It's not quite Fuckster, but: http://www.shagster.net/
Dawn: You're not fleeing. You're... moving at a brisk pace. Buffy: Quaintly referred to in some cultures as the Big Scaredy Run Away.
'Touched'
What Happens in Natter 35 Stays in Natter 35
Off-topic discussion. Wanna talk about corsets, duct tape, or physics? This is the place. Detailed discussion of any current-season TV must be whitefonted.
Jessica - Jun 02, 2005 2:59:18 pm PDT #8850 of 10001
And then Ortus came and said "It's Ortin' time" and they all Orted off into the sunset
Kristen - Jun 02, 2005 3:00:50 pm PDT #8851 of 10001
I don't suppose we have any accounting folk around here who could answer a question for me...
Kat - Jun 02, 2005 3:01:44 pm PDT #8852 of 10001
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo
Well, the original studies were done with dogs.
But wasn't there a follow up study done with people? Some sort of cognitive task and noise and the ability to switch the noise on and off. Also, if I remember correctly, it wasn't Skinner doing the experiments at all but Selig? Silig? Something like that.
It's been too many years since my educational psych classes.
ita! I need help! What were the directions for the beef patties? 375 or 350? and for how long?
Kat - Jun 02, 2005 3:14:43 pm PDT #8853 of 10001
"I keep to a strict diet of ill-advised enthusiasm and heartfelt regret." Leigh Bardugo
Okay, has anyone else had the cappucino flavored kit kats?
billytea - Jun 02, 2005 3:15:39 pm PDT #8854 of 10001
You were a wrong baby who grew up wrong. The wrong kind of wrong. It's better you hear it from a friend.
Did Australia give it or did the women pry it from Australia's manly hands?
Give it, I think. I don't recall much in the way of suffrage movement confrontations as you saw in Britain, for instance. Edit: well, I doubt it was some blokes in Parliament woke up one day and thought, "this'd make a nice present for the wife", but it seemed less contentious here than elsewhere.
Consuela - Jun 02, 2005 3:34:46 pm PDT #8855 of 10001
We are Buffistas. This isn't our first apocalypse. -- Pix
That's the thing -- that kind of learned helpless leads to self-contempt, because I perceive myself as growing less competent over time.
Ah. There's also the learned helplessness which is derived from arrogance. "I am too [senior/well-educated/important] to be required to learn this. Therefore I will not learn it, will bungle it, and other people will stop asking me to do this."
One of my former coworkers was a master at this strategy. I believe he honestly thought he was too good to learn how to use a computer competently. Should have been born in the era of secretaries and dictation.
... and, er, hello, all. ::waves::
Rick - Jun 02, 2005 3:43:41 pm PDT #8856 of 10001
But wasn't there a follow up study done with people? Some sort of cognitive task and noise and the ability to switch the noise on and off. Also, if I remember correctly, it wasn't Skinner doing the experiments at all but Selig? Silig? Something like that.
Yes, in the follow-up study they used unsolvable anagrams and inescapable noise ti --then looked to see if the people got 'depressed' afterward. It was Seligman, and he is still active in research (not helpless) even though he must be into his 80's by now.
Skinner, who was chairman of my department before he went to Harvard, hated punishment, so he didn't do these studies. He thought that if you taught people to get the things they wanted by effective rewardable behavior then you wouldn't need punishment. His vision of the human ideal, engaging in effective behavior to get the things you want, was suprisingly similar to that of Freud, who said that the purpose of life was "to love and to work."
Steph L. - Jun 02, 2005 3:44:22 pm PDT #8857 of 10001
Unusually and exceedingly peculiar and altogether quite impossible to describe
unsolvable anagrams
KPRINKLE!
Aims - Jun 02, 2005 3:58:23 pm PDT #8858 of 10001
Shit's all sorts of different now.
I don't suppose we have any accounting folk around here who could answer a question for me...
I can try, what's up?
Kristen - Jun 02, 2005 4:11:50 pm PDT #8859 of 10001
Hey Aimée! How's the little one?
So my question is regarding accrual accounting and closing out a year. Let's say that, hypothetically speaking, your fiscal year ended April 30. And you had a job that happened on April 15. Obviously, all the revenue and expenses associated with that job should be applied to the fiscal year ending April 30. But, for whatever reason, you didn't get a bill from one of your suppliers until now.
My thought process is that you pay the bill in the current fiscal year and apply it to your accrued expenses GL account. (Which you should have because, hello, you knew you used this vendor and they were going to bill you at some point even though they hadn't yet.)
Am I wrong?