Posts by Nicholas King

northerncyclist2 said:I think there’s actually a vBulletin script out there for that, and I can tell you from experience it works pretty smoothly. Plus, it won't break the bank, which is nice. But...

...we're talking about Reddit here 😁

Did you even bother reading the entire opening post?

The guy isn't just—good grief! 😱 —suggesting we use likes, he’s proposing that posts be sorted in descending order based on those likes—how on earth could a display order like that chronological discussion possibly work perfectly? 😕

The guy goes ahead and writes "at the bottom of the screen," and then—just in case I missed the point—he adds, "so, not page numbering"—and yet, I still find myself explaining exactly how to handle page numbering 🙈.

My apologies; it isn't that I'm dense, I was just completely losing my focus 🙂.

Sarah Morales90 said:So, you've been following this thread and decided—just like that—that our standards don't align, and that we should somehow feel ashamed for it? Is that really where you're coming from?

Wait—did you actually bother to read my post?

what is actually going on inside the head—like, what kind of issues does a person even have-- when they...

I’m honestly looking forward to seeing this same old song and dance again—or at least a similar circus—where we get these multi-day administrative summits and committees formed just to address nothing (since apparently Brian Edwards78 already messed everything up by preventing a quiet, painless deletion), and I wonder if it will be allowed for me, or Brian Edwards78, or whoever else to tell a participant in a debate that they are mentally unstable...

People are tossing out psychological diagnoses like they're cheap candy at a parade—it’s ridiculous. We can just calmly mutter, "you always and everywhere see conspiracy theories," simply because someone was shown, quite clearly, how they just blurted out something untrue. I suppose the DSM-IV has a whole section dedicated to people like that (edit: specifically those who "always and everywhere see conspiracy theories", rather than those who just happen to spout nonsense)—it’s all just pure, unadulterated nonsense.

A long time ago, I might have actually asked myself how you all could live with yourselves without feeling any shame at all.

electrichawk4 said:Somehow I managed to turn off the page numbering at the bottom of the screen in Word 2003—you know, where it shows something like 3/10.

I don't have 2003 sitting right in front of me, so I'm basically working from memory here.

The page number is what we call a field, so you didn't really "turn it off"—you likely just deleted it. To fix this, you'll need to enter the footer area (the footer); if I recall correctly, you can just double-click the bottom margin of the page, or navigate through View -> Header/Footer.

Once you're in there, a little floating toolbar should pop up, containing buttons for inserting things like page numbers, dates, and whatnot. One of those buttons is exactly what you're looking for.

With a bit of tinkering, you'll find it—and if you end up with any wrong field elements, just delete them like you would any other bit of text.

Justin Gray81 said:When the emails actually arrive, the sender's name isn't showing up in the inbox at all—instead, it just lists the names of everyone who was CC'd or included as a recipient. I'm hoping that makes sense enough 🤔

Not really, it doesn't🙂.

A screenshot would be worth its weight in gold

Maria Hughes25 said:Have you ever experienced that awkward situation where you’re out hanging with a girlfriend and you realize everyone is staring at her instead of actually engaging with you? Looking back to when I was just a teenager, maybe fifteen or sixteen, it felt like the entire world was obsessed with my friend; she had that classic look with blonde hair, green eyes, a great tan, and a more developed figure. Even when we hit the beach, every single head turned toward her, and while I can’t say I’m unattractive—people have definitely told me I’m good-looking—it felt like I was practically invisible whenever she was around. 😁

So, what’s the secret formula here? Is it just that perfectly styled blonde hair?
And do you honestly think being sidelined like that can take a real toll on someone's self-esteem during those formative teenage years?
It was like if we were both walking down the street, guys would constantly try to pull her into their circle and say, "Hey, come hang out with us over here."

I had another friend who figured this out too; she’d just put on some bright red lipstick, let her hair fall naturally, and suddenly she was getting VIP treatment and front-row seats to a Los Angeles Dodgers game.

At the end of the day, it really goes to show that physical beauty carries a massive amount of weight. ☕

Well, if your ultimate life goal is scoring free tickets to a Los Angeles Dodgers game, then yeah, looks definitely matter.

If you’re attempting to build a Table of Contents "by hand," you really ought to be using tabs—rather than the spacebar, which I suspect is what you're currently doing.

