New term, new timetable

The project is progressing. I now have all the areas selected that I need from the National Statistics website, and just have to download the last bit of data. Meanwhile, I've been scatter plotting what I already have, and it looks as though only about two of my variables could be correllated with the percentage of household waste recycled, and those only very very loosely. Which is a bit of an anticlimax, but I'm a firm believer that negative results are as important as positive results in science so will keep telling myself that.

I've also started making notes on what I'm going to say about the collection and measurement of the various variables that I'm using, but haven't yet taken the plunge of actually typing any of it up in proper sentences.

Regression and something something was a bit of a mixed lot. It doesn't seem that interesting to be honest (it was always going to be the least exciting of my choices this term), and it seems quite difficult- but the teacher is apparently not bad. He actually does examples, which is refreshing after some of the teaching we had last term, he recalls in asides things such as bits of matrix theory that of course we should already know but which may have temporarily slipped our minds (and he doesn't do it in a patronising way), which I'm very gratefull for, and he seems keen to bring the link between the theory and practice to the fore, or at least that's what he was saying when he was talking about the course, but I have to say I'm not entirely clear how one would use what we learnt today in a practical calculation situation. Maybe you don't.

I'm proposing a motion at the UGM- a motion drawn up by someone else and which other people will be speaking in favour of, so admittedly it's not something for which I am due any credit, but at least I could be usefull in some way. It's the anti-Sutherland motion that we'd planned last term. I was sitting in one of the computer rooms (wrestling with the Neighbourhood Statistics website) when I got an email from the bloke drawing the thing up saying that they still needed a proposer, and that he was in that computer room. We'd agreed that it was best that the proposer not be the bloke himself (though he seconded it up) or any of several other heavily union-involved people because there is a certain fairly large section of UGM attendees who will vote against anything proposed by these people regardless of what it actually is, and we wanted it to get a fair hearing unclouded by personal bias. There had been various emails during the day proposing various wordings and so on but I really wasn't sure what would be most likely to win over the greatest number of people, so I didn't weigh in. And I wouldn't have done anything in response to this latest one either, since someone had sent an email shortly before proposing someone else as the proposer and saying if not they'd do it. But since this email arrived after and said they didn't have a proposer, and since I was in the same room, I looked around, located the guy and went over to offer my name. I said I would only do it if it didn't involve speaking or anything, just putting my name to the paper, and I said if anyone else wanted to do it then that was great, thinking of the other email. In fact though, it was as well that I did because the girl who sent the email didn't turn up till after the motion had been submitted- and of course it wasn't just a matter of saying she'd do it, the proposer needs to give their student number and sign the piece of paper. I think she's going to speak in favour of it, though, so that works out nicely.

I feel a bit wierd though about having my name on the paper when I had 0 input into it, almost like plagiarism. At least most of the people at the UGM who actually know who I am will also know I didn't write it. And anyway if it helps with the whole getting rid of Sutherland thing it's worth it!