Thank you for your email. We have both starter kits in hand.
I think it would be much better if we could set up a meeting to clarify some matters which we have doubts.
It is precisely your statement that the 'two teams visited the sites together as one and they had visited the sites physically. if they had not visited the sites, they would not have known the questions and the answers.'. This is also my point, that if your role had just been to check their answers before submission, how would it be possible that you knew if their answers were right/ wrong unless you were also there with them? Would that not then constitute assistance as they are supposed to participate in the race themselves?
Perhaps it is best we could meet up to to discuss the matter. If it suits you, would this Friday be good?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Eh Desmond, you should point out the key word is 'check' which you used in the sense of 'determine a property of'.
You checked that their answers were correct. This does not constitute an active intervention. It is like checking your blind spot before turning. Unless you actually do something with it, it is not active intervention or a breach of the rules.
I mean, if you had said, "I checked the students to see that all of them were there," it would certainly not have been a breach. If you had said, "I checked the answers for the property of being identical; whether right or wrong I did not speculate or make any comment on them and I certainly did not provide assistance," it would have been clear too.
In fact, they are actually libelling you by calling you a cheat. You can take legal action.
B***h slap him, quick!
Post a Comment