teamboat was founded in 2002. the exact date is not known, but the formation of teamboat took place during a warmup
session before rugby training began. it all began when roland played a game of random team on battle.net
before training. relating the experience of the game to daniel, roland talked about him having a
horrible partner who referred to the unit "steam tanks" as "steamboats". daniel then had a brainwave, and
the two of them decided to create accounts called teamboat1 and teamboat2: the name thought up due to daniel's fascination with food and warcraft.
guanghao joined shortly after the formation of teamboat, due to the need for intelligence to balance out the
gluttony in daniel and good looks in roland. together, the trio have accomplished feats such as making
seoul garden move out of j8. armed with their passion for food and good recommendations from guanghao,
teamboat strives to test (and at the same time, destroy) all buffets in singapore.
currently, the strength of teamboat stands at 3: daniel, guanghao and roland. there is, at the
moment, only 1 associate member: clement.
layout and coding done somewhat by roland
best viewed in 1024x768
even though i use 1280x1024 =p
Wednesday, August 24, 2005
school -.-
warning: rant.
disclaimer: this rant is strictly my opinion, and should not be taken as an attack at the organisation at hand, nor the people running the organisation.
ready? get set? go.
ok remember how the school always encourages healthy living? keeping fit? wow how do they think they can help to achieve that when you lock up the school gym and make it unaccessible for the students in rj?? to use the gym now, there must be permission from the teacher in order for the teacher to help unlock it. stupid? well there's more. it's not any other teacher, it's your teacher in charge. now that's dumb, isn't it? so what happens if your teacher in charge is absent? you can't use the gym? what kind of absurd logic is that? why must the weights room be locked? wow i'm so gonna steal all the weights in there and carry it singlehandedly home.
i understand their frustrations at the gym weights not being kept back properly, and the plain refusal by students to sign in. but what's the point of locking the gym up? it's a lose-lose situation: the students aren't able to keep fit, and the school's expectation of students keeping fit by themselves is unfulfillable. great work there. there's so much emphasis on the school treating us like adults. yet if there's so little trust in the students, what kind of treatment is that? it's so hypocritical. aren't we all 17 year olds? can't there be trust in the students? i do my little part by keeping back the weights that i use. isn't locking up the gym unfair? what about the many others who also keep back the weights? what do we do if our teacher is absent? be denied of our gym sessions? plain stupid, i swear.
so what if people do not sign in. accountability reasons i guess? but what's there to account for when no one will steal weights? you won't be seeing people lugging a bag across their shoulders while carrying a few dumbbells in their arms. it's just plain stupid.
oh and on another note. attire.
ok so the school states that attire should be worn properly at all times, there's a need to be neat and tidy. so does this mean that guy's hair can't be slightly long at the back? what's wrong with that. as long as it's tidy, it's ok isn't it? the inherent irony is that the idea of being neat and tidy is to portray a good image of the school. so how does really long skirts that look like they are in no man's land (or in this case, woman's) fit into the idea of portraying a good image? the thing they aren't getting is that the portrayal of the school is judged by society's viewpoints. so if something looks hideous but neat, it still does not go well in the eyes of the general public. the same goes with hair. so what if a guy's hair at the back is longer than the collar level? as long as it's presentable/neat and not really bushy and all, doesn't it still work out eventually since it's accepted in our society?
another pertinent issue is the ankle socks issue. ok this applies more to ri, but who cares. ever seen people wear high socks which, after much walking/running, eventually crumple down into a mess just above the ankle? wow that's so much neater than ankle socks. ever seen ankle socks crumple up? no. furthermore, it's so much more tedious to keep pulling up longer socks everytime it crumples downwards. so why are ankle socks still banned? let's question the purpose of having socks. they are to absorb our sweat from our feet inside our shoes right? do they have any purpose in protecting our calf hairs? i doubt it. so what's wrong with ankle socks as long as they fulfill their purpose? furthermore, they look much better, again, from society's viewpoint. and they are easier to maintain too.
but as it is, rules can't be stretched, or they'll give me a white slip. so i'll have to go cut my hair -.- over the weekend i suppose.
