Courses that travels..

[hunter_alchemst]

let's not play fill in the blanks here, I can do that too - courses that (let you) travel/ courses that (require) travel. if people could just insert any freaking phrase they want, then almost everything would be correct.

still, 'courses that travel', that's really a fine usage, I've certainly heard it before. if you expand your english usage, you'll find that such phrasing is good, and is immediately understood.

like I said, no need to be douches about grammar.

ont. dunno if working for an airline company entails as much travel perks as flight attendants, but that could be an option.

So, just because I offered a suggestion, that's already considered being a douche? Wow.
And, I don't just rely on the common usage of the English language, I try to follow the technicalities of it as much as I can.

Anyway, napa-reply lang ako dahil sa "douche" and the "expand my English usage" remarks. I was like, "What? That's a lot of assumptions there."

There's no need to be a jerk here.

[Kray0n]

So, just because I offered a suggestion, that's already considered being a douche? Wow...

Not at all. I said 'douches', I clearly wasn't talking about you at all. Or anyone for that matter.

[Kray0n]

...And, I don't just rely on the common usage of the English language, I try to follow the technicalities of it as much as I can...

that's fine, not everyone has to. I read a bunch of literature myself, so it would be hard for me to rely on technicalities.

[hunter_alchemst]

Not at all. I said 'douches', I clearly wasn't talking about you at all. Or anyone for that matter.

Preach. When you're clearly being one in this thread.

[Kray0n]

...Anyway, napa-reply lang ako dahil sa "douche" and the "expand my English usage" remarks. I was like, "What? That's a lot of assumptions there."...

again, it's not expanding your personal english usage per se. stop relying on technicalities.

i was making a general point there (in both cases really). if you expand your english usage, you'll find that such phrasing is good, and is immediately understood. translation: if people (i.e. you as a pronoun for people) expand...

notice I began by using "let's", so imagine I am addressing a broader point, and talking to a more general audience. it should be easy to imagine, because pex is a public forum anyway.

me attacking you personally? that's your assumption.

[jielun]

OffTopic but nevertheless necessary: Man, I just got pwned! Natatawa tuloy ako sa mga reactions re my comment. Masyado tayong seryoso sa mga bagay guys, is there anyone (anybody? somebody? ) else I can poke aside from the dog next to me? But I understand, we all have different ways of interpreting jokes, so I respect yours. And once again, I call for love and ... love, what else?

On Topic: Courses related to social work/services.

[Kray0n]

Preach. When you're clearly being one in this thread.

oh definitely, like I said,

so, am I wrong or not? it's really only about that. you know how I find those trying to mistakenly correct others, right?

correcting those trying to correct others is fine with me, since I would assume that those people are fine with being corrected as well.

if you had read all my replies up to this point, maybe this would be easier to understand.

[gs09]

gramming police, you can interpret that any number of ways (self-effacing/condescending/sarcastic/just a catchphrase/etc.). there were no emoticons. and I have no clue who the pexer is, and his/her style.

do you really think people are gonna go into the minutiae of how the post is intended to be read?

and with 2nd language users like us, no less?

yeah, sarcasm on the internetz. when does that ever work?

Emoticons can be found in curiouser's post.

Anyway, we're dwelling too much on this issue. I know who these pexers are and I know their style. That's why I'm telling you that they were being sarcastic.

jielun kasi eh.

[Kray0n]

OffTopic but nevertheless necessary: Man, I just got pwned! Natatawa tuloy ako sa mga reactions re my comment. Masyado tayong seryoso sa mga bagay guys, is there anyone (anybody? somebody? ) else I can poke aside from the dog next to me? But I understand, we all have different ways of interpreting jokes, so I respect yours. And once again, I call for love and ... love, what else?

On Topic: Courses related to social work/services.

social work, well, that's not really the travel you'd want.

and no problem, I had assumed it was a small thing, but at the reactions, I'm being accused of being a jerk even.

[Kray0n]

Emoticons can be found in curiouser's post....

but I reacted fine there, sarcasm or not. I just laughed it off, right?
the original post was another thing, didn't think that was sarcasm at all. but hey, small thing.

[gs09]

No worries.

[Kray0n]

No worries.

yup yup.

[jielun]

social work, well, that's not really the travel you'd want.

and no problem, I had assumed it was a small thing, but at the reactions, I'm being accused of being a jerk even.

Dont worry too krayon. I used to eat you back in grade school, and lead has accumulated in my brain, kaya ayun.

I guess kung "itatapon" ka dun sa isang abandoned/depressed hinterland baka naman on your way, or after doing your supposedly good deed, you can drop by at a nearby resort or local tourism spot, do some snorkeling, kayakking or whatever. I have a feeling this actually happens.

[hunter_alchemst]

again, it's not expanding your personal english usage per se. stop relying on technicalities.

i was making a general point there (in both cases really). if you expand your english usage, you'll find that such phrasing is good, and is immediately understood. translation: if people (i.e. you as a pronoun for people) expand...

notice I began by using "let's", so imagine I am addressing a broader point, and talking to a more general audience. it should be easy to imagine, because pex is a public forum anyway.

me attacking you personally? that's your assumption.

Quoting my post somehow invalidates this explanation. The same way that you felt that the "jerk" comment was directed at you.

Lesson: Technicalities do matter. There's a reason why these exist.

Moving on, we're good man.

[jielun]

All is well that ends well. Pramis, hindi ko na po uulitin to.

OT: @Karyon, ika ba yang nasa avatar mo? Rawr!

[TTJ]

LOL. nakadapa,ready na i-doggie.

* kahit di mag-aral,pwede magbyahe ng magbyahe kung ang work/negosyo mo: truck driver,fruit and vegetable dealer,paramedic,etc

[TTJ]

kelangan pala ng training ng paramedic at truck driver

[dashingdevonair]

Any course, be it medicine, engineering, IT or even accounting, will provide you with travel opportunities if you're good enough. One of our family doctors go abroad almost once a month to attend conferences, all free of charge.

If you insist, some careers in which travel is inherent are sales, tourism and marketing. Contrary to what most believe, HRM actually does not involve much traveling unless you become a flight attendant. Some of my friends who took HRM are stationed at particular restaurants or hotels all day.

I suggest that you pick a course that you are actually interested in and a course that pays well. If traveling is your hobby you don't have to tailor your career around it. You can just work in the office, earn money and go abroad once in a while for leisure. I doubt you can enjoy your travels abroad with work in mind anyway.

[KingofDex]

Mass Com ( as future field reporter, hehe)

Take Digital Arts/Fine Arts and concentrate in photography and writing. You may considered in jobs like travel blogger of lifestyle writer etc.

[nikkilove]

To be a traveling therapist you need a license for every state you'd work in, and you need to keep them updated,

so you have to renew all of your license every two years, unless you know for sure, that youre not going back to that state again and let them expire.

on the average you need 40 units of seminars avery two years, 6 units/seminar would cause around $200.

so its going to be costly.

and its not really free, you'd still shoulder your plane tickets etc. they dont pay for those, or they might say, theyll shoulder it, but of course theyre going to get it back in some other ways, not upfront at your knowledge.

and if you have a car, youd pay for its transport, which would cost at least $500 in nearby states and a over a thousand from coast to coast.

so its a costly job. but if you like the travel and not concern if youre spending too much for it. its the job for you. but it definitely comes with a price.