Otherwise, with just a bit of effort—which is honestly more than worth the trouble—you could actually set up the document so that Word generates the entire thing automatically for you.

William Richardson12 said:— I certainly hope the gentleman in question hasn't taken offense? 🤷

I’m asking for credible sources, and you respond with "well, I'm speaking from experience."

I am looking for actual, tangible experiences here, yet all you give me are links.

Honestly, I think you're just messing with me.

William Richardson12 said:speaking from firsthand experience

Fantastic—in that case, I certainly expect you to provide some concrete examples to back up every single one of those claims of yours.

Dennis Davis5 said:The guy basically compared believers to the illiterate and mocked the Virgin Mary. I’m requesting this be flagged as hate speech.

I guess you just don't quite grasp how a relatively straightforward analogy works.

And honestly—it seems you're also struggling with the actual definition of "hate speech." Even if we assume he was mocking the Virgin Mary—who, exactly, is being targeted by "hate speech" there? Mockery isn't always hate speech. "Hate speech" and simply expressing "hatred" aren't the same thing, you know.

William Richardson12 said:Internet Explorer is just limited, riddled with bugs, and—if you'll excuse my language—completely subpar.

I’m going to go out on a limb here and say I’ll believe you once you actually provide a credible link to back up those claims—just so we can see if you're being serious or if you're just one of those people who "hates on Microsoft just to look cool in class."

William Richardson12 said:If I’m reading this correctly, it actually mentions Internet Explorer 5.5... seriously, how much of a dinosaur is this guy?

Come on, there's no need to call Brian Edwards78 a fossil.

BTW, he was clearly being sarcastic when he brought up 5.5 🙂.

We’ve drifted right back into historical debates. On one hand, people claim every evil serves some greater good—as if nobody ever mentions the mothers or the rest of the dear relatives left behind. 😁

wiredangler5, it’s blindingly obvious that you aren't just interested in the context surrounding your signature; you’re practically deeply entrenched in it—so, I have absolutely no intention (heaven forbid, I lack the expertise 🙂) of wading into the "true meaning and weight" of any quote. However, setting aside whether that signature constitutes an exaltation of Nazism or not, there is an entirely different dimension to this whole situation involving that specific signature—an aspect that can either be embraced or rejected, but one that warrants serious thought.

Specifically, having a supermoderator use a signature like that opens the floodgates to a massive spectrum of potential misinterpretations—and subsequent reactions like "well, he can do it, but I can't, you're all being hypocrites" when someone else has their signature, avatar, or whatever else removed that clearly should have been taken down in the first place. I mean, someone might feel emboldened by your example—even if they’ve misinterpreted it—to put Jack-in-the-box in their own signature and then start demanding their rights because a supermoderator is allowed to have whatever they want.

It’s a simple question: do you really need this? 🙂

Somewhere in your very first post, there was a sentence (if I recall correctly) stating, "If that's an issue, no problem, I've got quotes." I think it would be politically savvy to actually post one of those quotes.

Brian Edwards78 said:If it isn't considered bad taste, I suppose we should just stick to a quote from Goebbels. There really isn't any need for us to go around trolling with the Iron Cross.

With a thread title like this, I guess dwelling on that Goebbels quote is just bad form. 🙂.

There is a question here that we really need to resolve—and I mean resolve consistently, rather than just reacting based on how frayed everyone's nerves happen to be at any given moment—and that is the matter of clear boundaries. It seems to me that one of our forum members has been hit with the "Nationalists-like" label—if I recall correctly—and we need to decide: is that allowed, or is it not? Every so often, people chime in (sometimes...) I suppose we should address the issue of being colored—though I suspect most people here wouldn't know where to begin with such a nuanced topic. It’s all rather superficial, isn't it? People tend to get caught up in the aesthetics of things without ever digging into the actual substance underneath. I mean, maybe it's just my way of looking at things, but I find that when everything is artificially tinted or presented through a certain lens, the truth gets lost in the shade. It’s a bit like how people view history—only seeing the vibrant colors they want to see while ignoring the gray reality of what actually transpired. Just my two cents, I guess.) examples Flirtation... or rather, the modern concept of what people call "flirting" nowadays—it’s become such an incredibly shallow, performative exercise, hasn't it? I suppose if you look at it through a certain lens, it might seem harmless, but there is a certain lack of substance that I find quite grating. It feels less like genuine connection and more like a calculated series of social maneuvers designed to stroke one's own ego. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but I can't help but feel that the intention behind most of these interactions is rarely about getting to know someone deeply; it's more about the thrill of the chase or the validation of being wanted. It's all very superficial. So, with this one or that—is it actually going to work, or is it just more of the same? I mean, honestly, does it even have a chance? It’s hard to say for sure without looking at all the moving parts, but I guess we're left wondering if it'll actually land or if it's just going to fall flat. Maybe it'll pull through, but I'm skeptical.

