<body><script type="text/javascript"> function setAttributeOnload(object, attribute, val) { if(window.addEventListener) { window.addEventListener('load', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }, false); } else { window.attachEvent('onload', function(){ object[attribute] = val; }); } } </script> <div id="navbar-iframe-container"></div> <script type="text/javascript" src="https://apis.google.com/js/platform.js"></script> <script type="text/javascript"> gapi.load("gapi.iframes:gapi.iframes.style.bubble", function() { if (gapi.iframes && gapi.iframes.getContext) { gapi.iframes.getContext().openChild({ url: 'https://www.blogger.com/navbar/27446261?origin\x3dhttp://mediastud0601.blogspot.com', where: document.getElementById("navbar-iframe-container"), id: "navbar-iframe" }); } }); </script>
Friday, October 13

Haha. School's gonna start!

I'm here to clear up the air regarding the fiasco about the fund.
First. To Amanda: It may be only 2 bucks to you, it may be a whole lot more to others.
Ok. Situation is that Sara can claim the expenses of the class chalet from the PEM. And she is suggesting that the amount claimed be the class fund.
Why? Because the people who went to the chalet paid up for it, and it's gonna be damn tedious splitting up the money to return to the people.
And the snag now is that fiz says that he didnt go for the chalet, and so is justified to not pay for it.
BUT
Thing is that EVERYONE is supposed to pay the class fund. Since we're gonna be using the chalet money for class fund, that means that the people that went to the chalet has paid.
That leaves those who didnt go to the chalet.
Since the rest paid $20 for the chalet, that means that the people who weren't able to make it for the chalet are supposed to pay the $20 so that everybody chips in the same amount for the class fund, not having some buggering arses skip the 'tax'.
I hope that has helped the situation.
Kel