Actuarial Outpost
 
Go Back   Actuarial Outpost > Actuarial Discussion Forum > General Actuarial
FlashChat Actuarial Discussion Preliminary Exams CAS/SOA Exams Cyberchat Around the World Suggestions


General Actuarial Non-Specific Actuarial Topics - Before posting a thread, please browse over our other sections to see if there is a better fit, such as Careers - Employment, Actuarial Science Universities Forum or any of our other 100+ forums.

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Search this Thread Display Modes
  #141  
Old 06-22-2018, 10:32 AM
actuaryleaks101 actuaryleaks101 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
College: Imperial
Posts: 77
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Claw View Post
What on earth does your second paragraph even mean? that is, what does it mean after one wades through the horrendous grammar (which I attempted to fix, btw, bc it took me way too long to understand)

It cannot be "irrespective of the decision" if their (the court's) judgement will determine if the allegations are found to have basis in fact. if the court determines the allegations have merit then, of course, it would be a matter of concern. But if not, there is no concern.

In this thread, so far, you and the OP have not presented anything compelling (other than unsubstantiated accusations) that would convince your average outsider* to your position.

*Mostly us simple colonials, but even a bloke or two from across the pond.
It cannot be posted before the judgement.
  #142  
Old 06-22-2018, 10:32 AM
GargoyleWaiting's Avatar
GargoyleWaiting GargoyleWaiting is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Favorite beer: the closest one
Posts: 7,403
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Claw View Post

It cannot be "irrespective of the decision" if their (the court's) judgement will determine if the allegations are found to have basis in fact. if the court determines the allegations have merit then, of course, it would be a matter of concern. But if not, there is no concern.
I am choosing to interpret it as "if the court decides against the claimant, we will release all the information and allow people on the AO to make their own, fully informed, judgement"
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFActuary View Post
But the mosquitoes in New Brunswick Bay of Fundy did mess with my understanding of some limited loss functions
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the North View Post
Excel gave me #VALUE.

Edit: Nevermind, I was linking a sumif and didn't open the linked spreadsheet. It is now giving me #N/A.
  #143  
Old 06-22-2018, 10:37 AM
actuaryleaks101 actuaryleaks101 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
College: Imperial
Posts: 77
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppet View Post
Ah, OP is back - see, a different tone. I still think they are different people.

Humans are naturally impatient. AT forgets that he/she knows more than the rest of us, and seems to think that we should be able to work out what he/she knows from the limited information. We aren't making judgements, we are just being inquisitive and speculating about all the possibilities.

There's no need to hurl insults at us for doing so. You've obviously had a hard time but the world is not against you.

The ET refers to another ET. Can we see that one too? Has that one been heard yet? What was the conclusion?
I have not hurled any insults.
  #144  
Old 06-22-2018, 10:45 AM
Enough Exams Already Enough Exams Already is offline
Member
SOA AAA
 
Join Date: Sep 2001
Posts: 3,715
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by IroningBoard View Post
Read the first post and thought “I bet this has something to do with almost_there”. A few pages later, almost_there shows up. Is almost_there the claimant?

Edit: almost_there has a long history of posting on the “acted” forums (UK Actuarial education company). He has spent years complaining that he is being discriminated against because he can’t pass certain exams. If he spent as much time studying as he spent complaining he would be a fellow by now. I recommend reading his post history on Acted.co.uk

One such exam is “Communications”, which previously involved an oral presentation and a written report. Despite almost_there’s claims that he is an excellent communicator, he has been unable to pass the exams. A couple of posters have offered to take a look at some of his examples of presentations/written reports to offer unbiased constructive feedback, but he refuses to accept the help, preferring to continue to complain that the assessment is flawed and not him.
I'd rather [insert very painful, self-injurious activity here] than read any more of almost_there's bleating. But that does explain a lot. Should've guessed from his other posts. Thanks for that.
__________________
"Allow me to introduce you to the American public.
You'll want to wash your hands afterward."
--Samantha

