• Matt Westwood (unregistered) in reply to backForMore
    backForMore:
    @Deprecated:
    neminem:
    Heh. The third one reminds me, sadly, of when I first tried out getting my new shiny computer to talk to my tv over HDMI. The fact that it took some prodding to get it to send video data was totally Win7's fault. But after getting the video to work, the audio still wasn't working. Spent like half an hour googling, found any number of suggestions as to why I might not have any sound, but none of them worked.

    Eventually I realized my tv was muted. Drr... not my strongest day ever, intelligence-wise.

    I once spent a good three hours with a polycom soundpoint 300, trying to figure out:

    1. Where is the speakerphone button
    2. Why doesn't it send any audio in speakerphone mode.

    Turns out the SP300 doesn't have a speakerphone mic, just "handsfree audio output" mode.

    Bought a nice new shiny laptop with integrated wireless (when this was a new feature). Spent HOURS and hours formatting installing OS etc to try and get this feature to work. Eventually and feeling defeated I took it back to the store to let there techs fix it or give me a refund. I handed my laptop to him he held it up , spun the laptop around looking for something and then he flipped a little switch into the ON position and wireless worked.

    Been there as recently as two years ago - although the only embarrassment I experienced was that I rang the helpdesk (having had the foresight to buy a service contract).

    Being on the "consumer" end of the transaction puts ones own helpdesk horror stories into perspective.

  • Matt Westwood (unregistered) in reply to lolwtf
    lolwtf:
    anon:
    The text message one does remind me of one of my least favorite users at my last job. He was hired to do something that didn't really end up happening, but they kept him on because they planned a new venture with him down the road. Long story short he had no real job or anything to do for several months. During this time, he'd "work from home" quite often. I don't think he even had a computer at home, but basically he'd get his emails on his Blackberry (mostly personal crap and anything sent to firmwide distribution lists). Every time he worked from home, he'd email me around 8:30 or 9 asking "Is the email server working?" I'd reply "Yes Bill, and if it wasn't I wouldn't have gotten this so there's not much point in sending this email." The first time it happened, he actually replied to my response and said "But I haven't gotten any emails, I think something is wrong".....
    Well if he emails to ask if the email system is working, and doesn't get a reply, that pretty well answers his question...

    I would have been too tempted to not reply deliberately, and see whether he reacts by sending ever more frantic emails ... then finally a phone call. "Oh yeah, sorry, I've got your emails, but I've been busy - I've been doing work ..."

  • (cs) in reply to lolwtf
    lolwtf:
    anon:
    The text message one does remind me of one of my least favorite users at my last job. He was hired to do something that didn't really end up happening, but they kept him on because they planned a new venture with him down the road. Long story short he had no real job or anything to do for several months. During this time, he'd "work from home" quite often. I don't think he even had a computer at home, but basically he'd get his emails on his Blackberry (mostly personal crap and anything sent to firmwide distribution lists). Every time he worked from home, he'd email me around 8:30 or 9 asking "Is the email server working?" I'd reply "Yes Bill, and if it wasn't I wouldn't have gotten this so there's not much point in sending this email." The first time it happened, he actually replied to my response and said "But I haven't gotten any emails, I think something is wrong".....
    Well if he emails to ask if the email system is working, and doesn't get a reply, that pretty well answers his question...
    Do you really think so ?

    If he doesn't get a reply, why would he be sure that it is email server's fault... ?

    Think again, and ... well , afterwards, go away nonetheless.

  • Alargule (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.
    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    Your not too bright, are you?

    Why would he have to be 'too bright'? As long as he's bright enough, I don't see the problem.

    :-P

  • Grumpy (unregistered) in reply to nonpartisan
    nonpartisan:
    frits:
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.
    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    Your not too bright, are you?

    Self defense -- strangle the guy or burn up in the forthcoming fire. It works.

    Strangling a lawyer is always self defense. And for the greater good of humanity to boot.

  • Kyokan (unregistered) in reply to frits

    Talk about the most ironic comment ever.

  • Anonymous Hero (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.
    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    Your not too bright, are you?

    You're not too bright, are you?

  • Anonymous (unregistered) in reply to Anonymous Hero
    Anonymous Hero:
    frits:
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.
    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    Your not too bright, are you?

    You're not too bright, are you?
    He's bright enough to troll two dozen supposedly intelligent people, yourself included.

