I’m writing a short essay for a reasoning unit. The essay is to answer a question from a given selection. I’ve selected “Should the university allow students to use cognitive-enhancing pills?”.
The objective is to take a position and to justify it.

My position is “yes, students should be allowed to use cognitive-enhancing pills (nootropics)”. My main justification is that with in such a broad term, most nootropics are either legal or available through legal means, such as prescription. In no way will I attempt to justify inappropriate drug use.

This is something I’ve had personal experience with and have spent a looooot of time thinking about, but I’m having trouble fleshing the above out to the required word length.

My experience is with Eugeroics (modafinil) and obviously caffeine. The other nootropics I’ve included are:
-amphetamine (dexamphetamine)
-methyphenidate (ritalin)
-caffeine (coffee)
-nicotine (durries)
-racetams

Since the question seems to about if there is an unfair advantage to using these drugs for academic purposes, I’m considering if I should include beta-blockers. These are clearly not nootropics, but they are used to allow students to perform better than they otherwise might during an exam and I think that this fits the intent of the question.

I can find a lot of positive/supporting literature on racetams and eugeroics, much of which references the movie Limitless. I’ve read a thesis about modafinil. I can’t find anything from my uni about their position on this.

I’m seeking other peoples opinions on this. Basically, looking for different points of view that I may not have considered, for or against my stated position.

Lary said:

I’m writing a short essay for a reasoning unit. The essay is to answer a question from a given selection. I’ve selected “Should the university allow students to use cognitive-enhancing pills?”.
The objective is to take a position and to justify it.

My position is “yes, students should be allowed to use cognitive-enhancing pills (nootropics)”. My main justification is that with in such a broad term, most nootropics are either legal or available through legal means, such as prescription. In no way will I attempt to justify inappropriate drug use.

This is something I’ve had personal experience with and have spent a looooot of time thinking about, but I’m having trouble fleshing the above out to the required word length.

My experience is with Eugeroics (modafinil) and obviously caffeine. The other nootropics I’ve included are:
-amphetamine (dexamphetamine)
-methyphenidate (ritalin)
-caffeine (coffee)
-nicotine (durries)
-racetams

Since the question seems to about if there is an unfair advantage to using these drugs for academic purposes, I’m considering if I should include beta-blockers. These are clearly not nootropics, but they are used to allow students to perform better than they otherwise might during an exam and I think that this fits the intent of the question.

I can find a lot of positive/supporting literature on racetams and eugeroics, much of which references the movie Limitless. I’ve read a thesis about modafinil. I can’t find anything from my uni about their position on this.

I’m seeking other peoples opinions on this. Basically, looking for different points of view that I may not have considered, for or against my stated position.

I am sure that there is evidence to be discussed about how efficient it is to use say tobacco to stimulate the brain at the expense of the whole organism.

and so forth

roughbarked said:

Lary said:

I’m writing a short essay for a reasoning unit. The essay is to answer a question from a given selection. I’ve selected “Should the university allow students to use cognitive-enhancing pills?”.
The objective is to take a position and to justify it.

My position is “yes, students should be allowed to use cognitive-enhancing pills (nootropics)”. My main justification is that with in such a broad term, most nootropics are either legal or available through legal means, such as prescription. In no way will I attempt to justify inappropriate drug use.

This is something I’ve had personal experience with and have spent a looooot of time thinking about, but I’m having trouble fleshing the above out to the required word length.

My experience is with Eugeroics (modafinil) and obviously caffeine. The other nootropics I’ve included are:
-amphetamine (dexamphetamine)
-methyphenidate (ritalin)
-caffeine (coffee)
-nicotine (durries)
-racetams

Since the question seems to about if there is an unfair advantage to using these drugs for academic purposes, I’m considering if I should include beta-blockers. These are clearly not nootropics, but they are used to allow students to perform better than they otherwise might during an exam and I think that this fits the intent of the question.

I can find a lot of positive/supporting literature on racetams and eugeroics, much of which references the movie Limitless. I’ve read a thesis about modafinil. I can’t find anything from my uni about their position on this.

I’m seeking other peoples opinions on this. Basically, looking for different points of view that I may not have considered, for or against my stated position.

