oh god.
ok. so i have this class, htm173. it is about tourism (htm stands for hospitality tourism management... and it's my major). the teacher's name is jane. she's chinese and is most definately a FOB. well, i shouldn't say that. she just sounds like a FOB. she doesn't know shit about shit. this upsets me because i'm paying to be in her class. well i'm not paying, but my parentals are. ok, this is why i hate my teacher and her class.
we had an assignment. it was to answer the following question, "what is not related to tourism" in a online discussion. well. in order to answer this question one must know what tourism means. so, in her class notes, there were two definitions used. the first was the World Tourism Organization's (WTO) definition. it states, "The activities of a person outside his or her usual environment for less than a specified period of time and whose main purpose of travel is other than the exercise of an activity remunerated from the place visited” (Chadwick, 1994).
this is the second definition... the course's definition: "Tourism is an economic activity involving the interactions among tourists, residents, and businesses in the environmental, social and cultural settings."
i used the first definition as the basis of my response to her question. two winners were decided by the teacher for the best arguement and rebuttal to her question. both winners basically answered by saying that everything relates to tourism. i used WTO's definition and wrote a lil response about the winners' posts.
"to answer your question jane, the winners should
have (in my opinion) considered the definition of
tourism. to me that would make sense. so, to answer the
question "what is NOT related to tourism" i'll
reitterate the point i made with my initial post using
an example.
a local diner primarily attracts locals to it's
establishment. very rarely does this business get
visitors or tourists. the revenue generated from
foreign consumers relates to tourism. revenue generated
from local consumers is NOT related to tourism.
as you can see, you can't say everything relates to
tourism. that arguement is not sound because it
includes local consumption which is not tourism by
definition."
she posted a reply in the discussion...
"Thank you for your thoughts on this topic. I appreciate
you going a step further to defend youself with WTO's
definition of tourism.
First, I was very impressed with your posting. It argues
well on what is not related to tourism and the argument
is well supported by examples.
Unfortunately, there is only one best award for each
category and your posting is more of argumentative
nature rather than rebutting."
she also wrote:
"Second, as for WTO's definition, it is used as a "bad"
example in attempting to define tourism. Check out the
course definition for tourism. As I emphasized at the
beginning of the semester, the course definition of
tourism is the guideline for learning this course.
Also, please stick to professional writing format with
appropriaqte letter case when posting assignments.
Again, I enjoy reading your posting. I particularly
applaud your follow-up spirit."
i like the part about writing professionally, with "appropriaqte" letter case. you can kind of tell by her writing that she's a FOB.
god this story is long. but STFU. The Jeffrey helped me out with my response to her post because he is smart and i am not. this is what i posted:
I'm still not satisfied. I'm not really concerned so
much with the winners of the discussion. What does
concern me is the course definition. The 'best'
responses, were those answers that were typed with the
course definition in mind.
"Tourism is an economic activity involving the
interactions among tourists, residents, and businesses
in the environmental, social and cultural settings."
This definition is not sound. The usefulness of that
definition is equivalent to the following definition:
soccer is a game played by soccer players. It is
impossible to determine what activities are tourism when
it is said that those actions are done by tourists.
Likewise, you cannot understand what soccer is unless
you know what a soccer player is.
The course definition does not express what activites
constitute tourism. Because 'tourist' is not defined,
the definition of tourism is meaningless.
As you can see, asking the class to answer the question
"what is not related to tourism" is futile. We as a
class cannot have a productive discussion about tourism,
if tourism is not defined. This is why I believe the
class has struggled with your question.
haha... well, the very next day i had class. i was talkin to a couple people who i sit with. they mentioned something about a guy who basically ripped jane a new a-hole. hehe i laughed and said it was me. then class started. jane started to talk about the "interesting discussion". she made like a 15 minute long presentation including a powerpoint presentation. she showed us all of this tourism system graph thing, and said how we needed to know what that was in order to understand the definition. like, it was so ridiculous. she had like 8 slides that you needed to know and understand to use her definition. she explained that the WTO definition was "bad" because it only defined what a tourist was. christ. after i heard that i put my head down and passed out. i can't stand her class. i would rather cut off all the fingers on my left hand and then sow them to my face than sit through another one of her lectures.
she is getting paid to teach a class about tourism, without knowing what tourism is. she also said how there is no definition that can fully explain what tourism is. i thought that was a crock of walrus shit so i made one. hopefully it sounds alright....
A tourist is a person who economically interacts with a foreign environment. The tourism industry markets its products or services to tourists. Businesses in this
concentration are direct proprietors of tourism. Indirect proprietors of tourism and businesses that enable a company in the tourism industry to operate, are subsets of tourism.
this is an explanation. skip it if you understand my definition. but, since jane is a tard, i wrote out what my definition means.
To further explain my definition, I'll expand on an
example I've posted before. All restaurants are not
categorized the same way. Not all retaurants are part of
the tourism industry. For instance, a local diner does
not market its products to tourists. Because of this and
the fact that the diner earns nearly 100% of its revenue
from people who live in the same community, it is not
considered part of the tourism industry.
Restaurants such as the Hard Rock Cafe, are businesses
with the intent to sell products to tourists. Therefore,
the Hard Rock Cafe is a part of the tourism industry.
In closing, tourism encompasses every type of business.
But, in order to say a business is part of the tourism
industry, one must make the distinction between
companies that primarily market to tourists and
companies that earn revenue as a by product of tourism.
the end.
we had an assignment. it was to answer the following question, "what is not related to tourism" in a online discussion. well. in order to answer this question one must know what tourism means. so, in her class notes, there were two definitions used. the first was the World Tourism Organization's (WTO) definition. it states, "The activities of a person outside his or her usual environment for less than a specified period of time and whose main purpose of travel is other than the exercise of an activity remunerated from the place visited” (Chadwick, 1994).
this is the second definition... the course's definition: "Tourism is an economic activity involving the interactions among tourists, residents, and businesses in the environmental, social and cultural settings."
i used the first definition as the basis of my response to her question. two winners were decided by the teacher for the best arguement and rebuttal to her question. both winners basically answered by saying that everything relates to tourism. i used WTO's definition and wrote a lil response about the winners' posts.
