school who know nothing of the math they're supposed to know. As a result, a semester that starts with 20 students in her algebra class, typically ends with 6 or 7 passing. Half have long since dropped out and 3 or 4 can't pass the final exams. Noble my ass..
Quote: SOOPOOWhoa, Bob! feel free to make fun of mkl, but leave high school teachers out of this. You cannot possibly imply that teaching is not a noble and invaluable profession. It may be poorly compensated, but I am happy many fine, bright, men and women choose that profession. Seriously, if your son/daughter told you he/she wanted to be a teacher, high school English at that, would you discourage?
Bob's just mad at high school teachers because for him, high school was the worst nine years of his life.