  • (cs) in reply to frits

    EDIT: Troll'd

  • My Name (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits (unregistered):
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.
    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    Your not too bright, are you?

    To this post are referring:

    Grammar Nazi (unregistered):
    Pot, allow me to introduce you to my good friend, Kettle. I believe you two will discover that you are both of the same ebony hue.
    rojo (unregistered):
    You're not too bright
    Jo (unregistered):
    Neither are you. Your indicates ownership. You meant you're (you are)... Take that mister smarty fancy pants
    Kettle Black (unregistered):
    Homophones are tricky.
    Matt (unregistered):
    "You're not too bright, are you?" I fixed it for you.
    Duh! (unregistered):
    I think that you meant to say "You're not too bright" ;)
    zac (unregistered):
    [You're] not either...

    One should think that was sufficient ...

    Anonymous (unregistered):
    Well done to fake frits for proving beyond any doubt that the old trolls are still the most effective. Would anyone else like to comment on his obviously deliberate grammar error or are we all done now?
    But, obviously, Dante's line, "All hope abandon, ye who enter in." is still in effect.
    Jerry (unregistered):
    "You're"

    It's really not very bright to call someone's brightness into question while demonstrating your own lack of brightness.

    Begin of Page 2

    You're punctuation. (unregistered):
    No YOUR not too bright.
    You're punctuation. (unregistered):
    No YOUR not too bright.

    Now the natives of TDWTF begin to enjoy ...

    boog:
    frits:
    The fact that it's a featured comment means we've only just begun.
    Indeed. When you feed trolls they multiply, and rewarding this sort of behavior with "featured" status is like giving a troll access to a buffet.
    frits:
    Popcorn?
    Sure, thanks!

    Junior Mints?

    Sadly, though, even some natives fall for it ...

    immibis:
    You're not too bright either, are you?
    greg (unregistered):
    >You're

    FTFY

    Guido (unregistered):
    * you're not too bright
    Dr. Orangejuice (unregistered):
    Humor and grammar.

    You just failed at both.

    Kirsty (unregistered):
    * You're haha
    Grammar Analyst (unregistered):
    It's "you're", not "your".
    SpaceMonkey (unregistered):
    Re: "Your not too bright" (sic).

    Might be a good idea to learn basic English grammar before you start accusing other people of not being bright, mate.

    Rob (unregistered):
    You're not too bright either :p
    djhayman (unregistered):
    Telling people that they aren't too bright sounds better when you use the correct "you're".
    Grammar Guru (unregistered):
    "You're"?

    Begin of Page 3

    Kyokan (unregistered):
    Talk about the most ironic comment ever.
    Anonymous Hero (unregistered):
    You're not too bright, are you?

    Let's see how many he will manage to catch in addition ...

    Anonymous (unregistered):
    Anonymous Hero (unregistered):
    You're not too bright, are you?
    He's bright enough to troll two dozen supposedly intelligent people, yourself included.
    It's 22 until now, which means that 20% of the comments of this article are an explicit reply to a troll. Only about 4.5% of these replies are written by registered people. What does this tell us? Either there are very few registered people, or only the registered people tend to read before posting. Or a mixture of both, which is my guess.

    In any case: May I call that a successfull troll, regardless of being intentional or not?

    Disclaimer: All numbers are true as of 2010-12-17 06:30. It took some time to make the post look shiny.

  • My Name (unregistered) in reply to EJ_
    EJ_:
    * 88 8*****88a ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***
   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******888v **** 8** 88 8*****888
 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8* 
 * *******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 
88888******88e ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******8888 **
** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*r 88888******888 **
*   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8** 88 y*****
888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* **
* 8*  * *******8888 g*** 8** 88 8*****888 ****a* 8***8 
8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******888
8 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888
 ***   ******* rb* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8** 88 
8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******
* 8* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888 **l*8
* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  *
 *******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 
88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******8888
 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******8
88 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******88e8 **** 8** 8
8 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   **
***** 8* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888
 ****8* 8***8 8*8 8d888******888 ***   ******* 8* **
* 8*  * *******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8**
*8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * 
*******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 
88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******88
88 **** 8** 88 8x****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888m***
**888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8
** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******a888 **** 8** 88 8*****
888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8
* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8
* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *****
**88s8 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******88
88 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88828****
**888 ***   ******* 8* *** u*  * *******8888 **** 8
** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 **
   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8*

    I can't see what it is supposed to mean. I tried to convert it from binary assuming stars to be zeros and eights to be ones, leaving invalid characters in place. It still doesn't make sense ...

