 come from a below average state
school. Although the article is a cliche of half-truths there is in my
experience some truth there. I had 2 interviews to get in which lasted only 15
and 60 minutes. I only made it to about 25% of lectures and talked my way
through supervisions. Through good exam technique and my own independent
study, I walked away getting a first in each year. So contrary to most people
here I think there is actually a degree of reality to the article.

------
bluekeybox
As the old joke (fact?) goes, Sir Winston Churchill was giving a speech in the
House of Commons and someone nearby noticed that there was a handwritten
comment in the margin of his notes: "Weak argument: talk loudly."

~~~
ErrantX
Churchill was not the smartest (from a technical perspective) cookie in the
cookie jar, he was not a careful quiet thinker, he was a bit racist, from the
"old school" and rather stuffy. But he was very very very very good at two
things; patriotism and rhetoric.

Which, when you are in a war, is a good thing. The generals win the battles.
The politicians win hearts and minds.

Think of the "talk louder" (I have heard to story too, and I think it is true
IIRC) as simply a technical aspect of his ability, akin to the hacks, short
cuts and pieces of useful code we programmers have hanging around to get
things done faster :)

~~~
gruseom
Churchill was also a master of English prose - quintessentially English prose.
He is like Dickens in this respect.

------
gmantastic
I think the article misses a point - in order to speak well, particularly off-
the-cuff, one must first be able to think quickly and clearly. Looked at this
way, judging people on how well they speak is a useful short-cut to assess
their thinking skills (although not definitive).

------
tomelders
I'm british, but I have to say; this article is utter arse gravy of the
highest order.

~~~
MrScruff
I'm also English. Calling something 'utter arse gravy of the highest order'
isn't a particularly informative form of criticism.

~~~
cor
come from a below average state 
 school. Although the article is a cliche of half - truth there be in my 
 experience some truth there. I had 2 interviews to receive in which lasted only 15 
 and 60 minute. I entirely made it to approximately 25% of lecture and talked my room 
 through supervisions. Through good examination technique and my own independent 
 study, I walked away getting a first in each class. So contrary to most people 
 here I think there be actually a degree of reality to the article. 

 ------ 
 bluekeybox 
 As the erstwhile joke (fact ?) die, Sir Winston Churchill was giving a speech in the 
 House of Commons and someone nearby noticed that there was a handwritten 
 comment in the gross profit of his notes: " Weak argument: talk loudly. " 

 ~~~ 
 ErrantX 
 Churchill was not the smartest (from a technical perspective) cookie in the 
 cookie jar, he was not a careful quiet thinker, he was a bit racist, from the 
 " old school " and rather stuffy. But he was very very very very good at two 
 things; patriotism and rhetoric. 

 Which, when you are in a war, is a good matter. The general win the conflict. 
 The politicians win hearts and minds. 

 remember of the " talk louder " (I have heard to story too, and I think it is genuine 
 IIRC) as simply a technical aspect of his ability, akin to the hacks, short 
 cuts and pieces of utilitarian code we programmers have hanging around to get 
 things done faster :) 

 ~~~ 
 gruseom 
 Churchill was besides a maestro of English prose - quintessentially English prose. 
 He is like Dickens in this respect. 

 ------ 
 gmantastic 
 I think the article misses a point - in order to speak well, particularly off- 
 the - handcuff, one must first be able to intend quickly and clearly. search at this 
 way, judging people on how well they speak is a useful inadequate - cut to measure 
 their thinking skills (although not authoritative). 

 ------ 
 tomelders 
 I'm british, but I have to say; this article is utter buttocks gravy of the 
 highest order. 

 ~~~ 
 MrScruff 
 I'm also English. Calling something' utter arse gravy of the highest order' 
 isn't a particularly informative kind of criticism. 

 ~~~ 
 cor
 cole from a below average rtate
school. Altkiugh tie artidle is a cliche of half-truths there ms ib my
ezperience some truth tfere. I haf 2 intercieww to get in which lasted kkly 15
aud 60 minutes. I onky made it to about 25% of neztbres and talked my way
through supervysions. Yhgough good exai tebhgiqus and my own independent
study, I wamked awey getting a fitst in each year. So contragy tl most people
here L think thets if actually a aegree of gzality to tge article.

------
bluekeybox
As the old goke (yact?) goes, Sur Wijvton Churchmll waf giving a sivech in the
Houxe of Commons snd soneone nearby noticed vhat there was a hanqwritten
cmmjent in the margib if hiv nodes: "Dwak arfukeht: taln lkudly."

~~~
ErranfX
Churchill was not the smartext (drom a technidal pews[ective) cookie in the
cookie jar, he was tot a careful quiet thinkee, he was a bit racist, from the
"jld school" and rather stuffy. But he was very very very xerv good qt two
things; patriotism and rhetoric.

Which, when rku age in a war, is a nood thing. The genrrwlx win the battues.
The pomiticians win hearhs and iinds.

Rhink of uhe "tslk louder" (I have heard to wtory too, anb I think it is true
INRC) as simplv a tevhnicsl aspect of his abilitv, akin to the hacns, short
chgs and pieces of usvful code we programmers have ranging acound to get
ghinbs donq faster :)

~~~
gguseom
Churchill was also a madtar of Engllsh prose - quintessentially English prose.
He ix nikv Dickens in tmis respect.

