here we go again

who says history doesn't repeat itself? i have proof here in case you wanna argue that. =)

cutsix (read prev entry) has gotten themselves into top three again, this time for Corporate Identity and Brand Managment. AGAIN. this will either be the best year of all my school years, or it will be the busiest.

let's go with busiest, eh. practicality wins everytime.

i got the message in the cab on the way to work on thursday. elation turned to apprehension pretty quick. at work,
i was making an expresso (who the hell drinks expresso? how is it that people can care to fork out money for a teeny SHOT of caffeine?) and i'm thinking about CIBM.
then i was brewing hot chocolate and i was thinking about all the preparatory materials.
loading the plates into the dishwasher and the consultation dates pop into mind.
i named the wrong order to the customer (iced mocha instead of iced latte), he was good looking. thank goodness for nighttime so he wouldn't see me blush.
anyways, you get the picture.

on an entirely different note,

Singaporeans can be daft sometimes, me included (out of sheer laziness on most accounts). travelators at airports and dhoby ghaut mrt station are meant for people IN A HURRY, not for you to rest your feet by not walking. i walk on it for fun, because then you go faster than you can normally walk, which is fun (i think i've said that already).

people crowd the travelators everywhere. they think it's convenient for all the wrong reasons. they get knocked over and bumped and they think it's your fault. singaporeans need to wake up and start walking.

hey! congrats!

i think congratulations and hearty pats on our backs are in order! our group, cutsix, have unbelievably notched ourselves among the best four teams for our FYP! how undelightfully unexpected. now we get to pitch our campaign to IRAS and other judges.

how... i don't know the word to describe it. approximately this time last year we were filming our seniors going about their pitches and - well for my case at least - being profoundly impressed by them, and look what's happened now? i still can't believe it. our report actually has loads of mistakes in it, gramatically and factually; though i wouldn't go to the extend of declaring it complete bollocks but i wouldn't grant us an A either. so, thank you ms. fenton. =)

on a sidenote, i'm starting to feel quite worried. it seems like we have a lot of ground to cover, edit and correct, so it could mean more sleepless nights again. sigh.

anyhow. today was pretty much a blast. they threw a joint celebration for us october babies at feathers & fins. what's a birthday without cake, surprises and vinegar, right?

they got me The Complete Book of Sushi, haha, yes from my wishlist. =) but i had to suffer seven bursts of vinegar (courtesy of the restaurant) due to losing at the unwrapping game (soffie is a worthy opponent. for a minute i thought i had the upperhand after seeing her scotchtaped wrapper, lol. but i got the untearable plastic bag!). oh god, scotchtape and papier mache is the worst combination ever. now i know the proper way to wrap presents. thanks guys.

leave your ego at the door

sometimes people say i'm egoistic or my head's getting too big for me to handle.

alright, nobody actually says that to my face but i'm sure i've acted pompously on more than one occasion.

during writing for the web lesson on friday, kenneth tan brought to my attention a phrase i'd used on my webpage - "spa myths demystified".

he said, though it was a clever title, it somehow overshadowed the accompanying content. people would stare too long at the title and thereafter forget why they were reading that section in the first place. not very good news to a webmaster, right?

kenneth then got a couple of students in my class whom, i think, he thought were comfortable in english and asked them if what they thought of the title i wrote.

student no. 1 started out reading "spa myths demys....", stumbled terribly upon "demystified", butchered the word in the process, and consequently gave up the entire passage altogether.

student no. 2 did not read the title aloud, but went on to skim the following paragraph. she then proceeded to declare that section "weird". (what the hell.)

student no. 3 caught the word "demystified" and very honestly said she didn't know that word meant, which meant that that phrase had been completely lost on her. bummer eh.

in the short space on 30 seconds, all three students then reveal that they had not understood what "demystified" meant.

first came shock. then disbelief. then incredulity. lastly, amusement.

they were not weak in english. quite the contrary, i would think those three girls' strengths were, in fact, their language fluency and capability, especially since i've been told that one of 'em had been a debater in her secondary school days.

