02-10-2005, 12:20 AM
AvgJoe actually i have qualified both ICAEW and ACCA. Here i am actually acting as an "Devils Advocate"... Challenging the ideas and theories of other people with countless arguments. Actually i was also a bit shocked as most of the people of ICAP were just Looking Down upon ACCA's. I actually researched a bit and compared the Past Papers Of ACCA and ICAP and found ACCA papers equally tough.
Actually this is not even an issue of ACCA versus ACA. This is an issue of people not being able to argue unless the other ideology is the minority, or without the other side being non-existent. I want all sides to participate. If you make good arguments and avoid flame-baiting, and resorting to these ideological labels, then you might actually get somewhere here.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Tahoma, Arial" id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Avg joe if i starts creating links then i think i will have to create more than 50 links.people who want to compare both papers can go to ca and acca website and download the papers of any subject.e.g go to their site and compare the paper of IT of module D with paper 2.1 of acca of any attempt from the last two years and u will see the huge difference.
And this man Desert sleet instead of discussing the topic is getting personal.it is quite obvious that he doesnot know what to write as far as comparing the papers are concerned,so he is showing his family background.
bilal<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Bilal you don't balance the forum out by separating yourselves further from people you do not agree with. You challenge them, and do so properly, with sources, and logic. If they don't respond in a similar fashion then you tell me, and we try to resolve it.
I communicate with all people who are reported/reporters. We can resolve personal issues through the E-mail system. The user either takes the hint, smiles at me in the message and continues like a fool, or gives me lip for suggesting a little civility. The choices made at this stage help me determine if they can offer anything of value to the forum.
Value to me is intelligent posting. I want to see members who can wipe the floor with some of the people, and vise-versa. I want people who have done their homework, know how to present their arguments so all can participate, and never take any of this personal. I'll do what it takes to get as close as I can to that model.
If i did hurt someone then i must apologize.[^]
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Tahoma, Arial" id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">it is quite obvious that he doesnot know what to write as far as comparing the papers are concerned,so he is showing his family background.
bilal<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Thanks for the subtle insult. I had already concluded that there is no real point in arguing with you anymore cause you and I will just butt heads on the issue. Resorting to such family insults only reflects your mentality.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Tahoma, Arial" id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">you're just infantile by ANYONE'S standards. Like the little kid who wants to play with the big kids, you're just a little nuisance<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
You are right AvgJoe, it was an insult that I shouldn't have made, and for that I apologize. I think you can see that this debate affects me personally on many levels. Again, I apologize. In my defense though, I still say that the reply which Bilal gave me that provoked that statement, was not intelligent debate material as much as it was meant to paint a mental picture of what you despise about ACCA.
---------------------------------------------
If I could... Then I would... Turn back time!!
Actually this is not even an issue of ACCA versus ACA. This is an issue of people not being able to argue unless the other ideology is the minority, or without the other side being non-existent. I want all sides to participate. If you make good arguments and avoid flame-baiting, and resorting to these ideological labels, then you might actually get somewhere here.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Tahoma, Arial" id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Avg joe if i starts creating links then i think i will have to create more than 50 links.people who want to compare both papers can go to ca and acca website and download the papers of any subject.e.g go to their site and compare the paper of IT of module D with paper 2.1 of acca of any attempt from the last two years and u will see the huge difference.
And this man Desert sleet instead of discussing the topic is getting personal.it is quite obvious that he doesnot know what to write as far as comparing the papers are concerned,so he is showing his family background.
bilal<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Bilal you don't balance the forum out by separating yourselves further from people you do not agree with. You challenge them, and do so properly, with sources, and logic. If they don't respond in a similar fashion then you tell me, and we try to resolve it.
I communicate with all people who are reported/reporters. We can resolve personal issues through the E-mail system. The user either takes the hint, smiles at me in the message and continues like a fool, or gives me lip for suggesting a little civility. The choices made at this stage help me determine if they can offer anything of value to the forum.
Value to me is intelligent posting. I want to see members who can wipe the floor with some of the people, and vise-versa. I want people who have done their homework, know how to present their arguments so all can participate, and never take any of this personal. I'll do what it takes to get as close as I can to that model.
If i did hurt someone then i must apologize.[^]
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Tahoma, Arial" id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">it is quite obvious that he doesnot know what to write as far as comparing the papers are concerned,so he is showing his family background.
bilal<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
Thanks for the subtle insult. I had already concluded that there is no real point in arguing with you anymore cause you and I will just butt heads on the issue. Resorting to such family insults only reflects your mentality.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Tahoma, Arial" id="quote">quote<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">you're just infantile by ANYONE'S standards. Like the little kid who wants to play with the big kids, you're just a little nuisance<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></font id="quote"></blockquote id="quote">
You are right AvgJoe, it was an insult that I shouldn't have made, and for that I apologize. I think you can see that this debate affects me personally on many levels. Again, I apologize. In my defense though, I still say that the reply which Bilal gave me that provoked that statement, was not intelligent debate material as much as it was meant to paint a mental picture of what you despise about ACCA.
---------------------------------------------
If I could... Then I would... Turn back time!!