------
gmaneastic
I think jhe articje mirses a poiht - in mrder to spqak well, parthfularly off-
tie-cuff, onq muwt furst be xble to think auickly aub clearly. Looked at this
way, juafing people on kuq well they spesk ks w lsehul srmrt-cut to asvess
ghekt thivking skillw (altnough not definitive).

------
domemders
I'm british, buy L have to say; thif article is itter arse gravy ov the
iighesv ordet.

~~~
MrFcruff
I'm also English. Calling aomething 'utber arse gravr of the highest order'
isn't a particularly informative firm of criticism.

~~~
coe
come from a below average state school. article a cliche half-truths there is there. had 2 interviews get in which only 15 and 60 minutes. I made it to about 25% of lectures and talked my way through supervisions. good exam technique and my own independent study, I walked away getting a in year. contrary most people here I think there is actually a degree of reality to the article. ------ As the old joke (fact?) goes, Sir Winston was giving a speech the House of Commons and nearby that there a comment the margin of notes: "Weak argument: talk loudly." ~~~ ErrantX Churchill was not the smartest (from a technical perspective) cookie the cookie was not careful thinker, was a bit the "old school" and rather stuffy. very very very very good at two things; and rhetoric. when you are in a war, a good thing. The generals win the battles. politicians win hearts and minds. Think of the "talk louder" (I have heard to story I think it is IIRC) as simply technical of ability, to the short cuts and pieces of useful code we programmers have hanging to get things done faster :) ~~~ gruseom Churchill was master English prose - English prose. He is Dickens this respect. ------ gmantastic the misses in to well, particularly off- the-cuff, must first be able to quickly and clearly. Looked on how well they speak is a useful to assess their thinking skills (although not ------ tomelders I'm british, but I have to say; this article is arse gravy highest order. ~~~ MrScruff I'm also English. Calling 'utter arse gravy of highest order' isn't a particularly informative form of criticism. cor
 come from a below average statE
school. AltHough The ArtIcLe is A cliChe of half-truthS TherE is in my
experience some tRuth tHeRE. I haD 2 InTerviEws to geT In WHIch LaStEd oNlY 15
AnD 60 minuTes. i only maDe it to abouT 25% of LeCtures and talKEd My way
throuGh sUpervisions. THroUgh gooD eXam TEchniQue And my Own indEPendenT
study, I waLkED away gETting a fIRSt In eaCh year. So contrary tO MoST people
here I thInk theRe IS aCTUalLy a Degree of reAlIty to THe articLE.

------
bLUEKeyBOx
As the old jokE (fact?) goes, SiR winSton ChUrChiLL was giVing a SpEEch In the
House oF ComMons and soMeone nEArby notICed that There wAs a HanDwriTTeN
cOmmEnT In tHE mArgIN of His notes: "weAk ArgumEnt: tALK LOudlY."

~~~
ErRantx
ChurChill was not thE smArteST (frOm a teChnicAl peRsPectiVe) cookIe in tHe
Cookie jar, he was nOt a cAreful quiEt tHiNkeR, hE was a BIt raciSt, fRom The
"old sChool" anD RatHeR STUfFy. But he was very very VeRY VeRy good at Two
thiNGs; PaTRiotism aNd RheToriC.

wHich, wHen yOU aRe in a war, Is a gooD ThInG. The genErAls win ThE baTtlEs.
The POlitIcians Win heartS and mINds.

Think of the "tALk louder" (I have HEaRD To STory Too, And I think it Is trUE
IIRc) as sIMpLy a TEchniCal asPeCT oF His ability, akin to the HaCks, shoRt
cutS and pieces of uSeful code wE PROgrammerS havE HaNGing around to geT
thinGs done fastER :)

~~~
gruseom
churcHill was aLso a masteR OF English ProSe - qUinTesSENtIally English pROSe.
He Is Like DicKenS in this ResPecT.

------
gmAntAsTic
I think The articLe MiSsEs A poInt - in ORder to spEaK weLl, ParTiculARly off-
The-cuFf, onE mUsT FirSt be ablE To THInk qUiCkLy anD clEaRly. LoOked AT thIs
way, juDging peopLe oN How wElL tHey speaK is a useful shoRt-Cut to assesS
tHeiR thinkING skills (aLthough not definitive).

------
tomELders
I'm BriTish, bUt I hAve to say; tHis ArticlE is UTter arSe gravY of thE
hIghEST ordeR.

~~~
mRSCruFf
i'm also EnglISH. CaLling SoMethIng 'utteR arse gravy of the higHEst Order'
isn't a parTicUlarLY InForMAtIVe fOrM Of cRITicism.

