Other's Responses
-
well he did explain the shape of the graph
-
LOL, "...a rather aesthetically pleasing slope."
-
I can guarentee no one will believe me... but... IIIIIIIIIII was the BOY who actually wrote that paper shown above lol That was my design and technology GCSE exam in school, I totally didn't know what the graph was about... I was thinking "if you give me a really pathetic question (that i didn't understand at the time) then i'll give you a really pathetic answer!". Just so you know, i got a D for that GCSE and im now a fully qualified electrical engineer. STILL.... If no one believes me thats cool because I still know I wrote it and thats what I care about lol :D THANKS! p.s that was in Kent, ENGLAND in 2003/2004 so oooo its went a long way! Not sure about people photocopying a confidential exam paper though tut tut, o wel... enjoy :D
-
Technically he is totally correct. The question said to explain the shape of the graph and he/she did. Even he was being a smart ass, he answered the question. This student should get full marks for it. It's not a spelling test either so the incorrect spelling of straight does not factor.
-
I love the way he can spell "aesthetically" but not "straight" :') Love this xD
-
If I was the teacher, he'd get a straight up A for sure! :D
-
"it's curvy,"
-
that's a fucking Design & Technology student!!!
-
He actually described the shape of the graph, not explain it
-
I am literally in tears laughing right now!
-
actually what he did was describing the graph and not explaining. so he's still wrong. haha
-
well it's not straight
-
he sounds like me.. is he also a design student?
-
There's a difference between explain and describe.
-
L.O.L hahahaha i'll do it !
-
that's how mind goes vs time at the exam!
-
lol at "pretty flat straight bit"
-
Americans are dumb
-
I believe I hold the clear distiction, I believe it was D and T or Science GCSE UK. It was the last question I missed/did not answer and I was running out of time so hey presto. I got a grade C and A respectively.
-
I'd take off a mark for spelling, but after that, he'd get all of them. Besides that, I'd answer: "The undefined mass seems to decrease quickly at an undefined rate and then decelerating, stopping its anti-growth after an undefined amount of time."
-
What makes you think "he" is a boy? hahahah
-
I'm glad he at least got one point for that.
-
The answer could only have been improved if he had written Don't Worry in aesthetically pleasing colors and told the teacher that the correct answer was 42.
-
I would've been like "It looks like this: *drawing of graph*"
-
He can't spell "straight" lol
-
Besides that, I’d answer: “The undefined mass seems to decrease quickly at an undefined rate and then decelerating, stopping its anti-growth after an undefined amount of time.” Wow... NO ONE GIVES A FUCK!!! GOD! We're here to laugh at idiotic mistakes, not listen to some pretentious assholes, who try correct everything! FUCK! And btw, your answer is stupid... so is your mom... and your dad...
-
LOL "Strait"
-
To the person who thinks they wrote this - this paper is from Auckland NZ. I know because it is from the school I taught in and I know the Chemistry teacher who marked it! Also GCSE has marks!!! The three boxes on the right hand side are on NZ NCEA exam papers and are for grading achievement/merit or excellence.
-
Lol
-
"rather aesthetically pleasing" ROFL
-
shoulda got more marks
-
The most comprehensive answer, especially since the time axis does not show any absolute units, is one word. Entropy. Fate of the universe stuff. Look it up. Possibly the graph could refer to a single star or black hole after the stelliferous era
-
“Besides that, I’d answer: “The undefined mass seems to decrease quickly at an undefined rate and then decelerating, stopping its anti-growth after an undefined amount of time.” Wow... NO ONE GIVES A FUCK!!! GOD! We're here to laugh at idiotic mistakes, not listen to some pretentious assholes, who try correct everything! FUCK! And btw, your answer is stupid... so is your mom... and your dad...” XDDD awesome comeback FTW!! ((reCAPTCHA: Pompeii recounts. LOL!))
-
wowww
-
He described it, he didn't explain it.
-
He didn't 'explain' the shape of the graph, he described it :) - to the person who said it was right.
-
Close enough.
-
haha aesthetically , pleasing its just two lines :o
-
Fake
-
he even spelled "straight" wrong XD
-
my science teacher would have given him an A.
-
If I'd do this I think I wouldn't get a F but a A+
-
Wow... NO ONE GIVES A FUCK!!! GOD! We're here to laugh at idiotic mistakes, not listen to some pretentious assholes, who try correct everything! FUCK! And btw, your answer is stupid... so is your mom... and your dad... You're clearly an idiot as his description is making fun of the vagueness of the graph. If you weren't a back-wooded buck-toothed cousin-fucker you would understand that
-
u gotta love a smart aleck who literally explains the shape of the graph AND spells straight wrong but aesthitetically right lol!
-
He forgot to precise the length of each line.
-
Actually he didn't answer the question. He described it rather than explaining it.
-
Tat? are you a moron? Rhetorical I already know the answer
-
"The undefined mass (ERROR:irrelevant) seems (ERROR:no, not seems. it does) to decrease quickly (ERROR: It is decreasing in a non-linear fashion, appearing to be possibly an inverse proportionality) at an undefined rate (ERROR:no, the rate is defined implicitly, as before. That is the point) and then decelerating (ERROR:irrelevant, decelleration is implicit in the rate specification above), stopping its anti-growth (ERROR: no such terminology as "anti growth") after an undefined amount of time." Wow. Zero marks for the smartass. Now somebody correct me and things will really be rolling in here.
well he did explain the shape of the graph