|
At the same time, they can redefine electrons as having positive charge!
"At this point, what difference does it make?" (Hillary Clinton)
If you have an important point to make, don't try to be subtle or clever. Use a pile driver. Hit the point once. Then come back and hit it again. Then hit it a third time - a tremendous whack.
--Winston Churchill
|
|
|
|
|
You say kibi and I say kilo
Let's call the whole thing off!
|
|
|
|
|
I only say: nuts!
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amo l'Italia! La Toscana è bello
|
|
|
|
|
You were caught in moderation - I let them through and deleted the "spare".
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
cheers Mate - I didn't figure it out - thought I made a mistake and reposted
|
|
|
|
|
|
There is an automatic spam detector running, which is intended to catch the morons who try to post Baba, skin cream, illegal narcotics, forged passports, pills and creams I don't want to mention in a KSS forum, and a huge number of other adverts.
When it catches something (be it a message, a QA question, or an answer) it moves to a moderation queue so that a "real human" can look at it and decide if it's a valid post caught by accident, or a genuine piece of rubbish that needs shredding. But until an "appropriate member" has viewed the queue and decided, the item does not get published. That's what happened here: his message was trapped, and went to moderation, so it didn't appear. He assumed this was a mistake, and reposted it - which also went to moderation!
Hence if you look at S&A, you will see "Spammer from moderation queue" and such like, just listing a member - because the offending message was caught, and has been vaporised - and now we'd like the same to happen to the member, please!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
I feel ripped off here
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Why? Because you don't get sent to moderation?
Heck, I have to approve some of my own posts from time to time!
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Do you feel the difference? You can approve your comments.....
It makes me feel one more time: We -low rep's- are only crap here!
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
Only because I've been here a few years and I'm trusted a bit.
It'll come in time for you, I'm sure. Help around the site a bit, try not to annoy people too much, and wait for the invitation.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
|
If it comforts you SAK has been sacked at least twice because of that moderation (it was by mistake however)...And he can't approve himself...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
What is "SAK"?
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
The second hi rep member here after OG...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
Do I Need to know that? Is it a must to know SA and OG before one can comminucate here? Really? Thank you very much to Show this! No, this is never against you, but is again the high soc. Thank you to help me showing this.
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
All I tried to saw you that rep points do not make you god here...
Skipper: We'll fix it.
Alex: Fix it? How you gonna fix this?
Skipper: Grit, spit and a whole lotta duct tape.
|
|
|
|
|
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
0x01AA wrote: The area with the least population per km^2
Sounds like a dumb claim probably made by some tourism board.
Good thing "area" is so vaguely defined, because if you go by something a little less abstract such as country, this[^] disagrees rather strongly.
(and yes, I certainly realize it's not a country - to which I say, define "area", because I'm pretty sure anyone can come up with better counterexamples)
(I'm not saying it's not a nice and quiet place, I'm sure it is--I just tend to call out bold ridiculous-sounding claims such as this when they're rather trivial to debunk)
|
|
|
|
|
Indeed - and if you look at Antarctica, it has a area of 14,000,000 square Km and a population of up to 5000 (http://worldpopulationreview.com/continents/antarctica-population/[^]) so it's probably the lowest population density significant landmass on the planet.
The Pacific may be lower (depends, not sure how many ships and their crew there are at any one time).
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: 0x01AA wrote:
The area with the least population per km^2
This was restricted to Toscana
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|
|
So, Toscana has the least population per square km in all of Toscana?
If some tour guide mentioned something like this to me, I'd point out that by that definition, it also has the most population per square km.
|
|
|
|
|
this specific area in toscana....boah...I hope you are same exactly with your code and furthermore if it is like this, I hope you can work for your own and do not torture some co workers
modified 19-Jan-21 21:04pm.
|
|
|
|