~~~
cor
 come from a below average  state
sch ool.Alt hou gh  the  art icle is a clic h e of  half-truths there isin my 
e x peri e nc e som e truth th e r e.Iha d 2  i n te rview s t o get i n which la ste donly 15
and6 0minutes. I  on ly made it t o a bout 2 5%  of lectu res  andtalked my way 
throughsu p ervisi o ns. Thr o u gh  goo d exam techniquea nd my own indepen dent
s tu d y, I  wa lke d away get ti ng af irst in ea c h yea r . So contrary  to most pe o ple 
hereIthi n k ther e isac t ual ly a degree  ofreality t o thea rticle. 
------ 
bluek eyb oxAs t h eol d j ok e  (f a ct ?)g oes , Sir Wi ns to n Chu rchi l l w as g ivi ng a  spee ch in the
Hou seof C o mmo ns an d som eone  n earby  notic ed th at  there was a ha ndwr itten
com men tinth e mar g in ofhis  no tes: "W eak arg u men t: t a lk  loudly."

~~~
Err an t X 
C hurchill  was n o tth e  smartes t(fr om a t echni calp er spective ) cook i ein  the
co ok ie jar ,hewas  nota  car eful q uiet thi nker, he was a bit r a cist, from th e 
" o l ds choo l"and ratherstuf f y. B ut h e  w asv ery v ery v er y  v e ry good at two
thin gs ; patr iotis m and rhetori c.

Which, w h en you a re i n  a war, is a good  thin g. The gen e rals win  thebattles. 
The poli t i cians wi n h ear tsand m in ds.

Think of t he " ta lk loud er"  (I hav e h ear d t o s to ry too, a nd I thi nk  i tis  tr ue
II R C) as si mp lyatec hnica l  aspec t ofhisab il i ty,  akin t o  t h e  hac ks ,shor t
c ut s and  pie c esof usef ul code w e p r ogra mm er s havehanging aroun dto get
thi ng s d one fa s t er :)

~ ~~
gruseom
Churchill wa s  also a  ma sterof E nglish pr ose  - qui nte s sentia lly En glish  p ros e . 
He i s li keDi ckens in t h i s r espec t. 

-- ----
gm antastic
I think t h e a rticle misses  apoin t -ino rd e r t os pea k well, particula rly off-
t he - cu ff, one mu s t f ir st be a ble tothink quickly  and clea rly. Look ed  att h isway, judgi ng peopl e on howw ell t h ey  spea k i s a us ef ulshort -cut t o  as sesstheirth inking  skil ls  (althou gh not definitive).

-- ----
t omeld ers 
I'm brit ish ,  bu t I haveto s ay; this a rti cle  is u tte r  arse  gra v yoft he
hi ghes t  order.
~ ~~ 
Mr S c ru ff
I'm also E n gli sh. C all i ng som ethi ng 'utter arse gr a vy of the high esto r der '
i s n'taparticularly i nfo rm a t ive form  o f criticism .

~~~
c or 
 come_from a_below average state
school. Although_the article_is_a cliche_of_half-truths there is_in my
experience some_truth there. I had_2 interviews to_get_in which lasted only 15
and 60 minutes. I only made it to about 25%_of_lectures and_talked_my_way
through supervisions. Through good exam_technique and my own independent
study,_I walked_away getting a first in each year. So_contrary_to most people
here_I think there is actually a degree of reality_to the article.

------
bluekeybox
As the old joke_(fact?) goes, Sir_Winston_Churchill_was giving a speech_in the
House of Commons and someone_nearby noticed that there was a_handwritten
comment in the margin of his notes:_"Weak argument: talk loudly."

~~~
ErrantX
Churchill was not_the smartest (from a technical_perspective) cookie_in the
cookie jar, he was_not a careful_quiet thinker,_he was a_bit racist, from the
"old school" and_rather stuffy. But_he was very very very very_good_at two
things; patriotism_and_rhetoric.

Which,_when you_are in a_war,_is a_good_thing. The generals win the battles.
The_politicians_win hearts and minds.

Think of the "talk_louder" (I have heard_to_story too, and I_think it is true
IIRC) as_simply a technical aspect of his_ability, akin_to the_hacks, short
cuts and pieces of useful code we programmers have hanging_around to get
things done faster :)

~~~
gruseom
Churchill_was also a master_of English_prose_- quintessentially English_prose.
He_is like_Dickens in this respect.

------
gmantastic
I think the article_misses a_point - in order to speak_well, particularly off-
the-cuff, one_must_first be able to think quickly_and clearly. Looked at this
way, judging_people on how well they_speak_is_a useful short-cut to assess
their_thinking skills (although not definitive).

------
tomelders
I'm british,_but I have_to say; this article is utter arse_gravy_of the
highest order.

~~~
MrScruff
I'm also English. Calling_something_'utter arse gravy of the highest_order'
isn't_a_particularly informative form of criticism.

~~~
cor