I am sure that there is evidence to be discussed about how efficient it is to use say tobacco to stimulate the brain at the expense of the whole organism.

and so forth

Carl Jung and Sigmund would be aghast that you didn’t include cocaine.

roughbarked said:

I am sure that there is evidence to be discussed about how efficient it is to use say tobacco to stimulate the brain at the expense of the whole organism.

and so forth

I think that’s too indepth for this essay. This is just to demonstrate that I can make an argument.

roughbarked said:

Carl Jung and Sigmund would be aghast that you didn’t include cocaine.

Considering cocaine is illegal, it would be pretty silly to include it.

Lary said:

roughbarked said:

I am sure that there is evidence to be discussed about how efficient it is to use say tobacco to stimulate the brain at the expense of the whole organism.

and so forth

I think that’s too indepth for this essay. This is just to demonstrate that I can make an argument.

I’m simply pointing out what you will have to argue against.

Lary said:

I’m writing a short essay for a reasoning unit. The essay is to answer a question from a given selection. I’ve selected “Should the university allow students to use cognitive-enhancing pills?”.
The objective is to take a position and to justify it.

My position is “yes, students should be allowed to use cognitive-enhancing pills (nootropics)”. My main justification is that with in such a broad term, most nootropics are either legal or available through legal means, such as prescription. In no way will I attempt to justify inappropriate drug use.

This is something I’ve had personal experience with and have spent a looooot of time thinking about, but I’m having trouble fleshing the above out to the required word length.

My experience is with Eugeroics (modafinil) and obviously caffeine. The other nootropics I’ve included are:
-amphetamine (dexamphetamine)
-methyphenidate (ritalin)
-caffeine (coffee)
-nicotine (durries)
-racetams

Since the question seems to about if there is an unfair advantage to using these drugs for academic purposes, I’m considering if I should include beta-blockers. These are clearly not nootropics, but they are used to allow students to perform better than they otherwise might during an exam and I think that this fits the intent of the question.

I can find a lot of positive/supporting literature on racetams and eugeroics, much of which references the movie Limitless. I’ve read a thesis about modafinil. I can’t find anything from my uni about their position on this.

I’m seeking other peoples opinions on this. Basically, looking for different points of view that I may not have considered, for or against my stated position.

People are advantaged or disadvantaged in so many ways and what you suggest is only another. Where you were born, live and to whom, their education and financial position, plus how you were treated, these can help or disadvantage you considerably along with many other things. Depends whether you think the drugs are cheating like a list of the answers and so giving you an unfair advantage

Lary said:

roughbarked said:

Carl Jung and Sigmund would be aghast that you didn’t include cocaine.

Considering cocaine is illegal, it would be pretty silly to include it.

I duuno. It is well used by many anyway.

PermeateFree said:

People are advantaged or disadvantaged in so many ways and what you suggest is only another. Where you were born, live and to whom, their education and financial position, plus how you were treated, these can help or disadvantage you considerably along with many other things. Depends whether you think the drugs are cheating like a list of the answers and so giving you an unfair advantage

This is largely similar to my current position.

Lary said:

PermeateFree said:

People are advantaged or disadvantaged in so many ways and what you suggest is only another. Where you were born, live and to whom, their education and financial position, plus how you were treated, these can help or disadvantage you considerably along with many other things. Depends whether you think the drugs are cheating like a list of the answers and so giving you an unfair advantage

This is largely similar to my current position.

Why not just read the texts anyway?

roughbarked said:

Lary said:

PermeateFree said:

People are advantaged or disadvantaged in so many ways and what you suggest is only another. Where you were born, live and to whom, their education and financial position, plus how you were treated, these can help or disadvantage you considerably along with many other things. Depends whether you think the drugs are cheating like a list of the answers and so giving you an unfair advantage

This is largely similar to my current position.

Why not just read the texts anyway?

I mean, why did you get yourself involved on this side of the argument. What have you got to offer since you seemed positive enough to take on the stance?

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

Lary said:

This is largely similar to my current position.

Why not just read the texts anyway?

I mean, why did you get yourself involved on this side of the argument. What have you got to offer since you seemed positive enough to take on the stance?

I’m not sure what your question is? What texts?

Lary said:

roughbarked said:

roughbarked said:

Why not just read the texts anyway?

I mean, why did you get yourself involved on this side of the argument. What have you got to offer since you seemed positive enough to take on the stance?

I’m not sure what your question is? What texts?

