Summary
Although I want to stay out of controversies and such futile debates, but I couldn't stop myself from writing on the issue. Now that a few reverend candidates have mentioned how genius they are and how mediocre the passed ones are, and how confident they were and how lucky others were. I want to make these points:
1. Since the burning issue nowadays in this thread and other threads is that a large number of confident candidates fail, and then all the bribe, nepotism and cronyism come into play, I would like to give an example here. After MCQ paper of MOD test, when I came out I met a guy that I didn't know. When I asked him about the paper, he said it was tough. Then I asked him about mathematics. He said, "Math to yar 100% tek hua." So I asked him, there was a question, A is twice as old as B is, if, after 3 years the age of B is 9, how old is A? Without giving it a second thought, he said 18. I'm not saying he didn't know the answer, that's common sense but he made the choice in a hurry. That's what usually happens.
2. Regardless of the integrity of the NTS, equal opportunity was provided to all the candidates. If a question was repeated and a candidate already had heard about it, this simply means he had done his homework while others didn't.
3. All of us knew it was NTS which was conducting the test and so many already knew that NTS is a waste of time, then why did they even take the exam?
4. Neither FPSC nor NTS is an ideal recruiting institution. We appear in these tests because we need jobs, or because we need jobs better than our current jobs.
5. No more non-serious debates please. NTS is rubbish FPSC is sluggish, but a hot debate about it here won't change anything. This thread is becoming like a newspaper agony column.
|