yes, but it now appears there is johnny5 who used to be 2+2=5 and a different 2+2=5. Whether they're both peter with two accounts or separate people remains to be seen.

Reply 104

F1 fanatic

If it isn't Peter it's someone winding him up, it's too much of a coincidence, that a 2 + 2 = 5 should just happen to be posting in Ox Goss.

Reply 105

thomasjtl

maybe it's some peter fanboy, bleugh. *shudders*

Reply 106

anycon

a bit of harmless namecalling & I get a 'warning'. pish tush.

what I really wanted to express was the fact that, if you're snotty, the people here at Oxford will love you, and no one at all will want to be snotty back, because love is a precondition of human life, & everybody's nice to everybody & no one ever gets angry.

Reply 107

Hoofbeat

I'm fairly sure it's definitely not Peter as I've seen 2 + 2 =5 on the forum ages ago when Peter was also 2+2=5 (the difference being the spaces between the digits) and I remember getting quite confused. I think it is purely a coincidence that 2 + 2 = 5 is now posting in OxGoss

Reply 108

LennonMcCartney

It's a song on Hail to the Thief, so two different users with these names isn't entirely unlikely.

Reply 109

NeverMindThat

This forum needs altogether more spite and bile.

Reply 110

anycon

it's also an allusion to Nineteen Eighty-Four.

I wonder how long it takes me to stop checking this thread to see if anything interesting
or funny has been posted. like ... gossip. or mockery. or a rant.

Reply 111

LennonMcCartney

anycon

it's also an allusion to Nineteen Eighty-Four.

Ah yes, of course.

I wonder how long it takes me to stop checking this thread to see if anything interesting or funny has been posted. like ... gossip. or mockery. or a rant.

And me...

Reply 112

username138106

Ye gads, The Oxford Student is the worst newspaper in the entire English-speaking world.

It's too late for me to be arsed going into everything, but my reasons are good ones. Firstly, the features are standard monkey-typewriter fare, or worse: "Trashed" occupies an almost uniquely implausible position, as something that never manages to approach either serious journalism or laughter. The "romance" page - it is an entire page - manages to reach new depths of vapidity, looking (to an even greater extent than the other articles) that they decided on the word count long before they thought of what might fill it. And then there's a page where they take pictures of people clubbing, and then print them. Because I always thought words were overrated.

And then there's the "editorial independence" bull****. If anyone's actually been to the OUSU building, they'll see that the OxStu offices are at one end of a short corridor. In the middle of the corridor is a toilet, and at the end of this corridor is the OUSU President's office, literally ten seconds away. Just how much editorial independence can such a paper have? I'm not going to bother with the numbers now, but it's always seemed to me that the numbers of OUSU hacks quoted has always far exceeded the number of... anyone else. I can't help but think that this is a simple desire on the journos' part to walk around as little as is potentially possible. When there's perfectly good biased sources within half a minute of your offices, why bother with balanced articles? Like I say, at the moment this is little more than simple ranting... but does anyone else agree that at the moment, the Cherwell is by far - BY FAR - the best student paper we see?

Reply 113

Athena

The new OxStu front page design looks better, and I thought the first issue of the OxStu was better, but the Cherwell's back in front again now. It's just more interesting.

Reply 114

Quistis

I think OxStu Features has had a couple of good weeks this term, but I'm not taken by their People/Romance stuff. To be honest, I find news much of a muchness between the two papers, so for me it's Features/Culture/People/Romance etc that distinguish the two, and I think Cherwell does them much better. But I read and enjoy both papers, and I do think the OxStu is a lot better this term than it has been at any point since I started at Oxford.

(And before anybody bothers looking at my profile and working out who I am, yes I am biased, but note I wasn't tacky enough to praise my own section!)

Reply 115

thomasjtl

Would i be told if something i posted got deleted? I'm just trying to work out why the rant i posted hasn't showed up.

Reply 116

anycon

thomasjtl

Would i be told if something i posted got deleted? I'm just trying to work out why the rant i posted hasn't showed up.

Well I got warned, but that was for swearwords (eek!) & nastiness.

Rants may count in an entirely different category of blundering censorship.

2 + 2 -- I never perceived such a gap in quality between
the papers. This may be because I don't read the news
stories very closely. As for arts coverage, to me they seem as cloth-headed,
ill-written & devoid of insight as each other.
Oh except sometimes theatre in Cherwell.

Reply 117

username138106

That's just your way of saying Lafferty's the king. Which he is.

Reply 118

thomasjtl

i ranted about how the very ethos of this website is to seem respectable, so anything interesting rarely comes up. With most threads being innane application questions, the majority of threads are dry facts rather than interesting debate and discussion (by that i of course mean gossip, mockery or rants). And no one's allowed to change that ethos, either, because although we're a community of users, we have to respect swear filters and rules about rudeness etc. and a request for a separate forum for actual students to escape the domination of the oxford forum by applicants is denied precisely for the reason we requested it in the first place.

This isn't to criticise the mods- anthea and helenia are both really nice people (calciumkid, i don't know you, sorry)- rather the whole structure they're working in. Which brings me onto my second point- everyone who's not an applicant in here by and large already knows the people on here quite well, so we're hardly likely to start taking the piss out of each other etc.

all in all, this place isn't anything like oxgoss, and never can be. While there are some aspects of oxgoss that probably don't need to be brought back, a lighter hand in terms of moderation and a separate forum for actual students would go a long way to making this a more fun place for people to use ( and would certainly drum up advertising revenue *hint hint*), but for reasons i don't fully understand, i can't see that happening.

Mods- i know there are rules against reposting deleted material, so if indeed this was deleted, i apologise- you should probably tell me you've deleted something, though!

Reply 119

Cirsium

Well I read your rant the first time Jonathan so it was definitely here!!

Oxford Gossip...

Related discussions

Trending

Latest