"to answer your question jane, the winners should
have (in my opinion) considered the definition of
tourism. to me that would make sense. so, to answer the
question "what is NOT related to tourism" i'll
reitterate the point i made with my initial post using
an example.
a local diner primarily attracts locals to it's
establishment. very rarely does this business get
visitors or tourists. the revenue generated from
foreign consumers relates to tourism. revenue generated
from local consumers is NOT related to tourism.
as you can see, you can't say everything relates to
tourism. that arguement is not sound because it
includes local consumption which is not tourism by
definition."
she posted a reply in the discussion...
"Thank you for your thoughts on this topic. I appreciate
you going a step further to defend youself with WTO's
definition of tourism.
First, I was very impressed with your posting. It argues
well on what is not related to tourism and the argument
is well supported by examples.
Unfortunately, there is only one best award for each
category and your posting is more of argumentative
nature rather than rebutting."
she also wrote:
"Second, as for WTO's definition, it is used as a "bad"
example in attempting to define tourism. Check out the
course definition for tourism. As I emphasized at the
beginning of the semester, the course definition of
tourism is the guideline for learning this course.
Also, please stick to professional writing format with
appropriaqte letter case when posting assignments.
Again, I enjoy reading your posting. I particularly
applaud your follow-up spirit."
i like the part about writing professionally, with "appropriaqte" letter case. you can kind of tell by her writing that she's a FOB.
god this story is long. but STFU. The Jeffrey helped me out with my response to her post because he is smart and i am not. this is what i posted:
I'm still not satisfied. I'm not really concerned so
much with the winners of the discussion. What does
concern me is the course definition. The 'best'
responses, were those answers that were typed with the
course definition in mind.
"Tourism is an economic activity involving the
interactions among tourists, residents, and businesses
in the environmental, social and cultural settings."
This definition is not sound. The usefulness of that
definition is equivalent to the following definition:
soccer is a game played by soccer players. It is
impossible to determine what activities are tourism when
it is said that those actions are done by tourists.
Likewise, you cannot understand what soccer is unless
you know what a soccer player is.
The course definition does not express what activites
constitute tourism. Because 'tourist' is not defined,
the definition of tourism is meaningless.
As you can see, asking the class to answer the question
"what is not related to tourism" is futile. We as a
class cannot have a productive discussion about tourism,
if tourism is not defined. This is why I believe the
class has struggled with your question.
haha... well, the very next day i had class. i was talkin to a couple people who i sit with. they mentioned something about a guy who basically ripped jane a new a-hole. hehe i laughed and said it was me. then class started. jane started to talk about the "interesting discussion". she made like a 15 minute long presentation including a powerpoint presentation. she showed us all of this tourism system graph thing, and said how we needed to know what that was in order to understand the definition. like, it was so ridiculous. she had like 8 slides that you needed to know and understand to use her definition. she explained that the WTO definition was "bad" because it only defined what a tourist was. christ. after i heard that i put my head down and passed out. i can't stand her class. i would rather cut off all the fingers on my left hand and then sow them to my face than sit through another one of her lectures.
she is getting paid to teach a class about tourism, without knowing what tourism is. she also said how there is no definition that can fully explain what tourism is. i thought that was a crock of walrus shit so i made one. hopefully it sounds alright....
A tourist is a person who economically interacts with a foreign environment. The tourism industry markets its products or services to tourists. Businesses in this
concentration are direct proprietors of tourism. Indirect proprietors of tourism and businesses that enable a company in the tourism industry to operate, are subsets of tourism.
this is an explanation. skip it if you understand my definition. but, since jane is a tard, i wrote out what my definition means.
To further explain my definition, I'll expand on an
example I've posted before. All restaurants are not
categorized the same way. Not all retaurants are part of
the tourism industry. For instance, a local diner does
not market its products to tourists. Because of this and
the fact that the diner earns nearly 100% of its revenue
from people who live in the same community, it is not
considered part of the tourism industry.
Restaurants such as the Hard Rock Cafe, are businesses
with the intent to sell products to tourists. Therefore,
the Hard Rock Cafe is a part of the tourism industry.
In closing, tourism encompasses every type of business.
But, in order to say a business is part of the tourism
industry, one must make the distinction between
companies that primarily market to tourists and
companies that earn revenue as a by product of tourism.
the end.
posted by icon at 10:47 PM
5 Comments:
*claps*
you go, mike, uh, tenz!
incompetent teachers deserve to be challenged. and you're damn straight. what she said didn't even make sense philosophically OR literally.
and go, chuck. (since i really don't know how much of your response was yours and how much was chuck's.)
so you think she's gonna pass you regardless of anything you say or do from here on out?
maybe one day YOU should take over class. sounds like you have a hella better understanding of "tourism" already than she does.
and see, you are smaht! ok, pretend i didn't say that dumbfuck.
yea... so i think you might be the only person in the world to read that post in its entirety. cuz i know i sure as hell haven't.
you mean YOUR long post? well, yeah, when i get time i read ALL of your posts. and i saw evidence you have read at least my latest one. yay! hey, when the lame vs retarded battle it out, wanna sit in the bleachers with me and share my popcorn?
KIDDING!!!!!
later, tenz.
i would enjoy that
^^^^
see, this is an example of you being sweet.
but not an example of me getting freaky.
haha, later, tenz.
Post a Comment
<< Home