    Bad attempt:
    0 3 131a 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 7v 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 7939e 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 00 4 3 263 2 17 2r 15879 00 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 y07 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 00 2 0 15 g0 4 3 263 0a0 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 71 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 rb0 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 00 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 50 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 39693 0 0 2 0 2 0 3e1 0 4 11 263 2 17 5 15879 0 00 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 1d3591 0 0 2 00 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 41 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 33 0 4 3 1x7 2 17 5 31m07 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 10 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 0a7 0 4 3 327 2 17 5 15879 0 0 10 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 10 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 03s1 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 33 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 72167 0 0 2 0 u0 0 15 0 10 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 2
  • Zoc (unregistered)
    And then it dawned on me. Did anyone ever try sending the customer a text message?
    Ah, the Shinji Ikari factor. "The phone that never rings."
  • jls (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.
    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    Your not too bright, are you?

    You're forgetting that this is a lawyer he'd be killing. No lawyer would sue him, they'd applaud him for the reduction in competition.

    And no jury would find a verdict against him, because.... well hell, it was a lawyer, does it really need any further explanation?

  • Michaal (unregistered) in reply to frits

    I'm pretty sure you're trolling, since we techs say things like that even though we know common sense says not to do that...

    You're not too bright, are you?

  • Anon a mouse (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.

    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    Your not too bright, are you?

    You're not too bright either
  • (cs) in reply to Jan
    Jan:
    frits:
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.
    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.
    Depends on the amount of strangling. Dead lawyers can't win lawsuits.
    Quite. However, I wouldn't have rushed. If someone is so dumb that they don't feel it necessary to follow the advice they have just been given *on request* to a dangerous situation (or alternatively, used common sense self-preservation around electical equipment), then they deserve to burn.

    Mythbusters aside, a fire was inevitable. It would have been interesting to find out if the aerosol would have speeded up the process.

  • frits (unregistered) in reply to My Name

    What does this tell us? Either there are very few registered people, or only the registered people tend to read before posting. Or a mixture of both, which is my guess.

    or... frits like to troll his unregistered self?

  • My Name (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    What does this tell us? Either there are very few registered people, or only the registered people tend to read before posting. Or a mixture of both, which is my guess.

    or... frits like to troll his unregistered self?

    I like that. Thought of that, but it slipped my mind before I finished c&p ...

  • (cs) in reply to My Name

    Wow, I'm impressed. You really have a lot of free time.

    Well done!

  • Dr.Evil (unregistered) in reply to Matt Westwood
    Matt Westwood:
    lolwtf:
    anon:
    The text message one does remind me of one of my least favorite users at my last job. He was hired to do something that didn't really end up happening, but they kept him on because they planned a new venture with him down the road. Long story short he had no real job or anything to do for several months. During this time, he'd "work from home" quite often. I don't think he even had a computer at home, but basically he'd get his emails on his Blackberry (mostly personal crap and anything sent to firmwide distribution lists). Every time he worked from home, he'd email me around 8:30 or 9 asking "Is the email server working?" I'd reply "Yes Bill, and if it wasn't I wouldn't have gotten this so there's not much point in sending this email." The first time it happened, he actually replied to my response and said "But I haven't gotten any emails, I think something is wrong".....
    Well if he emails to ask if the email system is working, and doesn't get a reply, that pretty well answers his question...

    I would have been too tempted to not reply deliberately, and see whether he reacts by sending ever more frantic emails ... then finally a phone call. "Oh yeah, sorry, I've got your emails, but I've been busy - I've been doing work ..."

    I would have replied back that yes, the email server was indeed down, and there was some important news he needed to get to the office to receive.

    P.S. As much as we all love a good grammar nazi, can we let the your/you're thing just quietly die now?

    No?

    Ah well it was worth a try..

  • Mordred (unregistered)

    For the first story. Ok if that lady is running that computer who's advising the president?

  • Not a Douche (unregistered) in reply to frits

    Yeah and frits...I'm pretty sure someone needs to take that stick out of your butt.

  • anon#213 (unregistered) in reply to frits

    Apparently the "not" he owns is too bright, is it?

