> > The problem with this number is that to me it conveys even > less meaning than it purports to do. I can understand that > the network is happy with the achievement, and truth be told > it is an achievement of sorts. > > But if we are to put the performance of this industry into > a larger national perspective, are these numbers that great? >
No they are not infact they are miserable. If we look at the money earned from the common man against the returns we should be ashamed to be part of this industry. Which infact we are. > It reminds me of a student who came to me complaining bitterly. > How could I give him 9% in the exam, when he distinctly > remembers putting in so much effort, and feeling that he had > aced the paper? > The problem here is those taxed with marking the student have abdicated their responsibilities and left it to the networks to judge performance. Hell now that 9% student can give himeself 90% part himeself on the back and have a party to celebrate his performance. Meanwhile the teacher is also happy celebrating that his student has done so well. What a mess we are in. > So perhaps we should mark this paper now and see what marks > we, the professionals, give it! > my grades would be C- and that is being generous. _______________________________________________ LUG mailing list [email protected] http://kym.net/mailman/listinfo/lug %LUG is generously hosted by INFOCOM http://www.infocom.co.ug/ The above comments and data are owned by whoever posted them (including attachments if any). The List's Host is not responsible for them in any way. ---------------------------------------
