Forum Settings
       
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Reply To Thread

all hail HRCFollow

#1 Jul 05 2016 at 5:30 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,264 posts

All hail Hillary Diane Rodham from the House of Clinton. Light of lights, Queen of queens, may she rein for two thousand years.

Comey sounds so reasonable. There was certainly no intent with lawyers deleting emails. No way. It is not like HRS was asked for all emails. I love that he claims that 'no reasonable prosecutor would bring such a case' against HRC. Makes sense, who would go after someone who is immune from prosecution. Sounds like a career ending mistake. I personally loved his assurances that he would go after ordinary people who would dare to commit such a transgression with the full power of the law.

Anyhoo, so now a minor drone becomes a scapegoat for the administrative sanctions as Comey mentioned and life goes on. Phew. And the political class is surprised that regular people are actually considering people like Trump for the top office?

******* cryst on a stick. What the actual ****.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#2 Jul 05 2016 at 5:34 PM Rating: Decent
Avatar
***
3,462 posts
Reign, even
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#3 Jul 05 2016 at 5:36 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
HRC! HRC! HRC! HRC!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#4 Jul 05 2016 at 5:49 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,264 posts
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Reign, even


Sigh, I am so sorry oh great spotter of errors. May I leave this for your persusal and elucidation?

Edited, Jul 5th 2016 7:53pm by angrymnk
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#5 Jul 05 2016 at 5:51 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,462 posts
No, thanks anyway.
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#6 Jul 05 2016 at 5:54 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,264 posts
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
No, thanks anyway.


How about now? I changed the link to include abstract -- just for you.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#7 Jul 05 2016 at 6:03 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
***
3,462 posts
I'm bored.
____________________________
Dandruffshampoo wrote:
Curses, beaten by Professor stupidopo-opo.
Annabella, Goblin in Disguise wrote:
Stupidmonkey is more organized than a bag of raccoons.
#8 Jul 05 2016 at 7:04 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,936 posts
Seems like someone is Angry.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
#9 Jul 05 2016 at 7:29 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,264 posts
TirithRR wrote:
Seems like someone is Angry.


Hardly, this is me being miffed.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#10 Jul 05 2016 at 7:37 PM Rating: Good
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
angrymnk wrote:
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Reign, even
Sigh, I am so sorry oh great spotter of errors. May I leave this for your persusal and elucidation?

That's about emails. This is a forum.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#11 Jul 05 2016 at 8:02 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,264 posts
Jophiel wrote:
angrymnk wrote:
Professor stupidmonkey wrote:
Reign, even
Sigh, I am so sorry oh great spotter of errors. May I leave this for your persusal and elucidation?

That's about emails. This is a forum.


Not that much of a leap; not even skip, really.
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#12 Jul 05 2016 at 8:36 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
"Any reasonable person should have know that an unclassified system was no place for classified conversation"

"The security standards were not even up to the standards of private commercial email systems such as Gmail"
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#13 Jul 05 2016 at 9:49 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Timelordwho wrote:
"Any reasonable person should have know that an unclassified system was no place for classified conversation"

"The security standards were not even up to the standards of private commercial email systems such as Gmail"

Your reactions to Clinton's errors in her email will demonstrate your personality!
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#14 Jul 05 2016 at 10:17 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Timelordwho wrote:
"Any reasonable person should have know that an unclassified system was no place for classified conversation"

"The security standards were not even up to the standards of private commercial email systems such as Gmail"

Your reactions to Clinton's errors in her email will demonstrate your personality!