Caffiene and nicotene are pretty well documented. and in the university situation you are looking at.

Lary said:

I’m writing a short essay for a reasoning unit. The essay is to answer a question from a given selection. I’ve selected “Should the university allow students to use cognitive-enhancing pills?”.
The objective is to take a position and to justify it.

My position is “yes, students should be allowed to use cognitive-enhancing pills (nootropics)”. My main justification is that with in such a broad term, most nootropics are either legal or available through legal means, such as prescription. In no way will I attempt to justify inappropriate drug use.

This is something I’ve had personal experience with and have spent a looooot of time thinking about, but I’m having trouble fleshing the above out to the required word length.

My experience is with Eugeroics (modafinil) and obviously caffeine. The other nootropics I’ve included are:
-amphetamine (dexamphetamine)
-methyphenidate (ritalin)
-caffeine (coffee)
-nicotine (durries)
-racetams

Since the question seems to about if there is an unfair advantage to using these drugs for academic purposes, I’m considering if I should include beta-blockers. These are clearly not nootropics, but they are used to allow students to perform better than they otherwise might during an exam and I think that this fits the intent of the question.

I can find a lot of positive/supporting literature on racetams and eugeroics, much of which references the movie Limitless. I’ve read a thesis about modafinil. I can’t find anything from my uni about their position on this.

I’m seeking other peoples opinions on this. Basically, looking for different points of view that I may not have considered, for or against my stated position.

*remembers when I took betablockers and did a fantastic presentation. Then I fielded questions and comments from the research forum and I felt deadened to the urgency of reply and felt they were attacking me and it was hard to respond. I felt the good cop/bad cop interrogative stuff harder than normal and never did that again.

*Noone but me seemed to notice. They said I was triff.

sarahs mum said:

Lary said:

I’m writing a short essay for a reasoning unit. The essay is to answer a question from a given selection. I’ve selected “Should the university allow students to use cognitive-enhancing pills?”.
The objective is to take a position and to justify it.

My position is “yes, students should be allowed to use cognitive-enhancing pills (nootropics)”. My main justification is that with in such a broad term, most nootropics are either legal or available through legal means, such as prescription. In no way will I attempt to justify inappropriate drug use.

This is something I’ve had personal experience with and have spent a looooot of time thinking about, but I’m having trouble fleshing the above out to the required word length.

My experience is with Eugeroics (modafinil) and obviously caffeine. The other nootropics I’ve included are:
-amphetamine (dexamphetamine)
-methyphenidate (ritalin)
-caffeine (coffee)
-nicotine (durries)
-racetams

Since the question seems to about if there is an unfair advantage to using these drugs for academic purposes, I’m considering if I should include beta-blockers. These are clearly not nootropics, but they are used to allow students to perform better than they otherwise might during an exam and I think that this fits the intent of the question.

I can find a lot of positive/supporting literature on racetams and eugeroics, much of which references the movie Limitless. I’ve read a thesis about modafinil. I can’t find anything from my uni about their position on this.

I’m seeking other peoples opinions on this. Basically, looking for different points of view that I may not have considered, for or against my stated position.

*remembers when I took betablockers and did a fantastic presentation. Then I fielded questions and comments from the research forum and I felt deadened to the urgency of reply and felt they were attacking me and it was hard to respond. I felt the good cop/bad cop interrogative stuff harder than normal and never did that again.

*Noone but me seemed to notice. They said I was triff.

It is a momentary lapse of reason.

sarahs mum said:

*remembers when I took betablockers and did a fantastic presentation. Then I fielded questions and comments from the research forum and I felt deadened to the urgency of reply and felt they were attacking me and it was hard to respond. I felt the good cop/bad cop interrogative stuff harder than normal and never did that again.

*Noone but me seemed to notice. They said I was triff.

This matches what I’ve read, during my brief research into this. Apparently that’s a common response/side effect.

Lary said:

sarahs mum said:

*remembers when I took betablockers and did a fantastic presentation. Then I fielded questions and comments from the research forum and I felt deadened to the urgency of reply and felt they were attacking me and it was hard to respond. I felt the good cop/bad cop interrogative stuff harder than normal and never did that again.

*Noone but me seemed to notice. They said I was triff.

This matches what I’ve read, during my brief research into this. Apparently that’s a common response/side effect.

