From: sabrina downard Date: 18:45 on 14 Jan 2008 Subject: In which we learn that not all characters which look similar are, in fact, the same > Dear Valued Customer;/r/nThank you for your inquiry./r/nYou will receive a response from one of our Customer Service Specialists within 24-48 business hours. Monday through Friday./r/nPlease do not respond to this message./r/nSincerely,/r/nwhoever > > This response powered by Brightware. Dear Brightware: ITYM \. HAND. --Valued Customer, whose newlines are newlinier than yours.
From: Michael Jinks Date: 18:57 on 14 Jan 2008 Subject: Re: In which we learn that not all characters which look similar are, in fact, the same On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 12:45:02PM -0600, sabrina downard wrote: > > ITYM \. My (and Sabrina's) local (US) National Public Radio station regularly airs announcements directing the listener to visit some URL, "[whatever] backslash [whatever]". I have thus far managed to restrain myself from confirming my irredeemable dorkdom by phoning them to complain. Of course I blame Windows for this, and that's where my real hate lies.
From: Adam Atlas Date: 19:13 on 14 Jan 2008 Subject: Re: In which we learn that not all characters which look similar are, in fact, the same On 14 Jan 2008, at 13:57, Michael Jinks wrote: > My (and Sabrina's) local (US) National Public Radio station regularly > airs announcements directing the listener to visit some URL, > "[whatever] > backslash [whatever]". Our hard-earned tax dollars are being wasted on NPR announcers speaking wasteful syllables! DAMN THE FEDS On a related note, it makes me mad when announcements on my local NPR are giving some URL with a .org domain name and they feel they have to spell it out, "dot-O-R-G". I mean, come on. "Org" is about as phonetic as you can get.
From: Benjamin Reed Date: 19:43 on 14 Jan 2008 Subject: Re: In which we learn that not all characters which look similar are, in fact, the same -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 Adam Atlas wrote: | On a related note, it makes me mad when announcements on my local NPR | are giving some URL with a .org domain name and they feel they have to | spell it out, "dot-O-R-G". I mean, come on. "Org" is about as phonetic | as you can get. Yeah, we all know it's "OR-G", pronounced "orgy". ;) - -- Benjamin Reed a.k.a. Ranger Rick Fink, KDE, and Mac OS X development http://www.racoonfink.com/ -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.4.8 (Darwin) Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org iD8DBQFHi7tLUu+jZtP2Zf4RAlCXAJ9JPlsIkQmPZPJm5iAhJlsJmE8QFwCeJPnT cubeKlWRpaHPfSIK/hYmLgk= =XjMk -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
From: Martin Ebourne Date: 20:42 on 14 Jan 2008 Subject: Re: In which we learn that not all characters which look similar are, in fact, the same On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 14:13 -0500, Adam Atlas wrote: > On a related note, it makes me mad when announcements on my local NPR > are giving some URL with a .org domain name and they feel they have to > spell it out, "dot-O-R-G". I mean, come on. "Org" is about as phonetic > as you can get. Alas, you might think so. Try having a .org email, then you'll be surprised how often you need to spell it out. [My main email is martin zepler org, but not registered to any lists.] Cheers, Martin.
From: Matt McLeod Date: 00:10 on 15 Jan 2008 Subject: Re: In which we learn that not all characters which look similar are, in fact, the same Martin Ebourne wrote: > On Mon, 2008-01-14 at 14:13 -0500, Adam Atlas wrote: > > On a related note, it makes me mad when announcements on my local NPR > > are giving some URL with a .org domain name and they feel they have to > > spell it out, "dot-O-R-G". I mean, come on. "Org" is about as phonetic > > as you can get. > > Alas, you might think so. Try having a .org email, then you'll be > surprised how often you need to spell it out. [My main email is martin > zepler org, but not registered to any lists.] It's about a 50% chance that speaking my email address will result in the other person being confused and trying to use 'boggle.com'. An alarming proportion of the Great Unwashed think everything is under .com. Even .com.au confuses some locals.
From: Adam Atlas Date: 00:46 on 15 Jan 2008 Subject: Re: In which we learn that not all characters which look similar are, in fact, the same On 14 Jan 2008, at 19:10, Matt McLeod wrote: > It's about a 50% chance that speaking my email address will result > in the other person being confused and trying to use 'boggle.com'. > > An alarming proportion of the Great Unwashed think everything is > under .com. Even .com.au confuses some locals. You should try having a .st email address. "So it's atlas dot S-T dot com?" "No, just S-T." "Dot what?" "Dot nothing." "Really?" "YES"
From: Ricardo SIGNES Date: 01:20 on 15 Jan 2008 Subject: Re: In which we learn that not all characters which look similar are, in fact, the same * Matt McLeod <matt@xxxxxx.xxx> [2008-01-14T19:10:19] > It's about a 50% chance that speaking my email address will result > in the other person being confused and trying to use 'boggle.com'. > > An alarming proportion of the Great Unwashed think everything is > under .com. Even .com.au confuses some locals. ...and it's only made more hateful by the addition to some minibrowsers of a ".com" button. Argh.
From: Philip Newton
Date: 08:44 on 15 Jan 2008
Subject: Re: In which we learn that not all characters which look similar are, in fact, the same
On Jan 15, 2008 1:10 AM, Matt McLeod <matt@xxxxxx.xxx> wrote:
>
> An alarming proportion of the Great Unwashed think everything is
> under .com.
And an alarming proportion of those think everything starts with "
www. ". Including email addresses. ("www.joe@xxx.xxx"?)
Cheers,
From: Walt Mankowski Date: 19:32 on 14 Jan 2008 Subject: Re: In which we learn that not all characters which look similar are, in fact, the same On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 12:45:02PM -0600, sabrina downard wrote: > > Dear Valued Customer;/r/nThank you for your inquiry./r/nYou will receive a response from one of our Customer Service Specialists within 24-48 business hours. Monday through Friday./r/nPlease do not respond to this message./r/nSincerely,/r/nwhoever What the heck does "24-48 business hours" mean? Since a normal business day is 8 hours, does it mean "3-6 business days"? Or is it just a fancy way of saying "1-2 business days"? Walt
From: Michael G Schwern Date: 19:58 on 14 Jan 2008 Subject: Re: In which we learn that not all characters which look similar are, in fact, the same Walt Mankowski wrote: > On Mon, Jan 14, 2008 at 12:45:02PM -0600, sabrina downard wrote: >>> Dear Valued Customer;/r/nThank you for your inquiry./r/nYou will receive a response from one of our Customer Service Specialists within 24-48 business hours. Monday through Friday./r/nPlease do not respond to this message./r/nSincerely,/r/nwhoever > > What the heck does "24-48 business hours" mean? Since a normal > business day is 8 hours, does it mean "3-6 business days"? Or is it > just a fancy way of saying "1-2 business days"? I think it's the business equivalent of throwing down a smoke bomb and running out of the room, like ninja.
From: Aristotle Pagaltzis Date: 15:19 on 15 Jan 2008 Subject: Re: In which we learn that not all characters which look similar are, in fact, the same * Walt Mankowski <waltman-hates-software@xxxxxx.xxx> [2008-01-15 16:05]: > What the heck does "24-48 business hours" mean? Since a normal > business day is 8 hours, does it mean "3-6 business days"? Or > is it just a fancy way of saying "1-2 business days"? Probably they're reserving plausible deniability that they meant the former while creating the impression that they're saying the latter. So yeah, what Schwern said. Regards,
Generated at 10:26 on 16 Apr 2008 by mariachi