Search results

Actually you didn't. You were specific and absolute. There was no "may be" involved. "A simple innocuous statement that only the guilty parties would care to disagree with." You then directly associated Muttly and LDB with the above absolute, stating matter-of-factly that "Muttly and LDB showed...

My bologna has a first name.

That they got what they deserved is certainly in this thread

I'm just perched on top of a post.

Whenever you use an emotional response and attack the post, it is always weaker than using an intelligent response to attack what the poster said. Not just "you" personally, but me or anyone else that does it. An emotional response is inherently weaker than a reasoned one. You'll have to give me...

I've done the same thing, for the exact same reasons.

Aside from the fact that the next driver wouldn't even know about a load that wasn't offered in the first place, I'm not suggesting that loads more than 8 hours out shouldn't be offered at all, I'm suggesting that if they are going to be offered that far in advance then they shouldn't be subject...

That's certainly how the math works out, yes.

It's a pretty easy solution, since offering the load in the first place is also a manual process. If the load offer is one that is subject to a turn-down being recorded, don't even offer it if it's more than 8 hours in advance (24 on the weekends).

4.6, and 22.9, respectively [emoji1]

Yes, it is. When we accept an expedite load that's 8 hours out, we are removed from consideration from other load opportunities for all of those 8 hours. The farther out a pickup time is the better chance is has to be cancelled. If it's a good load we might prefer to take the chance of it...

For me personally, I really don't have a problem getting hit for a turn down, because if I turn down a load I have a good enough reason for doing so. I'll own it. The reason may be perfectly justifiable to me, but not at all justifiable to them, and I understand that. I once sat in KC for...

I agree that it's a pretty lame direction to take, but it's really no weaker or pathetic than attacking the poster rather than post itself. You criticized LOS for criticizing Chelsea, despite the fact that she is a public figure and an adult, yet at the same time took it upon yourself to defend...

What's really remarkable is the fact that people would rather get in trouble, up to and including prison time, for doing something wrong in destroying data, rather than allow that data to come out. Really makes you wonder how much worse, for them, the destroyed data might be.

I dunno. Common sense, common courtesy and the Golden Rule? Signed, not a happy camper myself, but for a different albeit similar resultative reason.

Classified or not, it's extraordinarily easy to discuss. You want to talk about COMINT and SIGINT, and how "A GOOD traffic analyst can, however, determine much from the externals of a packet," in a conversation about recreating IRS e-mails from TCP/IP, SMAP and POP packet headers where no such...

You called it.

Re: A veteran reporter discusses the state of investigative journalism and government Fascinating interview, highly worth watching. She doesn't pull many punches, even against fellow reporters. And you'll certainly never look at MediaMatters, or any other Blog, liberal or conservative, in the...

Much to the dismay of a few here, the conviction was overturned, she was found innocent, and was released from jail. She is a free woman, at home with her husband her child. Looks like some here will have to seek out something else to get all barmy over...

It's evident you've never worked with IP packets, because there are never, ever any extra preambles or postambles with network data packets. The packet headers are always exactly the same length with the same number of bits. Decoding and analysing IP packets aren't cloak and dagger stuff, it's...