Is this a fortune cookie?
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#15 Jul 05 2016 at 10:32 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
...in bed
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#16 Jul 06 2016 at 7:38 AM Rating: Decent
******
49,905 posts
angrymnk wrote:
And the political class is surprised that regular people are actually considering people like Trump for the top office?
Trump's demographic is people who hate old people not knowing how email works?
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#17 Jul 06 2016 at 8:32 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
******
29,394 posts
Jophiel wrote:
HRC! HRC! HRC! HRC!
I make that same sound the day after eating an entire block of cheese.
#18 Jul 06 2016 at 8:54 AM Rating: Good
Avatar
*****
13,230 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
angrymnk wrote:
And the political class is surprised that regular people are actually considering people like Trump for the top office?
Trump's demographic is people who hate old people not knowing how email works?


A large chunk of it, yes.
____________________________
Just as Planned.
#19 Jul 06 2016 at 10:16 AM Rating: Decent
******
49,905 posts
I'm certain that the majority of Trump's demographic is the one that has been fed toxic levels of fear and nationalism for the last twenty years. It doesn't just happen, that's the kind of thing you have to cultivate.

And realistically "people who hate old people with email" is pretty much every 25~30 year old in the world who still has parents. My mom still can't figure out the difference between Reply and Forward.

Edited, Jul 6th 2016 12:19pm by lolgaxe
____________________________
George Carlin wrote:
I think it’s the duty of the comedian to find out where the line is drawn and cross it deliberately.
#20 Jul 06 2016 at 5:07 PM Rating: Good
Repressed Memories
******
20,917 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
My mom still can't figure out the difference between Reply and Forward.

There isn't one, at least functionally. There also is no reason for carbon copy either, but it's still there as a vestigial relic of the past.

And rarely needed, but functionally different features like controlling individually which recipient sees which other recipients is not an option. Because why do all the things that you need to and only the needs you need to, when you could do most of the things you need to and then some other things you don't?

This is the pet peeve thread right?
#21 Jul 06 2016 at 5:16 PM Rating: Good
Avatar
****
6,445 posts
So I'm hearing now Hilary is appealing to Bernie fans by mimicking his tuition free college thing*. Emphasis on the *.
____________________________
Galkaman wrote:
Kuwoobie will die crushed under the burden of his mediocrity.

#22 Jul 06 2016 at 5:19 PM Rating: Excellent
Liberal Conspiracy
*******
TILT
Allegory wrote:
There also is no reason for carbon copy either, but it's still there as a vestigial relic of the past.

Smiley: confused

You never need to send the same message to multiple people? I guess I rarely do from home but it's used all the time in work contexts.
____________________________
Belkira wrote:
Wow. Regular ol' Joph fan club in here.
#23 Jul 06 2016 at 5:41 PM Rating: Good
Soulless Internet Tiger
******
35,381 posts
Jophiel wrote:
Allegory wrote:
There also is no reason for carbon copy either, but it's still there as a vestigial relic of the past.

Smiley: confused

You never need to send the same message to multiple people? I guess I rarely do from home but it's used all the time in work contexts.
Yea, I constantly use it at work as well.
____________________________
Donate. One day it could be your family.


An invasion of armies can be resisted, but not an idea whose time has come. Victor Hugo

#24 Jul 06 2016 at 5:47 PM Rating: Good
Scholar
***
1,264 posts
lolgaxe wrote:
angrymnk wrote:
And the political class is surprised that regular people are actually considering people like Trump for the top office?
Trump's demographic is people who hate old people not knowing how email works?


I can't tell whether you are being deliberately obtuse or not. I guess it does not really matter, does it?

I will state something relatively obvious. For all the things she may be clueless about, email does not appear to be one of them if that little quip about wiping server it with a cloth is any indication. Granted, my mom would not even know what a server is, but then my mom is an SOS.

In short, I highly doubt Trump's demographic is people who hate old people do not know how email works, but there are people who are willing to take a gamble on DT after yesterday. I will admit it does not include me. Still, the sentiment is there and it is getting harder to ignore..
____________________________
Your soul was made of fists.

Jar the Sam
#25 Jul 06 2016 at 5:53 PM Rating: Decent
Encyclopedia
******
35,010 posts
Allegory wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
My mom still can't figure out the difference between Reply and Forward.