Yeah. Have you ever tried to tell your brain that you don’t need nicotene?

roughbarked said:

sarahs mum said:

Lary said:

I’m writing a short essay for a reasoning unit. The essay is to answer a question from a given selection. I’ve selected “Should the university allow students to use cognitive-enhancing pills?”.
The objective is to take a position and to justify it.

My position is “yes, students should be allowed to use cognitive-enhancing pills (nootropics)”. My main justification is that with in such a broad term, most nootropics are either legal or available through legal means, such as prescription. In no way will I attempt to justify inappropriate drug use.

This is something I’ve had personal experience with and have spent a looooot of time thinking about, but I’m having trouble fleshing the above out to the required word length.

My experience is with Eugeroics (modafinil) and obviously caffeine. The other nootropics I’ve included are:
-amphetamine (dexamphetamine)
-methyphenidate (ritalin)
-caffeine (coffee)
-nicotine (durries)
-racetams

Since the question seems to about if there is an unfair advantage to using these drugs for academic purposes, I’m considering if I should include beta-blockers. These are clearly not nootropics, but they are used to allow students to perform better than they otherwise might during an exam and I think that this fits the intent of the question.

I can find a lot of positive/supporting literature on racetams and eugeroics, much of which references the movie Limitless. I’ve read a thesis about modafinil. I can’t find anything from my uni about their position on this.

I’m seeking other peoples opinions on this. Basically, looking for different points of view that I may not have considered, for or against my stated position.

*remembers when I took betablockers and did a fantastic presentation. Then I fielded questions and comments from the research forum and I felt deadened to the urgency of reply and felt they were attacking me and it was hard to respond. I felt the good cop/bad cop interrogative stuff harder than normal and never did that again.

*Noone but me seemed to notice. They said I was triff.

It is a momentary lapse of reason.

The beta blockers according to shrink let you get the first feeling but they shut down the echo in the fear cycle.

In the above instance It wasn’t working for me. I think it was working against me.

sarahs mum said:

roughbarked said:

sarahs mum said:

*remembers when I took betablockers and did a fantastic presentation. Then I fielded questions and comments from the research forum and I felt deadened to the urgency of reply and felt they were attacking me and it was hard to respond. I felt the good cop/bad cop interrogative stuff harder than normal and never did that again.

*Noone but me seemed to notice. They said I was triff.

It is a momentary lapse of reason.

The beta blockers according to shrink let you get the first feeling but they shut down the echo in the fear cycle.

In the above instance It wasn’t working for me. I think it was working against me.

As I tried to point out, if you cannot reason about what is happening now, then it all starts going out that window.

roughbarked said:

Lary said:

sarahs mum said:

*remembers when I took betablockers and did a fantastic presentation. Then I fielded questions and comments from the research forum and I felt deadened to the urgency of reply and felt they were attacking me and it was hard to respond. I felt the good cop/bad cop interrogative stuff harder than normal and never did that again.

*Noone but me seemed to notice. They said I was triff.

This matches what I’ve read, during my brief research into this. Apparently that’s a common response/side effect.

Yeah. Have you ever tried to tell your brain that you don’t need nicotene?

well, that is really the only way to quit. and people quit.

JudgeMental said:

roughbarked said:

Lary said:

This matches what I’ve read, during my brief research into this. Apparently that’s a common response/side effect.

Yeah. Have you ever tried to tell your brain that you don’t need nicotene?

well, that is really the only way to quit. and people quit.

Spot on. Yes.

JudgeMental said:

roughbarked said:

Lary said:

This matches what I’ve read, during my brief research into this. Apparently that’s a common response/side effect.

Yeah. Have you ever tried to tell your brain that you don’t need nicotene?

well, that is really the only way to quit. and people quit.

Bugger. I was waiting for you to post in this thread so I could take a contrary, and therefore almost certainly correct position, and you go and post the above.

shakes fist

JudgeMental said:

roughbarked said:

Lary said:

This matches what I’ve read, during my brief research into this. Apparently that’s a common response/side effect.

Yeah. Have you ever tried to tell your brain that you don’t need nicotene?

well, that is really the only way to quit. and people quit.

Some people don’t quit.

sibeen said:

JudgeMental said:

roughbarked said:

Yeah. Have you ever tried to tell your brain that you don’t need nicotene?

well, that is really the only way to quit. and people quit.

