Click here to Skip to main content

Welcome to the Lounge

   

For lazing about and discussing anything in a software developer's life that takes your fancy.
The Lounge is rated PG. If you're about to post something you wouldn't want your kid sister to read then don't post it. No flame wars, no abusive conduct and please don't post ads.

Technical discussions are welcome, but if you need specific help please use the programming forums.


 
Hint: For improved responsiveness ensure Javascript is enabled and choose 'Normal' from the Layout dropdown and hit 'Update'.
You must Sign In to use this message board.
Search this forum  
    Spacing  Noise  Layout  Per page  Show 
GeneralRe: How Difficult Would It Be?memberDan Neely10 Dec '12 - 9:21 
GeneralRe: How Difficult Would It Be?memberZac Greve10 Dec '12 - 9:22 
GeneralRe: How Difficult Would It Be?memberRoger Wright10 Dec '12 - 10:17 
GeneralRe: How Difficult Would It Be?memberwizardzz11 Dec '12 - 6:07 
GeneralRe: How Difficult Would It Be?memberRoger Wright11 Dec '12 - 18:28 
GeneralRe: How Difficult Would It Be?memberBrady Kelly10 Dec '12 - 6:27 
GeneralRe: How Difficult Would It Be?memberLloyd Atkinson10 Dec '12 - 9:18 
GeneralRe: How Difficult Would It Be?member_Maxxx_10 Dec '12 - 16:52 
GeneralA revisit to "that" prank callprotectorPete O'Hanlon10 Dec '12 - 5:43 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberDalek Dave10 Dec '12 - 5:47 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberbryce10 Dec '12 - 12:58 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberSimon_Whale10 Dec '12 - 5:53 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmvpRichard MacCutchan10 Dec '12 - 6:02 
Given the number of these that have been done over the last few years and the furore and upset they have caused, I think they were pretty irresponsible, and so was the station management. They knew nothing about this nurse and lied to her in order to get information that they knew was not supposed to be made public.
 
However,
Pete O'Hanlon wrote:
They do not deserve the ordeal that they are being put through.
I tend to agree, they are being humiliated almost as much.
One of these days I'm going to think of a really clever signature.

GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callprotectorAspDotNetDev10 Dec '12 - 6:03 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmvpNish Sivakumar10 Dec '12 - 6:31 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callprotectorAspDotNetDev10 Dec '12 - 6:37 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmvpNish Sivakumar10 Dec '12 - 6:38 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callprotectorAspDotNetDev10 Dec '12 - 6:45 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberChrisElston10 Dec '12 - 8:35 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmvpOriginalGriff10 Dec '12 - 8:45 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callprotectorAspDotNetDev10 Dec '12 - 9:02 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberPHS24110 Dec '12 - 6:18 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberSlacker00710 Dec '12 - 6:20 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmvpNish Sivakumar10 Dec '12 - 6:33 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberThe Reincarnation11 Dec '12 - 1:21 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmvpNish Sivakumar11 Dec '12 - 7:28 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberhayrob10 Dec '12 - 6:51 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callprotectorPete O'Hanlon10 Dec '12 - 7:17 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberhayrob10 Dec '12 - 9:02 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callprotectorPete O'Hanlon10 Dec '12 - 23:29 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberhayrob10 Dec '12 - 23:32 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberc242310 Dec '12 - 8:13 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberMike Mullikin10 Dec '12 - 8:15 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberMehGerbil10 Dec '12 - 8:24 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberChrisElston10 Dec '12 - 8:30 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberMehGerbil10 Dec '12 - 9:54 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberjschell10 Dec '12 - 9:01 
GeneralRe: A revisit to "that" prank callmemberForogar17 Dec '12 - 7:48 
GeneralWho needs an Apache anyway?protectorPete O'Hanlon10 Dec '12 - 5:17 
GeneralRe: Who needs an Apache anyway?memberSlacker00710 Dec '12 - 5:20 
GeneralRe: Who needs an Apache anyway?memberMaximilien10 Dec '12 - 6:43 
GeneralRe: Who needs an Apache anyway?memberBrady Kelly10 Dec '12 - 6:46 
GeneralRe: Who needs an Apache anyway?memberAlbert Holguin10 Dec '12 - 7:22 
GeneralRe: Who needs an Apache anyway?memberjeron110 Dec '12 - 7:28 
GeneralRe: Who needs an Apache anyway?memberColin Mullikin10 Dec '12 - 8:32 
GeneralRe: Who needs an Apache anyway?memberSoMad10 Dec '12 - 8:48 
GeneralRe: Who needs an Apache anyway?protectorPete O'Hanlon10 Dec '12 - 8:50 
GeneralRe: Who needs an Apache anyway?memberTheOtherCPian10 Dec '12 - 19:27 
GeneralRe: Who needs an Apache anyway?memberBergholt Stuttley Johnson10 Dec '12 - 21:24 
GeneralRe: Who needs an Apache anyway?memberMark_Wallace11 Dec '12 - 2:38 

General General    News News    Suggestion Suggestion    Question Question    Bug Bug    Answer Answer    Joke Joke    Rant Rant    Admin Admin   


Advertise | Privacy | Mobile
Web02 | 2.6.130516.1 | Last Updated 22 May 2013
Copyright © CodeProject, 1999-2013
All Rights Reserved. Terms of Use
Layout: fixed | fluid