You're right. The rules are not the same with your own cats. One of my cats likes long blinks (aka "eye kisses"), and for an other one it's a call to play and cuddle on the rug.
Also, avoid direct eye contact, and never ever stare into their eyes. This is the equivalent of an oath of blood and despair.
That's something people who don't own a cat don't understand: the less you look at them, the more friendly they think you are (that's why cats love allergic persons)
Firstly, the more students there are, the less time the teacher can devote to them individually. When there's a comprehension problem, it's really in the interaction that things can be sorted out: understanding why the person doesn't understand, explaining from different angles, etc.
And all the time spent with one person leaves the rest of the group on its own, which can very quickly dissipate all the group's attention, with a few whispered personal discussions turning into hubbub.
What's more, the larger the group, the easier and more tempting it is for weak and shy students to hide in the crowd. In a small group, the teacher should regularly check that no one is left behind. With 100 people, this is strictly impossible.
Finally, I don't believe in the argument that the more people you have, the more friends and studying partners you can find. Socially, we get together in small groups (between 2 and 6, roughly speaking) no matter what's going on. I think that beyond this limit, there's a diminishing return (unconsciously): a new person brings less than reinforcing the group's cohesion. If the group gets any bigger, it's going to reshape itself by affinity into smaller, tighter-knit groups.
Rating: I don't believe in rating system. If I say 3/10, can you change 20% of your idea to reach 5/10? What's 20% of an idea ? Would 5/10 be good enough? Can you change 70% of an idea to reach perfection? In this case, why don't we live in a perfect world?
Last year, for the first time, a large majority of my students used chatGPT.
This correlated with their skills at the start of the year: the more they lacked (or were lazy), the more they used it. And at the end of the year, they were the ones who had learned the least.
I'm not playing the old fart who thinks young people are getting dumber and dumber. There are beginning to be studies on this, and my little experience is consistent with their results.
When he was young, he had an atypical beauty but he was fucking hot.
Get a PEP treatment as soon as possible
PEP ≠ PREP
I'd make you fall backwards and I'd eat you
The nature of a relationship is not defined by the gender of the people involved.
If you'd called it cuckolding if it was with a guy, it's cuckolding.
It makes a very positive difference, according to their lawyers.
Even with the explanations given here, it's still very counter-intuitive for me.
I think the best thing would be to cut the person in half, send one half towards the sun and the other half out of the solar system.
Yes, it's so obvious. It doesn't take significantly longer to cook a double portion.
Beyond the legal aspect, AI training on artists' works poses an ethical problem. And when it comes to ethics, I think we can avoid quoting Picasso,
Oh yeah, Picasso. The great artist who was an abusive guy who beat her mistress to paint her crying (The Weeping Woman / Dora Maar).