Why you, my beloved TA, should give me full marks.
What you are going to see is all the reasons that you should give me full marks.
You may, amongst your grading rubric, note that there is a certain set of requirements of you in marking this. For the sake of ease
I have decided in my conditional goodness to list them all out here for you , my dear I don't know. It doesn't even matter the buttons don't work anyway (don't mark me down it's intentional).
Without further ado:
You must include at least one link (ie. a tag).
You must include at least one list (ie. ol or ul tags).
You must include at least one table (ie. table tags).
You must include at least one image (ie. img tags).
You must include some paragraphs with formatted text (ie. p, b, or h1 tags).
You must include some CSS Links to an external site. styling that is unique from the style4.css page presented in Lecture 19. For simplicity, call the page style_lab08.css. It should be a combined style (meaning multiple elements in the style). You may use or - or even all - of the CSS styles, but you need to create one combined CSS class that is unique from the style presented in class.
Immediately, I have already fulfilled #1, #2 and #5. The rest of this website will be dedicated to fulfiling the remaining requirements of myself, showing how I deserve
nothing less than a cool 120/120. Of course, if I don't get 120/120, I might do something silly 😋💣 ******.
******For legal reasons this is a joke; I have neither the physical, mental or spiritual prowess to harm anyone please don't retaliate. Also I'm noticing
that Neocities doesn't like my use of emojis; don't penalise me I'm nice I swear.
Hey TA! Did you also have to suffer through Principles of Microeconomics? Do you want to relive your most visceral trauma? Don't worry; I got you! Remember Nash Equilibrium? You know, when you're in a duopoly and you have to envisage both the analytical and psychological abilities of both parties involved? You don't remember? Well, let me remind you!
Let's say you have two firms illustrated in a table as shown here, such that (Firm 1's profit, Firm 2's profit):
If we start at the part of the table where both parties earns $10, then we can begin to understand. Some schizophrenic guy named Nash basically said that parties in duopoly will always try to maximise profit in the same way you might if this were a game. The 'game' is every firm gets a move, and the move you make is to maximise your own profit. Let's say Firm 1 goes first. They have the choice between $10 and $12:
Naturally, they are going to choose the higher of the two, meaning their profit increases to $12. However, this decreases the profit of Firm 2 far more drastically than it increased Firm 1's. It is now Firm 2's turn in this strange game, and they have a choice between $4 and $6:
Of course, they choose $6. Since neither firm can increase their profits from this point. This entire tract makes no sense at all and reminds me I need to revise economics. But, in case you missed it, I did fulfil the third criterion: add a table 😎
Oh and here's an image that's more clear than my table:
I added an image? Bang. Snuck in Reason 4 too
As you can see, I have done all criteria, from 1-5. There's a 6? Yes, and the uniqueness of my CSS speaks for itself; I need not reiterate it. Thus, my website has no reason to not get 120/120. If it doesn't then...well...
If you actually read this whole thing, you are procrastinating marking other labs. Go away. Shoo.