Dear el perro grande

I did quite well at school, thanks - which is why I have more letters after my name than you have braincells. Please do not think that because I'm good with computers, I'm bad with everything else - for I'm quite willing to nail your arrogant and presumptuous ass right to the shithouse door in any intellectual arena you might choose.

Computers are a part of your job - essential tools in your trade, which you really should be able to utilise. The fact you cannot do the job you're paid for reflects poorly on you, not me; were you interchangeable grey-faced cubicle-monkeys capable of flicking an on/off switch without getting it wrong nine times out of ten, my role would not exist, and thus you would not feel the need to whinge about it like a butthurt little baby girl.

Your network exists because I know my trade. If you don't like it - you have a biro, and paper, and stamps. Get fucking writing, you stupid Luddite cunt.

Yours,

Network admins.
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Sat 6 Mar 2010, 1:54, 1 reply)

Come back
when you have letters BEFORE your name. And grey-faced? No need to be racist, i'm grey and proud.
(el perro grande, Sat 6 Mar 2010, 13:51, closed)

'come back'?
your implication being I'm somehow unworthy to stand in your presence? I've just read through some of your past offerings, out of idle curiousity, and you seem to be a terminally-unfunny, borderline-illiterate, spectactularly boring nonentity. The chances of you having progressed much beyond GCSEs are vanishly slender, and the implication that you hold a doctorate is frankly laughable.
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Sat 6 Mar 2010, 15:10, closed)

Laughable maybe, but true. 'spectactularly' wrong there old bean. It would seem to at least one person here, you, that I'm not that boring. You actually seem quite interested in me, is there something special between us? Got any pics?
(el perro grande, Sat 6 Mar 2010, 15:41, closed)

bollocks
I would imagine you've got a crappy McQualification from some dreadful ex-Poly, and are exaggerating for all you're worth. Your complete inability to form a coherent sentence, as demonstrated in your previous 'witty' anecdotes, argues strongly against anything more.

Some observations, from your previous postings:

1) You were a 'young wannabe punk rocker' trying to get some action, in 2001 at the earliest (dated by your shitty choice of music). Presumably - unless you're some late-starting spotty virgin - you were 15ish at the time, give or take a year or so, and thus did not at this point hold a doctorate.

2) In 2007, you had a job earning 'crappy money' (not what you'd expect from a PHd graduate), which you'd held for two years.

There is neither time between your abject failure to get action in 2001 and your commencement of employment in 2005, nor afterwards, presuming you left said employment in 2007, to gain both an undergraduate degree (three years) and a doctorate (typically, three years).

Ergo, you are a lying sack of shit.
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Sat 6 Mar 2010, 16:56, closed)

Imagine, presume, give or take... However you want to dress up your attempt to somehow prove I´m lying, you are wrong.

It was actually 4 years undergraduate, 4 years for a doctorate. Most (not all) people going into scientific PhD will have a masters. Given that the majority of EPSRC projects are funded for 3.5 years, very few people complete in 3 years as you have wrongly assumed. Even then there aren´t many places in the world you can get a doctorate that quickly, 3 years is a minimum. You really don´t show a good understanding of how it all works, why would you use your estimates and presumptions to conclude I´m lying?

Call me sack of shit or whatever you like, you are wrong.
(el perro grande, Sat 6 Mar 2010, 21:53, closed)

keep going...
A doctorate is three years, standard. I know this for a fact, as I have a good deal of experience in higher education. Yes, you can spin it out - most do - and yes, you an compress it, if you really have to.

That all aside - by extending the time-frame, all you achieve in respect of your 'doctorate' is to move is from 'improbable', to 'impossible'. Unless, of course, you were planning this exchange years in advance, and the dates and time you've previously given are false. Which still means,one way or another, that you're telling fibs.

Either way, you're a liar, and a fraud. How is JMU these days, Poly-boy? Does it even resemble an actual university?
( Happy Phantom has been to Hastings, Brighton, and Eastbourne too, Sat 6 Mar 2010, 23:11, closed)

You know it for a fact? Then why is the majority of funding now offered for 3.5 or even 4 years these days? That is not three years standard is it? A very small minority finish in 3 years. Maybe that was the case when you were at uni, 3 years was the standard in the past. Of the 12 people who started their doctorate at the same time as me a grand total of one handed in their thesis on the three year mark. I also think you are forgetting that you then have to wait for a viva in order to fully complete a doctorate.

As for your reasoning based on the times of my stories, complete rubbish. The crappy money I mentioned was during my PhD, something you would have realised if you read the post I was replying to. Wrong assumptions, again. Unfortunately for you in this case repeating yourself over and over will not make what you say any more right.
(el perro grande, Sun 7 Mar 2010, 12:23, closed)