Wednesday, May 27, 2009

Accountant = architect?


We all know that accounting is just an over-complication of what is essentially revenue-expenses.
When the new faculty building was constructed, I would've thought that the university would have used architects to design the building. However, I have come to the conclusion that there were cost-cutting involved in the construction of the building. Instead of using architects, they actually asked accounting staff to design the building.

While I sat this morning waiting for my lecture I saw a great number of visitors (most likely here for some event) walking into the building and:
1. Had no clue where they were suppose to go
2. Had no idea HOW to get there

I might have mentioned a while back that there are all but one visible stairs that lead up from the first to the second floor, and that stair is OUTSIDE the building.... Ok, it might look good to not have a stair inside leading up for the second floor, or it might be the new "it" thing but come on... this is the building NOT an accounting practice or something that should be over-complicated.




Since we're talking about accounting, let me rage about the allocation of marks in the test.
We were asked to fill in the missing numbers for a statement (from a-e). There were NO indication that they asked for the "total" figure at the end so I didnt add all the figures from a-e up.

Got my marked paper back yesterday and found out that they actually allocated 20% to the total figure..... I had a massive (albeit invisible) WTF on top of my head.....
Ughhh......

*Dang that was a long post.....that should make up for the recent lack of complaints/b***ing
*Picture credit of : http://www.codeodor.com/images/meditation.jpg

No comments: