The Daily WTF: Curious Perversions in Information Technology

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

The featuritis of certain unix file systems offers another layer of protection:

 $ chflags uchg evilscript

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

snoofle:
I folks, I'm the submitter of this one...
As I said in the post, it was only intended to be a teach-myself-how-to-do-something-non-trivial-in-CF system, intended to be thrown away.

There was no actual production db; just the one in the development db server. As for keeping the script around, it was in a doc's folder, which had a _README.txt file at the top of the directory listing clearly spelling out what each file/directory in the system did. There were 3 paragraphs dedicated to this script.

The guy who took over for me had 8 years of "professional" experience and seemed rather intelligent, at least conversationally.

Addendum: after he trashed this system, my boss transferred him to another department, where he went on to trash a real prod db, with lots of transaction data in it. For that one, he was fired.

You fool! Why on earth didn't you use a frame? Don't you realise that secure multi-mediation is the future of all webbing?

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

mario:
everyone would run this script. It's like a don't touch label at a museum. Before you never thought of touching it

No I'd OPEN the script file, READ the script file and promptly have no need to run it. See unlike the moron noob I know that there are sometimes better ways to understand a program you have source to than running it (especially when it tells you to not run it).

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

"DO NOT RUN THIS SCRIPT EVER"

Then why the hell is it in included in the file at all?

That's the real WTF...

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

snoofle:
The guy who took over for me had 8 years of "professional" experience and seemed rather intelligent, at least conversationally.
Addendum: after he trashed this system, my boss transferred him to another department, where he went on to trash a real prod db, with lots of transaction data in it. For that one, he was fired.

Like someone else said the guy was probably intelligent but simply insane (possibly in a clinical sense even).

Maybe interviews should include a nice red button in the room with the word's don't press on it. the interviewer would of course leave at one point and the button would not do anything except invisibly record presses.

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

It's been years, but I laughed.

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

rbonvall:
whicker:
(Car analogies always apply to software)
Syntax error.
(car '(analogies always apply to software))

D'oh. Quote it. It's been years, but I laughed.

Code Dependent · 2008-01-25 Reply Admin

anon:
Maybe interviews should include a nice red button in the room with the word's don't press on it. the interviewer would of course leave at one point and the button would not do anything except invisibly record presses.

I read an interesting story of a similar interview, involving a company taking bids for a service. The interviewer excused himself and left in the middle of the interview. The interviewee noticed that on his desk was a bid from a rival company. Unfortunately, the interviewer had set down his coffee cup exactly where the offer was.

Our hero studied the document for a few moments, and realizing the opportunity that was available to him, he finally reached over and lifted the coffee cup.

At which point, of course, the coffee spilled out through the hole in the cup, all over the rival bid and the interviewer's desk.

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

Ubersoldat:
whicker:
(Car analogies always apply to software)

Totally agree with you. Explaining OOP? Use a car. Explaining Efficience? Use a car. Ad infinitum!

What? ullamcorper... damn this captchas are getting WAY too long

One character longer than efficience/efficiency? That's a bit of a severe limitation, there. You'd prefer Alex to revert to the script of his forebears, as in http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Disowned-by-Driver.aspx?

Much simpler:

JohnFx:
Πολύ καλός.
In English: Poli Kala!

I don't think that's really English, let alone accurate, but then my Modern Greek isn't what it didn't used to be. We're down to ten characters, and only two of them accented... Feeling better yet? Don't worry, you can always use the Symbol font to enter captchas, although the last time I looked at a Greek typography site, they were fairly scathing.

(Just thought that quoting from other threads might start a trend. If it stops this interminable argument about whether "ize" or "ise" is correct, then it's worth a go. And, in the context of Greek, I still despise the faux-elitist analyze.)

Oddly enough, I overheard a (presumably) Public School mathematician colleague today, talking about how he'd found Greek difficult to learn in school because of the "accent" representing an 'h.' Being (minor) Public School, he didn't respond to my comment that it's a rough breathing, not an accent. (Even odder, in its own way, is the mandatory smooth breathing for the absence of an 'h' where the word starts with a vowel. Mandatory, that is, unless the text is capitalised, which is the case with practically any extant Ancient Greek not written on parchment. This stuff is usually white-space free, too, which makes Perl regexps a bit of a pain. And then people complain about English. I suspect that a rough/smooth breathing is more of a diacritical than an accent, but I can't be bothered to walk downstairs and look it up in Vox Graeca.) Being me, I didn't point out that he was an ignorant and ungracious twerp.

Where was I?

Oh yes.

If you can ad infinitum -- maybe also subtrac, multipl and divid -- you can learn to live with eleven characters in mildly obscure Latin that are designed to convert web-bots to Catholicism, or die.

(Curiously, mine would have been "bene." (Only four letters!) Go Greek, Alex. Make the buggers sign in.

real_aardvark · 2008-01-25 Reply Admin

akatherder:
real_aardvark:
I'm trying to get my head around the exact pathology of the guy.
He understands how to change permissions on a file. He understands (sort of) ksh scripts (or at least how to delete "exit 1").

He doesn't understand plain English in block capitals. He doesn't understand sql (fair enough, but c'mon ... "drop table?").

Most of his synapses appear to be fried. Exactly what would he have been looking for, after running the script, to "see how it worked?"

The only logical answer is that he understood "Re-create the database" as re-creating the database and all the data rather than a blank db.

I think that was part of my point. If running the script recreates the database in its entirety, how can he possibly know that he's made a difference? (And, just as much to the point, why would he get excited about the possibility?)

And if you're going to babble about fstat-related differences, well then, I'm going to wander into a corner and sulk.

Seriously. I expect boo-boos, and potentially even catastrophes, from an intern or a new hire. I've been there. You've probably been there. That's how we learn.

What I don't expect is unintelligible gibberish, accompanied by the excuse that "I just wanted to see how it works."

In today's world, this may no longer be Grounds For Dismissal. It is, however, Grounds For Being Put In Charge Of Counting Paperclips (Assistant). By the gonads. Using a three-phase circuit.

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

do runscript until me.isFired

origin_dev · 2008-01-25 Reply Admin

I feel for you, I really do. In my team, we have a simple rule; "If you don't know what it does, or what you're doing, don't touch it."

The real WTF, is that the pointy haired boss rushed to put a little RND project into production, oh, and did someone really give the newbie the su password?

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

I wonder what the script name was...if it was something along the lines of "drop_and_create_db.ksh" then the WTF is clearly not with the author

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

Haha, the broker I work for uses a sluggish Excel 'application' for client portfolios too.

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

what a dumbass,if it says in caps "do not run this script ever" i think that's a hint.

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

joe:
He NEVER read terry pratchett? If you label a door "Do not enter here, ever, seriosuly, you WILL die", the first thing a wizard will do is to enter the door, just to see what is on the other side.

Reminds me of a warning sign in a lab, near the output aperture of a laser:

DO NOT STARE INTO LASER BEAM WITH REMAINING GOOD EYE.

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

raz:
Well, I have to support the view that writing that the script "RE-CREATES" the database is at fault here.
The script doesn't. It just RE-CREATES the empty structure, NOT the data.

Of course this is normal procedure for people experienced with databases, but I would NEVER EVER write this to any non-professional out there. They would ALL assume that RE-CREATE will both include STRUCTURE as well as DATA.

Why didn't you dump the data in a file in the script BEFORE dropping anyway?

For me that's standard procedure in such a script.

If the dump failed for any reason, what do you think the n00b will do next?

phaedrus · 2008-01-25 Reply Admin

anon:
mario:
everyone would run this script. It's like a don't touch label at a museum. Before you never thought of touching it

No I'd OPEN the script file, READ the script file and promptly have no need to run it. See unlike the moron noob I know that there are sometimes better ways to understand a program you have source to than running it (especially when it tells you to not run it).

Well, Mr. Anon, you are much like me. However, I have some direct, real-world experience with this phenomenon as well. A few years ago, when I was in college (back before two girls one cup), I was in the student lounge slumming it on slashdot. The thread I was reading derailed to talking about trolling people with awful shock-porn.

Well, one guy mentioned goatse guy, tubgirl and lemonparty in this context. The direct reply was (paraphrasing) "Dear God! Those are horrible!" The next reply was, "You moron, it was obvious from context that those are things one should not google."

I was laughing at this point, and relayed the posts to my fellow students. They all thought it was funny, but one guy jumped up and ran to the computer next to me and said, "Lemonparty? What's that?"

I couldn't convince him that he should resist googling. I hid my eyes, and moments later, the guy next to me screamed in horror.

I do not know. I never will know. There are things one does not google.

Likewise, some people will never resist the Big Red Button. There are programs one runs, and programs one reads. The competent user will have techniques for telling the difference before running the program.

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

Shiny candy like button.

real_aardvark · 2008-01-25 Reply Admin

critosopher:
What kind of genius makes highly destructive scripts which should never be run, and worse yet, can be modified and run by the ignorant? Layoff "farewell" code, perhaps? Might as well make that rm -fr script next.

That sort of person would be snoofle, who can apparently spell his moniker correctly. Double minus ungood for critosopher, unless that's some bizarre reference to Plato's memoirs of Socrates.

Worse yet, a script can be modified? Well, in strict functional programming terms, yes, that's bad. No Side Effects.

I may be missing something; but the whole point of a script is that it can be run by "the ignorant." Otherwise, you wouldn't bother to script it. In this case, I believe there is a clear difference between "the ignorant" and the "plain fucking cretinous."

I'm not necessarily defending the script, per se. As with (the occasionally thoughtful) other commentators, I would have made it two scripts -- one to drop tables (with HUGE warning signs, etc), and one to create tables (ditto, but modified).

Really, it's not that difficult to see the essential core of the WTF.

Usually, it's "WTF was this berk thinking?"

In this case, it's "WTF was this berk expecting to see?"

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

rbonvall:
Syntax error.
(car '(analogies always apply to software))

I hate you so much !

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

I am wondering why this script was not deleted when the system went live?

real_aardvark · 2008-01-25 Reply Admin

raz:
Well, I have to support the view that writing that the script "RE-CREATES" the database is at fault here.
The script doesn't. It just RE-CREATES the empty structure, NOT the data.

Of course this is normal procedure for people experienced with databases, but I would NEVER EVER write this to any non-professional out there. They would ALL assume that RE-CREATE will both include STRUCTURE as well as DATA.

Why didn't you dump the data in a file in the script BEFORE dropping anyway?

For me that's standard procedure in such a script.

This is why I despise DBAs.

(No, really, I do. I fly off the handle at people I would almost certainly like, although I doubt it's commutative.)

I just love that "STRUCTURE as well as DATA."

First of all, the way you're missing the point is far beyond irony. The new hire is obviously a dangerous cretin. Period. That's the (c)WTF(c).

Secondly, the entire point of the script is to "RE-CREATE the empty structure, NOT the data." What, you guys think that a database magics itself out of nothing?

Thirdly, most normal people would assume that DATA is more important than STRUCTURE. Obviously, those of us who are not brain-dead DBAs would regard both as fairly important, but I suppose that DBA newbies might think otherwise.

Fourthly, snoofle managed to wind back to a previous commit. That would be kind of like dumping the data in the toilet^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^H^Ha file, only maybe better.

Fifthly, Professional? How, exactly, would you define yourself as a professional, as opposed to us non-professional guys out here? Got a BrainBench certificate, or something?

And your point would be?

Code Dependent · 2008-01-25 Reply Admin

Anonymous P.M.Doubleday:
And, in the context of Greek, I still despise the faux-elitist analyze.)

Well, don't get all anal-ized about it.

real_aardvark · 2008-01-25 Reply Admin

anon:
Like someone else said the guy was probably intelligent but simply insane (possibly in a clinical sense even).
Maybe interviews should include a nice red button in the room with the word's don't press on it. the interviewer would of course leave at one point and the button would not do anything except invisibly record presses.

That is actually a very good point.

Stuff this Web 2.0 nonsense -- I'm going to make my millions out of Big Red Buttons...

Code Dependent · 2008-01-25 Reply Admin

real_aardvark:
In today's world, this may no longer be Grounds For Dismissal. It is, however, Grounds For Being Put In Charge Of Counting Paperclips (Assistant). By the gonads. Using a three-phase circuit.

Oh, my gonads. I mean, goodness.

2008-01-25 Reply Admin

Adam and Eve: do not eat the apples! Pandora: do not open the box! Newbie: Do not run this script, ever!

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

Anonymous P.M.Doubleday:
Ubersoldat:
whicker:
(Car analogies always apply to software)

Totally agree with you. Explaining OOP? Use a car. Explaining Efficience? Use a car. Ad infinitum!

What? ullamcorper... damn this captchas are getting WAY too long
One character longer than efficience/efficiency? That's a bit of a severe limitation, there. You'd prefer Alex to revert to the script of his forebears, as in http://thedailywtf.com/Articles/Disowned-by-Driver.aspx?

Much simpler:

JohnFx:
Πολύ καλός.
In English: Poli Kala!

I don't think that's really English, let alone accurate, but then my Modern Greek isn't what it didn't used to be. We're down to ten characters, and only two of them accented... Feeling better yet? Don't worry, you can always use the Symbol font to enter captchas, although the last time I looked at a Greek typography site, they were fairly scathing.

(Just thought that quoting from other threads might start a trend. If it stops this interminable argument about whether "ize" or "ise" is correct, then it's worth a go. And, in the context of Greek, I still despise the faux-elitist analyze.)

Oddly enough, I overheard a (presumably) Public School mathematician colleague today, talking about how he'd found Greek difficult to learn in school because of the "accent" representing an 'h.' Being (minor) Public School, he didn't respond to my comment that it's a rough breathing, not an accent. (Even odder, in its own way, is the mandatory smooth breathing for the absence of an 'h' where the word starts with a vowel. Mandatory, that is, unless the text is capitalised, which is the case with practically any extant Ancient Greek not written on parchment. This stuff is usually white-space free, too, which makes Perl regexps a bit of a pain. And then people complain about English. I suspect that a rough/smooth breathing is more of a diacritical than an accent, but I can't be bothered to walk downstairs and look it up in Vox Graeca.) Being me, I didn't point out that he was an ignorant and ungracious twerp.

Where was I?

Oh yes.

If you can ad infinitum -- maybe also subtrac, multipl and divid -- you can learn to live with eleven characters in mildly obscure Latin that are designed to convert web-bots to Catholicism, or die.

(Curiously, mine would have been "bene." (Only four letters!) Go Greek, Alex. Make the buggers sign in.

What the hell is this post about? Also, the noob should get a vasectomy, some people just deserve to be dropped off a cliff and Lemonparty is three old people having sex. Yay multi-answering.

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

The OP is dumb:
This is why sane people never have DROP DATABASE in a create script and cleanly exit without doing anything if the database exists.

Are you one of those guys that only drop databases when they don't exist?

DaveK · 2008-01-26 Reply Admin

This is entirely the author's fault, for poor documentation.

echo "DO NOT EVER RUN THIS SCRIPT - IT DESTROYS, THEN RE-CREATES THE DATABASE"

You quite clearly told the user it would re-create the database after destroying it. You never said that what it would re-create would be completely different from what it was that got destroyed.

echo "DO NOT EVER RUN THIS SCRIPT - IT DESTROYS THE DATABASE"

You should have written that. Or "erases", or "blanks out". But never "Do not run this script, it does ${SOMETHING COMPLICATED} then un-does it."

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

joe:
He NEVER read terry pratchett? If you label a door "Do not enter here, ever, seriosuly, you WILL die", the first thing a wizard will do is to enter the door, just to see what is on the other side.

Read Raymond Fest. Those Wizards don't deserve living. They were supposed to open the door by magic means. Even the BOFH does that when recruiting!

DaveK · 2008-01-26 Reply Admin

Barf 4 eva:
snoofle:
Addendum: after he trashed this system, my boss transferred him to another department, where he went on to trash a *real* prod db, with lots of transaction data in it. For that one, he was fired.

But still...... you mean to tell me after everyone had the luxury of knowing how much of a renegade jackass this guy was, he was STILL given full permission to a production server in the other dept?!?? :P

I believe it's called "Promoted". He was obviously on the fast-track to management.

DaveK · 2008-01-26 Reply Admin

real_aardvark:
akatherder:
real_aardvark:
I'm trying to get my head around the exact pathology of the guy.
He understands how to change permissions on a file. He understands (sort of) ksh scripts (or at least how to delete "exit 1").

He doesn't understand plain English in block capitals.

Hold your horses there. "Destroy X" and "Re-create X" are the plain English phrases in block capitals, and the plain English understanding of those phrases in context would be that the two X's are the same X. It goes beyond plain English and into the realm of specialist technical knowledge to understand the distinction between the structure and the content of a database. And to realise that "Destroy" applies to both, but "Recreate" only applies to one.

That is to say, it requires more than just the ability to understand plain English to realise that the meaning of the sentence in the technical sense is in fact radically different to the meaning of the sentence in plain English. You can criticise n00b for not understanding databases, but not for not understanding plain English.

real_aardvark:
akatherder:
real_aardvark:
He doesn't understand sql (fair enough, but c'mon ... "drop table?").
Most of his synapses appear to be fried. Exactly what would he have been looking for, after running the script, to "see how it worked?"

The only logical answer is that he understood "Re-create the database" as re-creating the database and all the data rather than a blank db.
I think that was part of my point. If running the script recreates the database in its entirety, how can he possibly know that he's made a difference? (And, just as much to the point, why would he get excited about the possibility?)

It means that his attempt to repair the database by re-running the script over and over was, in fact, a thoroughly sane rational decision, wrong only because based on a misinformed understanding of the technical terminology in use.

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

You can criticise n00b for not understanding databases, but not for not understanding plain English.

Of course I can, since the first part of the sentence clearly states "DO NOT RUN THIS SCRIPT". You don't need any technical knowledge to understand this command but you, as many other people commenting articles here, want to look like a fucking smartass with your genius analysis of non-existing problem.

It means that his attempt to repair the database by re-running the script over and over was, in fact, a thoroughly sane rational decision, wrong only because based on a misinformed understanding of the technical terminology in use.

No, he was a tremendous cretin, just like you (although both of you sound intelligent) who like you thought that repeating the same action over and over is going to result in something different.

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

Bluemoon:
For the same reason you should never write "Wet Paint" on a sign of your newly painted outdoor bench, every one will touch it.
The trick: write "Wheth Paint" en everyone comments that the spelling is wrong and that the paint isn't white to start with, but no one touches your paint. :)

Bleumoon

That is very clever, I like it.

How would you apply it to the ksh script?

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

Drunken Monkey:
Single user locking Excel? That's easy to fix .. don't need anything as fancy as ColdFusion or nothing .. ;)
"Tools -> Share workbook" .. there fixed ! :p

Yeah, until two people overlap modifications.

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

webrunner:
He should have added a mail(); call that mailed him and [email protected] with the name of the person who ran the script saying "This guy just destroyed everything after we asked him not to"

Also very clever. Note taken.

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

I am convinced that the newbie would have dropped all the tables even if the script never existed.

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

snoofle:
I folks, I'm the submitter of this one...
As I said in the post, it was only intended to be a teach-myself-how-to-do-something-non-trivial-in-CF system, intended to be thrown away.

There was no actual production db; just the one in the development db server. As for keeping the script around, it was in a doc's folder, which had a _README.txt file at the top of the directory listing clearly spelling out what each file/directory in the system did. There were 3 paragraphs dedicated to this script.

The guy who took over for me had 8 years of "professional" experience and seemed rather intelligent, at least conversationally.

Addendum: after he trashed this system, my boss transferred him to another department, where he went on to trash a real prod db, with lots of transaction data in it. For that one, he was fired.

See! I was right - that is all the newbie does - drop tables.

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

"Don't touch that! It's the History Eraser Button!"

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

I hate this darn computer, I wish that they would sell it. It never does exactly what I want, only what I tell it.

PEBKAC error: Problem Exists Between Keyboard And Chair

real_aardvark · 2008-01-26 Reply Admin

DaveK:
Hold your horses there. "Destroy X" and "Re-create X" are the plain English phrases in block capitals, and the plain English understanding of those phrases in context would be that the two X's are the same X. It goes beyond plain English and into the realm of specialist technical knowledge to understand the distinction between the structure and the content of a database. And to realise that "Destroy" applies to both, but "Recreate" only applies to one.
That is to say, it requires more than just the ability to understand plain English to realise that the meaning of the sentence in the technical sense is in fact radically different to the meaning of the sentence in plain English. You can criticise n00b for not understanding databases, but not for not understanding plain English.
<snip/>
It means that his attempt to repair the database by re-running the script over and over was, in fact, a thoroughly sane rational decision, wrong only because based on a misinformed understanding of the technical terminology in use.

One would hope that even a college intern would be able to discern the difference between "plain English" and "domain specific." Particularly if it's in block capitals. Perhaps snoofle should have used XML instead. (Typically, plain English is to be found in what we academic types call a "context.")

I assert that there is no point in executing this script if you truly believe that it "destroys" the database and then "recreates" the database in its entirety. Why do a deep copy onto yourself? I suspect that the whiny "I just wanted to see what it did" rather reinforces this point. Not, you will note, "I just wanted to completely obliterate the database, with no trace left whatsoever, unless somebody who is marginally saner than I has backed it up and can restore it before anybody else notices, and then recreate the same database in such a way that nobody, including me, can tell the difference. Why? Because I just wanted to see what it did."

Plain English is plain English. As ye reap, so shall ye sow.

Repair the database? Who said anything about that? And how would that work, anyway?

One of my favourite quotes in Computer Science is Jamie ... no, make that Edjgar ... no, make that The Unix-Haters Handbook. Mostly because it's hysterically (and intentionally) funny. But partly because of its wisdom in cases like this. It has a comment on the futility of repeatedly running "wc" which appears to apply here.

Re-running the script over and over (once again, a flight of fancy not mentioned in the post) in an attempt to "repair" the database sounds awfully similar to spending your day running wc over and over again, just to make sure that the file system isn't subject to bit-rot.

Basically, this is what a lobotomised parakeet would do.

If you truly believe that this is "a thoroughly sane rational decision," I suggest that you contact snoofle so that you can hire this guy.

Low fee, much love, and a bridge over the East River for free...

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

Ok, this is just so funny. For some time ago me and a couple of friends wrote a terminal application to interface with some lasers for a game. We made a fancy menu and thought if the idea to add an option: "Self destruct". We thought that with a menu-choice so clear about what it would do, no one would use it and no one would ask what it did ... But then again, the only thing they asked us about was: "What does the selfdestruct button do?" No one, I mean no one, asked about what "Start game" did, or "Exit application" ...

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

DaveK:
This is entirely the author's fault, for poor documentation.
echo "DO NOT EVER RUN THIS SCRIPT - IT DESTROYS, THEN RE-CREATES THE DATABASE"

You quite clearly told the user it would re-create the database after destroying it. You never said that what it would re-create would be completely different from what it was that got destroyed.

echo "DO NOT EVER RUN THIS SCRIPT - IT DESTROYS THE DATABASE"

You should have written that. Or "erases", or "blanks out". But never "Do not run this script, it does ${SOMETHING COMPLICATED} then un-does it."

"DO NOT EVER RUN THIS SCRIPT - IT DESTROYES THE DATABASE AND CREATES A NEW EMPTY ONE" there you go.

2008-01-26 Reply Admin

Actually, you could even just say it deletes everything from the database. Not quite accurate but the end result is the same.

2008-01-27 Reply Admin

Reverse psychology in a large organization? Are you nuts? That's the dumbest idea I've ever heard.

This story almost seems too ridiculous to be true.

2008-01-27 Reply Admin

phaedrus:
Well, one guy mentioned goatse guy, tubgirl and lemonparty in this context. The direct reply was (paraphrasing) "Dear God! Those are horrible!" The next reply was, "You moron, it was obvious from context that those are things one should not google."

And of course hamsterpunt. Wasn't around a few years ago, but it's one more thing that ... no, just don't look.

2008-01-27 Reply Admin

For some reason, people don't seem to realise that Excel (and probably other spreadsheets) can be set to allow concurrent modification.

DaveK · 2008-01-27 Reply Admin

Anonymous:
fucking smartass [ ... ] genius analysis [ ... ] tremendous cretin, just like you

Wow, who pissed in your wheaties? I wasn't even talking to you.

Anonymous:
(although both of you sound intelligent)

You should try it some time, instead of just sounding angry and embittered.

Anonymous:
who like you thought that repeating the same action over and over is going to result in something different.

Nah, I don't think like that. If I did, I'd still be trying to talk to you like you were a reasonable human being. <flush>

2008-01-27 Reply Admin

Wow, who pissed in your wheaties?

Noone, I'm like that everyday, especially when someone like you pisses me off.

You should try it some time, instead of just sounding angry and embittered.

Yes, because the most important part is to sound intelligent, right?

Nah, I don't think like that. If I did, I'd still be trying to talk to you like you were a reasonable human being. <flush>

Not sure if you noticed, Sherlock, but you're doing exactly that. Oh, and one more thing - you can put the condescending tone up your ass, it doesn't work, and your irony is weak. (but what am I supposed to expect from a person who said that running a script destroying an important database is "rational" and supported it with some Alice-in-Wonderland logic?)

Do not run this script, ever!

Leave a comment on “Do not run this script, ever!”