"I guess I just have a lower prior-expectation of humanity than you folks. You win for optimism, but I win for accuracy."
--Pseudolus

"I wonder if there's a lower bound on how dumb the internet can get. We gotta be getting close, right?"
--Mother of DragQueens
  #145  
Old 06-22-2018, 10:50 AM
GargoyleWaiting's Avatar
GargoyleWaiting GargoyleWaiting is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2009
Favorite beer: the closest one
Posts: 7,403
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by actuaryleaks101 View Post
I have not hurled any insults.
True. But unfortunately your friend has taken a massive dump all over this thread, it'll take a bit of cleaning up.
__________________
Quote:
Originally Posted by UFActuary View Post
But the mosquitoes in New Brunswick Bay of Fundy did mess with my understanding of some limited loss functions
Quote:
Originally Posted by King of the North View Post
Excel gave me #VALUE.

Edit: Nevermind, I was linking a sumif and didn't open the linked spreadsheet. It is now giving me #N/A.
  #146  
Old 06-22-2018, 10:59 AM
muppet muppet is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 38
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by actuaryleaks101 View Post
I have not hurled any insults.
agreed - sorry - wasn't aimed at you.
Lack of structure to my post.
Like I say - your tone is different.
__________________
bibbidi bobbidi boo
  #147  
Old 06-22-2018, 11:09 AM
actuaryleaks101 actuaryleaks101 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
College: Imperial
Posts: 77
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppet View Post
agreed - sorry - wasn't aimed at you.
Lack of structure to my post.
Like I say - your tone is different.
Lets wait until the judgement comes out. I cannot release anything before that.
It is a bit like witness statements. People cannot discuss the contents of such documents until the court has heard all of the evidence and decided on it.

I think the earlier misunderstanding should be cleared up too. Sometimes a person can be treated really badly. The facts might also support that conclusion, however the claim can fail in court despite the facts being conclusive.

This is likely to be where the legal test is not satisfied.

So please hold in... I promise I will post up the Judgement and other related information.
  #148  
Old 06-22-2018, 11:14 AM
muppet muppet is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
Posts: 38
Default

I'm surprised you were able to publish what you have already. But know nothing about UK courts.
And the other ET referred to in item 31 of (your) post #42 in this thread. Should that not be of interest to us too?
__________________
bibbidi bobbidi boo
  #149  
Old 06-22-2018, 11:16 AM
actuaryleaks101 actuaryleaks101 is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jun 2018
College: Imperial
Posts: 77
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by muppet View Post
I'm surprised you were able to publish what you have already. But know nothing about UK courts.
And the other ET referred to in item 31 of (your) post #42 in this thread. Should that not be of interest to us too?
Is this directed at me??
If so, what "other ET" are you referring to??
  #150  
Old 06-22-2018, 11:18 AM
almost_there almost_there is offline
Member
 
Join Date: Jan 2017
Posts: 326
Blog Entries: 1
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Dr. Claw View Post
It cannot be "irrespective of the decision" if their (the court's) judgement will determine if the allegations are found to have basis in fact. if the court determines the allegations have merit then, of course, it would be a matter of concern. But if not, there is no concern.
The claim is one of victimisation, the legal definition is as follows:
http://www.legislation.gov.uk/ukpga/2010/15/section/27
Quote:
A person (A) victimises another person (B) if A subjects B to a detriment because—
(a)B does a protected act, or
(b)A believes that B has done, or may do, a protected act.
The point made is if a Court is not convinced the detriments were because of the protected acts (the discrimination complaint to EHRC) then it would not uphold the victimisation claim but that doesn't mean no detriment took place.
Closed Thread

Tags
acted, britain, ehrc, ifoa, racism, victimisation

Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 09:48 PM.


Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
*PLEASE NOTE: Posts are not checked for accuracy, and do not
represent the views of the Actuarial Outpost or its sponsors.
Page generated in 0.22522 seconds with 9 queries