Bugger. I was waiting for you to post in this thread so I could take a contrary, and therefore almost certainly correct position, and you go and post the above.

shakes fist

because i’m good at the sciencey stuff.

sarahs mum said:

JudgeMental said:

roughbarked said:

Yeah. Have you ever tried to tell your brain that you don’t need nicotene?

well, that is really the only way to quit. and people quit.

Some people don’t quit.

In that context my fave reference was pulled off radio. Yeah you remember that?

“Quitting smoking is easy, I’ve done it 186,000 times”.

JudgeMental said:

sibeen said:

JudgeMental said:

well, that is really the only way to quit. and people quit.

Bugger. I was waiting for you to post in this thread so I could take a contrary, and therefore almost certainly correct position, and you go and post the above.

shakes fist

because i’m good at the sciencey stuff.

Stop polishing your fingernails on your shirt.

roughbarked said:

JudgeMental said:

sibeen said:

Bugger. I was waiting for you to post in this thread so I could take a contrary, and therefore almost certainly correct position, and you go and post the above.

shakes fist

because i’m good at the sciencey stuff.

Stop polishing your fingernails on your shirt.

no.

JudgeMental said:

roughbarked said:

JudgeMental said:

because i’m good at the sciencey stuff.

Stop polishing your fingernails on your shirt.

no.

It is OK. As long as you know that I know. :)

roughbarked said:

JudgeMental said:

roughbarked said:

Stop polishing your fingernails on your shirt.

no.

It is OK. As long as you know that I know. :)

well, you think you know.

JudgeMental said:

roughbarked said:

JudgeMental said:

no.

It is OK. As long as you know that I know. :)

well, you think you know.

That goes as it does. ;)

Have you gone down the ‘state-dependent memory’ path?

Could give you a paragraph of relevant material, if you’re struggling to make the word count.

Rule 303 said:

Have you gone down the ‘state-dependent memory’ path?

Could give you a paragraph of relevant material, if you’re struggling to make the word count.

Nope. I haven’t even heard of it.
I’ll start looking into it now.

Thank you.

Lary said:

Rule 303 said:

Have you gone down the ‘state-dependent memory’ path?

Could give you a paragraph of relevant material, if you’re struggling to make the word count.

Nope. I haven’t even heard of it.
I’ll start looking into it now.

Thank you.

Any time.

My knowledge of nootropics is nearly zero.

Glad you mentioned caffeine. From memory, caffeine is the only drug that has ever been removed from the Olympics banned list. That is, caffeine has been re-legalised.

Have you tried searching “smart drugs”? A search on Google Scholar brings up three relevant papers:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0028416
https://jme.bmj.com/content/35/10/611.short
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrn984
If those links don’t take you to the full paper, try sci-hub.

I count SSRIs, antidepressants, as smart drugs. Taken in moderation, they would act to reduce exam anxiety and improve concentration in class, even for people with normal cognitive function. They’re non-addictive and don’t have bad side effects other than reducing sexual desire.

Another source of information is DSM, the diagnostic and statistical manual for mental disorders. If you feel inclined, look up the chapter on drug abuse and drug dependence. DSM-IV is a better guide here than DSM-5 because it goes into more detail about individual drugs: Intoxication, hallucination, addiction, sexual impotence both on taking the drug and on withdrawal.

My simple rule is that if any drug has passed through FDA or similar tests as effective and safe then it is effective and safe. The FDA eliminates far too many useful drugs and takes far too long to approve drugs for sale.

mollwollfumble said:

My knowledge of nootropics is nearly zero.

Glad you mentioned caffeine. From memory, caffeine is the only drug that has ever been removed from the Olympics banned list. That is, caffeine has been re-legalised.

Have you tried searching “smart drugs”? A search on Google Scholar brings up three relevant papers:
https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0028416
https://jme.bmj.com/content/35/10/611.short
https://www.nature.com/articles/nrn984
If those links don’t take you to the full paper, try sci-hub.

I count SSRIs, antidepressants, as smart drugs. Taken in moderation, they would act to reduce exam anxiety and improve concentration in class, even for people with normal cognitive function. They’re non-addictive and don’t have bad side effects other than reducing sexual desire.