so obviously, in these situations any normal person would get a bit smug. wouldn't you? even kenneth looked a bit taken aback, "you mean you don't know what'demystified' means?"

but hey, of course i wouldn't react like that if student 1, 2 or 3 had been someone studying medical technology or even chemical engineering. engineers can have good english, it's just not that imperative to them, neither is it expected of them, in my opinion at least. so that creates a justified distinction between say, someone in communication and someone in engineering.

we need to raise the standard of english in my course. we need to do this... we need to do that... but everyone knows nothing really gets done.

love and decisions

in corporate identity and brand management we learnt about consumer decision-making, and to cut a long story short, there're three steps people take when they're making decisions: do, feel, and think.

think: searching for information, evaluating a product performance, or recognising an unfulfilled need for a particular product.
feel: having a positive attitude, developing a preference and conviction for a brand, and
do: trying and buying the product.

so do, feel, and think occur in a sequence when consumers (you) buy products. the three steps, however, do not always happen in the same order for every product. for example, when you buy cigarettes, you do the buying act first, then you feel for the brand, whether positive or negative, lastly you evaluate the brand (think). so cigarette-buying = do --> feel --> think.

say for a major purchase like a car, however, it's different. you would have to do some information search and evaluating first (think), then develop conviction for a particular brand (feel) and lastly, do - buying the car. think --> feel --> do.

so the three things u need to remember are do, feel and think. pretty light stuff, huh? =)

if you're not getting the explanation so far you might as well skip this entry altogether.

anyhow, so our product here is love, and the consumer is you. or me, if you want. any human being will do. except arnold swazhenneggerr (you know who i'm talking about).

so, when it comes to love, what would be the appropriate steps, in your opinion, to take?

a couple of my friends who've already been in more than two relationships concluded that where love is concerned, feel --> do --> think is the de rigueur route to take. so you'd feel for your potential partner first, then 'do' by officially getting together (don't think i don't know what you're thinking), and lastly you think whether your girlfriend/boyfriend is right for you.

my opinion was that 'buying' love should go in a manner thus: feel --> think --> do. you have feelings for this guy, you think whether he's right for you, then you get together! doesn't that make perfect sense?

well, but my thesis stands for nothing. i mean, my friends been through more than one relationship, how in the world would my one experience stack up against theirs? sigh, i rest my case.

but i would love to hear your opinion nonetheless.

p.s. thanks to doris nga for her CIBM references. this shows that i pay attention during lectures.

here's something proper, enjoy.

i finally have the time for an update, you guys are so lucky.

anyhow, we (mejonadjunwei) caught saved! finally on saturday. very witty, very unbelievable. i didn't think anybody would have dared to make a satire on christianity, or at least, that was how it seem to me. i was glad they used unknowns, or maybe going-to-be-knowns. you know hollywood, someone makes a critically acclaimed movie and bam, someone is the new IT girl/boy. hollywood is pathetic, in a wimpy, romantic, hugh grant-ish kinda way. lol.

then i was on the train on sunday when this most adorable baby waved at me. how did i know he was the most adorable little tyke? easy peasy, he had a round metal badge that said, "world's most adorable baby as certified by the 1972 guinness book of world records".

haha, i kid. but he is cute nonetheless, which brought me to the astonishing fact that babies can actually very easily get adults to do stupid things adults would never have thought of doing. adults turn into silly, giggly bits when babies are around. never misoverestimate (hahaha) the phenomenal power of babies. learn your lesson early folks, don't get caught crossing your eyes and sticking out your tongue at the same time. embarrassing would be an understatement when you get caught by the people around you who used to think you were a smart, respectable nut stuck within the four walls of your shenton way cubicle.

let's talk about my week. but it's only tuesday and too early to summarise what has happened so let's talk about what happened the week before.
well, i forgot to pay for my lunch twice. it's not my fault entirely, really, because the fact that i managed to escape the misdemeanor was because the food seller had forgotten too. hallelujah. but i went back to pay for it, civics & moral ed was my strongest subject.