    CAPTCHA: haero - Common greeting to customers entering Chinese restaurant.

  • anon#213 (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.
    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    Your not too bright, are you?

    Apparently the "not" he owns is too bright, is it?

    CAPTCHA: haero - Common greeting to customers entering Chinese restaurant.

  • Troy (unregistered) in reply to frits

    I'm pretty sure you'd lose the lawsuit for strangling someone at ANY office.

    You'RE not too bright, are you?

    Sometimes strangulation (or the possibility) is necessary for sanity. I'm pretty sure boog's comment wasn't a self admission of guilt as a serial strangler.

  • (cs) in reply to My Name
    My Name:
    EJ_:
    * 88 8*****88a ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***
   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******888v **** 8** 88 8*****888
 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8* 
 * *******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 
88888******88e ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******8888 **
** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*r 88888******888 **
*   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8** 88 y*****
888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* **
* 8*  * *******8888 g*** 8** 88 8*****888 ****a* 8***8 
8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******888
8 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888
 ***   ******* rb* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8** 88 
8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******
* 8* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888 **l*8
* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  *
 *******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 
88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******8888
 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******8
88 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******88e8 **** 8** 8
8 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   **
***** 8* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888
 ****8* 8***8 8*8 8d888******888 ***   ******* 8* **
* 8*  * *******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8**
*8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * 
*******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 
88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******88
88 **** 8** 88 8x****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888m***
**888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8
** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******a888 **** 8** 88 8*****
888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8
* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8
* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *****
**88s8 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 ***   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******88
88 **** 8** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88828****
**888 ***   ******* 8* *** u*  * *******8888 **** 8
** 88 8*****888 ****8* 8***8 8*8 88888******888 **
   ******* 8* *** 8*  * *******8888 **** 8*

    I can't see what it is supposed to mean. I tried to convert it from binary assuming stars to be zeros and eights to be ones, leaving invalid characters in place. It still doesn't make sense ...

    Bad attempt:
    0 3 131a 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 7v 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 7939e 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 00 4 3 263 2 17 2r 15879 00 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 y07 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 00 2 0 15 g0 4 3 263 0a0 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 71 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 rb0 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 00 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 50 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 39693 0 0 2 0 2 0 3e1 0 4 11 263 2 17 5 15879 0 00 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 1d3591 0 0 2 00 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 41 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 33 0 4 3 1x7 2 17 5 31m07 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 10 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 0a7 0 4 3 327 2 17 5 15879 0 0 10 0 2 0 15 0 4 3 263 10 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 03s1 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 33 0 4 3 263 2 17 5 72167 0 0 2 0 u0 0 15 0 10 3 263 2 17 5 15879 0 0 2 0 2 0 15 0 2

    Well, it's lame, but if you take out all the 8's and *'s, you can see a message in the scattering of letters: "A very garbled xmas 2 u". (I did say it was lame, after all.)

    Beyond that, I am not able to see any useful meaning in the 8's and *'s. But if you arrange the characters (mostly) 92 to a line, there is an organization. THere are two lines of wrong length, but the rest align vertically.

  • Wejn (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.
    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    Your not too bright, are you?

    I'm pretty sure the guy with the aerosol can had a chance to become very bright, though.

  • DJ (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    Your not too bright, are you?

    My head assplode.

  • keith (unregistered)

    Speaking of school district WTF:

    http://www.philly.com/philly/education/20101108_Highball_bidder_wins_schools_applicant_tracking.html

    Power to you, Kenexa, but still.

  • (cs)
    From the Article:
    I quickly stopped him from spraying the can, cleared away all the papers, and unplugged the monitor as fast as I could. Flabbergasted, I asked him why he was spraying the monitor with the aerosol can. He replied “the smoke smell was getting to me, so I wanted to use some air freshener on it.”
    Definitely a contender for a Darwin Award!
  • letatio (unregistered) in reply to ÃÆâ€ââ€
    ÃÆâ€ââ€:
    When did the backwater of the internet start coming here?

    Jeez, people, WTF?

    Digg crumbled and invaded reddit, forcing effluvium through various cracks in the foundation of the internet. Hydrostatic pressure, I think it's called.

    That, or the sewer backed up again from Paula flushing all those tamp^Wbeans.

  • (cs) in reply to boog
    boog:
    frits:
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.
    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    Your not too bright, are you?