Another source of information is DSM, the diagnostic and statistical manual for mental disorders. If you feel inclined, look up the chapter on drug abuse and drug dependence. DSM-IV is a better guide here than DSM-5 because it goes into more detail about individual drugs: Intoxication, hallucination, addiction, sexual impotence both on taking the drug and on withdrawal.

My simple rule is that if any drug has passed through FDA or similar tests as effective and safe then it is effective and safe. The FDA eliminates far too many useful drugs and takes far too long to approve drugs for sale.

Even painkillers and anti-inflamataries may be considered cognitive enhancers, when used by people with normal cognition.

I wouldn’t call them “smart drugs” though.

Quick question, I want to leave a link/phone number for drug support. What should I leave? Lifeline?

Lary said:

Quick question, I want to leave a link/phone number for drug support. What should I leave? Lifeline?

https://www.mhc.wa.gov.au/alcoholanddrugsupportline

Arts said:

Lary said:

Quick question, I want to leave a link/phone number for drug support. What should I leave? Lifeline?

https://www.mhc.wa.gov.au/alcoholanddrugsupportline

Tah

Arts said:

Lary said:

Quick question, I want to leave a link/phone number for drug support. What should I leave? Lifeline?

https://www.mhc.wa.gov.au/alcoholanddrugsupportline

Wait, wrong state. I’m in Tas now. I was just going to include a general one.

https://www.dhhs.tas.gov.au/mentalhealth/alcohol_and_drug/contact_us

Lary said:

Quick question, I want to leave a link/phone number for drug support. What should I leave? Lifeline?

Depends who the intended caller is and what the problem is. If you had to choose only one, LifeLine is probably the most useful number.

Rule 303 said:

Lary said:

Quick question, I want to leave a link/phone number for drug support. What should I leave? Lifeline?

Depends who the intended caller is and what the problem is. If you had to choose only one, LifeLine is probably the most useful number.

lifeline is not really about drug stuff though.. more crisis care mental health

Arts said:

https://www.dhhs.tas.gov.au/mentalhealth/alcohol_and_drug/contact_us

Cheers
The last gov.au site I found was just loads of questions with no real help info

Arts said:

Rule 303 said:

Lary said:

Quick question, I want to leave a link/phone number for drug support. What should I leave? Lifeline?

Depends who the intended caller is and what the problem is. If you had to choose only one, LifeLine is probably the most useful number.

lifeline is not really about drug stuff though.. more crisis care mental health

Yeah, I’m thinking they will hopefully act as a referral agency, since there’s drug support agencies for different demographic groups, suffering different problems, in different geographical areas.

“How far would you go to reveal your true, super-smart inner self? Athletes have used substances and techniques to enhance their performance physically. Now there are ways to boost your intelligence. We don’t suggest you try it at home – but David Adam did – using smart pills and brain hacks to try and cheat his way into Mensa. But his method also involved some moral dilemmas.”

I heard this quite a while ago, found it very interesting and it is right up your alley Lary.

https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/allinthemind/adventures-with-smart-pills-and-brain-hacks/9596944

Peak Warming Man said:

“How far would you go to reveal your true, super-smart inner self? Athletes have used substances and techniques to enhance their performance physically. Now there are ways to boost your intelligence. We don’t suggest you try it at home – but David Adam did – using smart pills and brain hacks to try and cheat his way into Mensa. But his method also involved some moral dilemmas.”

I heard this quite a while ago, found it very interesting and it is right up your alley Lary.

https://www.abc.net.au/radionational/programs/allinthemind/adventures-with-smart-pills-and-brain-hacks/9596944

Also,(as you likely have seen), there are a lot of references on this Wikipedia page:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nootropic

Michael V said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nootropic

Tah, this was my kick off point.

Lary said:

Michael V said:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nootropic

Tah, this was my kick off point.

Micro dosing with LSD sounds interesting
I do wonder if we can expand the human mind with a drug or perhaps cybernetics, long way off I imagine

Essay was submitted this afternoon, a few hours early. A few people I study with chose the same question, but had opposing stance, which was interesting.

Well it is getting on towards close of business at Government House so I think we can now safely say the election will be on May 18.

dv said:

Well it is getting on towards close of business at Government House so I think we can now safely say the election will be on May 18.

This was the conclusion of my essay.

dv said:

Well it is getting on towards close of business at Government House so I think we can now safely say the election will be on May 18.

Wrong thread