... but I really think this woman ought to have a go.
From the Age this morning:
'A BURMESE dissident has successfully fought a decision refusing her asylum in Australia because the word "oogabooga" was typed into the Refugee Review Tribunal's ruling.
The word appeared next to the heading "Definition of 'Refugee' " in a document outlining tribunal member Wendy Boddison's 2002 findings in the case of Burmese woman Khin Wut Hmon Win.
In overturning the decision in February, a federal magistrate quoted film critics on the King Kong remake and snippets from James Cook's account of his voyages in finding the word appeared to have "overtones of mysticism and racism in its more modern uses". He ruled that its appearance in the document would cause a "fair-minded" observer to conclude the tribunal was biased in its deliberations.
Ms Boddison claimed she inserted the "nonsense" word to test her spell checker as it had been malfunctioning. She had overlooked it when proofing the document.'
Now try this little test. Type the word 'oogabooga' into some document you are working on. Print the document and proofread it. See if you can manage not to see it.
I wonder why it is that when confronted with irrefutable proof of our wrongdoings, so many of us are tempted to make goofs of ourselves with truly bizarre porkies rather than say 'Yes guv, it's a fair cop, you caught me bang to rights.' Is it some dim memory of the knowledge that if we do bad things, Mummy will send us to the naughty room?
And yes, you read it correctly. This woman was (and for all I know, still is) a member of the Refugee Review Tribunal. Do they screen these people, and if so, for what? I wonder who appointed her, and by what criteria, and under whose directions.
Follow the link and have a read if you have time -- it's a longish article but it's very good.