Indicators: SolarWinds - page 7

New comment
 
Silent: Appraiser don't break it, you use it too much. Depreciation, you know, all that stuff. PS Wizards are among us. That's something to think about. Good luck.
Drainage is protected.
 
Yedelkin:

The card is in the previous message.

So Personality is inadequate.

Has anyone asked the questions you want to ask in this thread?

It's even strange that you came into this thread without realising if there was a 'discussion of something' here. ...Laughing for a long time.

Why are you paying so much attention to me? Are you one of the very customers I've sent away with a murky spec? What exactly are you getting a kick out of me?
 
Yedelkin:
Slip is protected.

Remedy: "...let this pianist (programmer) call things by their proper names...".

Clarifying question (maybe it really should have been added that it is only and exclusively conversion).

Answer

Yes, the plum is shushed. As early as page three.

 
Integer:  Why are you paying so much attention to me? You're one of my most sent customers, aren't you? What exactly is it about me that makes you tick?
I don't give a damn about you personally. Nonsense, voiced by you, - tried to comment. If my comments did not reach the addressee - I apologise complacently, I do not know other polite ways. :)
 
sergeev:

Gentlemen, don't shoot the pianist, he plays as well as he can.

So, no complaints about the quality of the code. I said about the quality of the content above. But that's not the point. It's just real -- I'm probably the only one who is allergic to these beautiful useless coloured toys.

It's just not quite an adequate reaction to a somewhat heated remark about an existing error.

Our codepaster's a little starstruck.

And the rest of us have gone off the rails.

 
Yedelkin:
I don't give a damn about you personally. I tried to comment on the nonsense voiced by you. If my comments did not reach the addressee - I apologise graciously, I do not know other polite ways. :)

Please be more precise about stupidity.

Look at yourself, why did you post in this thread, what did you want to say, what did you say in the end. Notice how you yourself got stuck with your "right to be wrong".

If it is true (as expressed in the first sentence), gather all your courage and willpower and try to ignore me.

 
Silent: Clarifying question (maybe I should have added that it is only and exclusively conversion).
Judging by your pathos, you will probably be very surprised if I agree that 'it should be added that it is only and exclusively conversion'. After all, the fact is that you have been able to formulate your thought correctly only now.
 
Integer: Please be more specific about the stupidity. Look at yourself, why did you post in this thread, what did you want to say, what did you say in the end. Notice how you yourself got stuck with your "right to be wrong". If that's really the case (as expressed in the first sentence), gather all your courage and willpower and try to ignore me.
Take my word for it. I have read very carefully your exersis commented above. And I have learnt that you have understood everything from what I said earlier. So quit these intellectual toys and consider that about your stupidity I 'gathered all my courage and willpower' and tried to ignore you until the next stupidity.
 
Yedelkin:
Take my word for it. I have read very carefully your exersis commented above. And I realised that you understood everything I said earlier. So quit these intellectual toys and consider that about your stupidity I 'gathered all my courage and willpower' and tried not to notice you until the next stupidity.
You know what I learnt from that star topic? That you're a worthless lawyer because you allow yourself to indulge in your right to be wrong. That's all I wanted to say to you, but I didn't dare because I found my post so offensive, but now I have to say it. I thought it would get through to you, but as you can see, it didn't, so I apologise. The reason why you're mad at me is probably because I realised it, and it doesn't give me the slightest respect for you.
 
Yedelkin:
1) Judging by your pathos, you would probably 2) be very surprised if I agree that 'it should have been added that it is only and exclusively a conversion'. After all, the thing is tos, 3) you have only now been able to formulate your thought correctly.

1) Your fantasy.

2) Not at all. Was initially ready for a constructive dialogue :)

3) In the context of your post, no additional wording was required. You made a claim without suggesting it - I clarified it. That's all. And the fact that your evaluator turns off thinking - I wrote above: learn to understand.

123456789
New comment