    I'm pretty sure that I have a 100% chance of never holding a job.

    You could always play first base for the Orioles.

  • gilhad (unregistered) in reply to anon
    anon:
    The text message one does remind me of one of my least favorite users at my last job. He was hired to do something that didn't really end up happening, but they kept him on because they planned a new venture with him down the road. Long story short he had no real job or anything to do for several months. During this time, he'd "work from home" quite often. I don't think he even had a computer at home, but basically he'd get his emails on his Blackberry (mostly personal crap and anything sent to firmwide distribution lists). Every time he worked from home, he'd email me around 8:30 or 9 asking "Is the email server working?" I'd reply "Yes Bill, and if it wasn't I wouldn't have gotten this so there's not much point in sending this email." The first time it happened, he actually replied to my response and said "But I haven't gotten any emails, I think something is wrong".....

    I would set up cron to mail him automagically every day at 8:15 with message "email server is not working, so it is impossible to send you any email"

  • mr p (unregistered) in reply to frits

    You're not too bright

  • Hyuk (unregistered) in reply to frits

    Yer done a bit of a hick yer self, huh.

  • Gd dmnt (unregistered) in reply to mr p

    ur nt 2 brite

    nulla - ya wnt a nulla cld 1?

  • Grazi (unregistered) in reply to frits

    You possible meant "You're", but we all know that you're very bright ...

  • lol (unregistered) in reply to frits

    your not either

  • Jester (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.
    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    Your not too bright, are you?

    lol, and I'm pretty sure there's a 100% chance that you've had a sense of humour failure.

  • JSR (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    boog:
    the smoke smell was getting to m--
    I'm pretty sure I'd have strangled him before he could finish that sentence.
    I'm pretty sure that you would have a 100% chance of being on the losing end of a lawsuit.

    Your not too bright, are you?

    I'll bet he's bright enought to know the difference between "your" and "you're".

  • -=G=- (unregistered) in reply to frits

    I'm pretty sure he was joking.

    Your not too perceptive, are you?

  • AzSanRat (unregistered) in reply to frits

    Don't you mean "You're not too bright"? Pot, meet kettle...

  • strif (unregistered) in reply to frits

    *you're not too bright

  • Geek Prime (unregistered) in reply to frits

    YOU'RE.

    There, I fixed it for you.

    Loser troll is lose.

  • Gramamr Nazi (unregistered) in reply to frits
    frits:
    Your not too bright, are you?

    You're not too bright, are you?

  • miwi (unregistered)

    Meanwhile in France,

    %%                                       *    .        *     *
%% This is the AFNIC Whois server.  *          .   .  /.\      .
%%                                         .         /.^'\  *
%% complete date format : DD/MM/YYYY    *        *   /'.'\
%% short date format    : DD/MM      .       *      /.^'.'\    .
%% version              : FRNIC-2.5           .  .  /'.^'.\  .
%%                                       *          ^^|_|^^    *
  • durr (unregistered) in reply to frits

    His not too bright what?

    One of the few times when it's acceptable to mock someone's internet-spelling/grammar is when the target is mocking someone else's stupidity.

  • Thijs (unregistered)

    Logic of Layers does tend to not make much sense to me. I am the tech guy of the staff of a gaming website. On that website there is test that people can take in order to become a judge.

    The test is 10 questions. A new addition to the recode was that the questions should have a category besides a difficulty. A fellow staff member kept saying the way I did it was wrong. He stated the following example (he is a layer by profession):

    "For the test first you need to get 10 questions, 5 of each category (assuming 2 categories) and then 5 questions of each difficulty (assuming there are 2 difficulties). "

    According to my math that would up to 20 questions. According to him, I have no idea. We kept clashing so other staff members had to step in. They were more then happy with the way I had it coded so I left it at that.

    And this was pretty recent too.

  • Randy Snicker (unregistered)
    The next logical conclusion was that his phone probably didn't support the feature in the first place (it was a new thing back in those days).
    Oh. Right. This was in America.
  • Randy Snicker (unregistered) in reply to First!
    First!:
    I once had a christmas tree.

    That is a night I do not wish to relive.

    You're not supposed to eat it.

    In one night.

Leave a comment on “When Christmas Trees Attack and More Support Stories”

Log In or post as a guest

Replying to comment #:

Log Out

« Return to Article