There isn't one, at least functionally.


Er? One replies to the sender (which may or may not include all other recipients), while the other sends it to a different person entirely. They are completely different. I suppose you could hit "forward", and then cut and paste in the list of original recipients, but that would be kinda silly. Forwarding is also useful when dealing with meeting invites, since you usually want to forward it to just the person you want to add to the meeting, but don't necessarily want to spam an entire list of people who already got the first invite.

Quote:
There also is no reason for carbon copy either, but it's still there as a vestigial relic of the past.


Yes and no. Old style email had just one "to" recipient, with everyone else being cc. Today, you can put a list of names on the to line and it works just fine. However, that's not to say that there isn't a reason to use the two different lines. If you deal with large amounts of email (like, say, several thousand a day), having a means to filter email based on whether something was sent to you directly, or you were merely cc'd on the email is kinda useful. Of course, this requires that the sender actually take a few seconds to actually separate out recipients based on this criteria, which is becoming increasingly rare. But for enterprise environments where you may be dealing with dozens of automated notification systems, separating out primary recipients from secondary folks who might want to know, but don't need to know (and can filter into an appropriate location), is very useful.

And of course, bcc is massively useful. Imagine this scenario. You need to send an email to 10,000 people to notify them of some important thing that's going on. If you just cc them all (or worse, put them all on the to line), guess what happens when say 1% of those people click "reply to all" to ask some question about the notification? Yup. 10,000 people each receive 100 emails (which is, for those keeping count, 1 million emails). Then, at least 1% of those people will angrily respond (also to all), to "stop spamming everyone with these emails", which, of course, just adds to the problem. In years past, we've literally seen email servers grind to an ugly halt from this. Of course, modern email servers use links to database segments to handle multiple identical emails, so it doesn't kill the servers anymore, but the recipients still get massive spam. Which is funny to a point. Then it becomes really not funny at all.

Yeah yeah, you can handle this with server based email flags (or email lists that tons of people are on, but only a select few can actually send to), so it's not a big deal these days, but these still assume a single server pool handling things. Which works for a single enterprise, but not so much for say large customer lists to individuals spread all over the place. So still useful.

Quote:
This is the pet peeve thread right?


Sure! Wait.. is it?
____________________________
King Nobby wrote:
More words please
#26 Jul 06 2016 at 6:02 PM Rating: Good
Worst. Title. Ever!
*****
16,936 posts
gbaji wrote:
Allegory wrote:
lolgaxe wrote:
My mom still can't figure out the difference between Reply and Forward.

There isn't one, at least functionally.


Er? One replies to the sender (which may or may not include all other recipients), while the other sends it to a different person entirely. They are completely different. I suppose you could hit "forward", and then cut and paste in the list of original recipients, but that would be kinda silly. Forwarding is also useful when dealing with meeting invites, since you usually want to forward it to just the person you want to add to the meeting, but don't necessarily want to spam an entire list of people who already got the first invite.


Only real difference is what it automatically inserts as the recipients, whether or not it automatically attaches any included attachments, and _maybe_ some body formatting options based on your chosen email client. Oh, and that RE: vs FW: automatically inserted. Your last comment there is actually a Reply/Forward vs Reply All distinction. Not necessarily a Reply vs Forward distinction.

Now, if you wanted to make a distinction on the whole "CC vs. BCC" options you'd see some pretty functional differences. But Forward and Reply are really the same thing, just a few automated formatting options. I chose to FW things which I am Replying to, and vice versa, specifically because of these default formatting options. I even Reply to mail in my own Sent folder.

I normally heavily edit the To/CC fields on all Forward / Replies anyway. Since I normally get email requests from people who want me to change things, I'll reply to them with my answer, and copy either my supervisor or their supervisors (or both) so later the person doesn't sit in a meeting and say I never respond to their requests.
____________________________
Can't sleep, clown will eat me.
« Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 73 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (73)