It is a lot, but it might all go on increased expenses, leaving me with less than a qurter of that after taxes and increased expenses. Maybe

The point being, the levels of self-awareness of your own motivations and psychology required to be immune to marketing, are, IMO, heroic to the point of needing to be a saint…

Well that is what confuses me, nothing saintly about this Dalai Lama. He may be immune to marketing, but only because he is a world class expert.

Mainly correct IME.
The only way IMO to be immune to marketing is to have very high self-awareness, and total honesty about your motivations, weaknesses, need for status, belonging and the identity you wish to project about yourself.

Very difficult to achieve of course… possibly only Ghandi and the Dalai Lama come close!

OT but seriously? The Dalai Lama? The man who claims to be the priest king of a nation? Who focuses his whole strategy projecting and an ascetic attitude whilst trying to regain his place as head of a feudal nation divided by social and religious classes? Or do you mean a different Dalai Lama

🙂 of course, because mountain bike and mountain biking aren’t the product of some of the biggest cycle marketing campaigns ever! Without marketing, it would still be a few blokes clunking down a hill in cali somewhere woildn’t it?

http://singletrackworld.com/forum/topic/clever-logo-well-i-thought-so-anyway/page/49

If we learn anything from history…

This forum IS marketing

Absolute poppycock!

Of course the weakness is with regard to the position. To be honest if the candidate didn’t realise that, then i think they’ve already answered the question.

I’ve spent most of today interviewing, i asked the weaknesses questionbut phrased differently. Folks are telling me what they are good at, but iwant to know what i can help them with or areas in which they feel they want or need to develop

Thanks all, i went for a samsung without wi-fi but bought a wireless av kit for it. only 170 allowed me all sorts of other toys

Go to any shop which stocks the G12 and the X10, pick them both up,hold them to your eye, put them down side by side and i challenge you to choose the G12. It is impossible.

“As no one seems to be able to come up with a substantive difference between civil partnerships and marriage,” there is absolutly no reason to have the two different unions and there for same sex couples should be able to marry.

If there is no difference, does it really matter what it is called?

Fuji x10

Is the difference between marriage and civil partnership anything more than semantic?

Chuckie Egg! Why has no one mentioned Chuckie Egg?

Try getting it from a halal butchers. The way the animal is slaughtered leaves fewer nasties in.

Would te free blog software be enough to do it or woul i needto go for a paid service?

Lemon juice

What happens after the first year?

It might be that the test agency don’t think that a pedestrian turning slightly is particularly hazardous

Like the one who, on hearing my bell, then turned sharply and walked straight in front of me, resulting in both of us on the ground, her with the phone she was yakking on smashed on the ground, me with a badly grazed knee and bruising.

Clearly not

oops.

I did mean I’ve not got the bike

Yeah, i knew it, that’s Peckham for ya

Perhaps more people should strive to be ok..

In terms of assessment systems, this is very true.

*waits for the edit*

I’ve got the bike.

it is Peckham after all and you have 15 minutes

learning to be nice n caring and thoughtful and pathetic
. It’s an ongoing thing

Wuss

That’s got me convinced.

well, what do you want? all the evidence seems to say that it does OK. Test development can’t be based on opinion.

My 5 & 7 year old have just presented me with a business case for another computer to stop them arguing over whose turn it is to go on Moshi Monsters!

Worht every penny, if only to secretly log in as the one or the other’s monster and harass them.

Clearly having a simple pass/fail and retake is the cheapest model, but not the most efficient really, is it?

seems to work well enough. No evidence that explanations would make it any better. Taking TJ’s data, would give us 7% who would need further testing. But the time per person is the inefficiency, and realistically, some of those 7% would still fail, so by instituting a back up system, with all the associated admin, we end up gaining 1%-say 3% of the people on the border line.

yeah, its fine, moshi monsters too

Hence my suggestion of human interaction to discuss the reasons why you did or didn’t click.

This would take too long, and would then be more prone to inter-rater-unreliability. The driving part is already subject to this. But as always there is a conflict between validity and reliability. Test designers need to agree on some balance point

identify (correctly I might add) a developing hazard

well, this is one of the drawbacks of the test. People had a tendency to be ‘test-smart’ identify which of a range of potential hazards was likely to develop. Not sure of the mechanics of this but it was little to do with the behaviours of the hazards. May be some sort of priming effect which we were unaware of.

Look, the test is simple, all you have to do is spot the car:

In truth the only hazard you really need to be wary of is Dave Hazard.

appropriate action is drive away quickly

“safely ignore undeveloped potential hazards until they’re actually hazardous

no you don’t ignore them, but you treat them differently to developing hazards.

perhaps we should be using that in some sort of way that prevents these unsafe drivers from getting licences

We do, but they come on web forums and complain about it

Potential hazard or hazard developing?

How can they know? It will, after all, not have developed

Well, they have their definitions of hazard, not my scope, but the test response characteristics seem to bear them out. But until it develops it is not a hazard.

How does this help improve my driving? Can I safely ignore undeveloped potential hazards until they’re actually hazardous? That’s what the test rewards, apparently?

Yes, it is a hazard perception test, not a potential hazard perception test

On each video there are pedestrians who could potentially be hazards if they decided to run into the road

sure, but did you click for the apparently parked cars which might pull out in front of you? or the cars on the other side of the road who might decide to drive into you?

but the mechanism you’re using to eliminate constant clicking is also eliminating those that identify hazards early – not just “ped on pavement” but “ped turning slightly as they walk past car.” That’s enough to make someone who is observant click as a developing hazard, but the test doesnt open the “developing hazard window” until later.

and yet it is very good at predicting safe drivers, differentiates well between expert and novice drivers, and correlates well with other driving skills tests.

It might be that the test agency don’t think that a pedestrian turning slightly is particularly hazardous

There are a lot of potential hazards on the road which is the reason we’re testing people and the test designers figured, gosh, that’s hard to test for on a button click, lets penalise anyone who spots them instead?

The art is in identifying when a potential hazard becomes a real one

Do I win or lose points for identifying all the hazards and extra points for identifying the hazard that I’m being tested for as it develops

What other hazards did you identify? on which test?

Ah. So the candidate’s clicking technique when interacting with the test is of higher importance to the test’s creators than the candidate’s hazard perception skills?

The test needs some way of differentiating between constant undifferentiated clicking and clicking associated with identification of a hazard. i hadn’t said it was of higher importance, only that it is a source of information. You could carry out a similar assessment but instead of using a computer simulation, you sat in a car with the candidate. You need to make some judgement on whether or not they were able to identify hazards, so you ask them to shout each time they saw one. If they just shouted all the time, you would have to surmise that they didn’t really know a hazard when they saw one.

So when i say we don’t want constant clicking, what I really mean is that we don’t want to pass people who just click constantly.