Kenneth Morris57 said:I’m not entirely sure if I picked the right title for this thread... but... anyway, let me just jump straight into the question: why on earth do some people switch up their roles when you're just, say, hanging out with friends?

They sit there and listen to you, totally willing to offer advice and everything, but then—and this is the part that gets me—they go and talk about your situation to someone else as if it isn't some deep, meaningful issue. It’s like they’re treating your life like some trivial little human-interest story in the local newspaper, you know? Just all sarcasm, jokes, and acting like they're somehow above it all!

I actually ended up calling out someone recently because they did the exact same thing to me... and well, they just shut down and got all huffy and offended... almost like I was the one in the wrong here, which, I don't know, doesn't seem right at all. I mean, obviously, I did confront them verbally, but I kept it really polite and civil since that's just how I was raised 😍

What we're looking at here is a total breakdown of discretion, which—if you ask me—is pretty much one of the absolute pillars of friendship.
Quincy:

and they do the whole thing through sarcasm, jokes, and acting all high and mighty!

In my view, this isn't just about breaking a bond of friendship; it’s a failure of basic human decency.

Look, some people... I guess you could say they lack a certain filter. They might leak a secret before they even realize they should have kept it quiet—but hey, maybe you can still be friends with those types, provided you just account for their "information leakage" and don't trust them with anything vital.

But you simply cannot call someone a friend if they sit there and mock your struggles.

Nathan Moore6 said:Honestly, I don't see what the big deal is; you could just revert it and host it that way without any security risks, but hey, maybe I'm just oversimplifying some complex nuclear physics here ☕

It’s a bit like a parable, really. Imagine you’ve got a massive leak in your basement—something serious that needs immediate attention—and you end up calling out two different plumbers to deal with the mess.

Whoever gets home first—and honestly, it’s usually a race—just grabs it. That's just how it goes. I suppose if we’re going to talk about parrots—or whatever specific feathered nuisance we're dealing with today—we might as well dive into the whole mess. It’s one of those things where you think you understand the situation, but then you realize you haven't even scratched the surface of how much trouble they can actually cause. I guess it’s just one of those things, isn't it? One minute everything is fine, and the next, you're dealing with a complete chaos of wings and noise. Maybe I'm being too cynical, but I highly doubt otherwise.Just a little more pressure, and we’ll be done in a minute.

Then they just stare at you, wearing this look of pure concern—shaking their head like they’ve seen it all—and they turn to you and say...Good grief, it looks like your account assignment is completely botched—I really need to sit down and sort this mess out. Luckily, a colleague of mine is heading out to Chicago tomorrow, so he can pick up those specific documents for your profile while he's there. I should have everything squared away for you by Tuesday....

I’d probably give this first guy ten bucks—and honestly, even then, I’d be sitting here convinced that's way too much generosity... though, if I’m being perfectly honest, I suppose I’d probably end up doing the exact same thing myself.

You’ll end up handing that guy twice whatever massive amount he asks for—and I mean twice—then you'll sit there cracking open your absolute finest bottle of bourbon just to toast him. Honestly, you'd probably go as far as offering him your own daughter's hand in marriage, all while bragging to anyone who will listen that good old Joe is nothing short of a goddamn genius.

ruggednomad5 said:It’s actually not a bad idea. 😉

This whole "puberty" phase excuse is nonsense. Age dictates behavior. We teach them how to walk, we teach them how to handle life at 15 or 16... whether you call those years puberty or a damn potato doesn't change anything.

There is no excuse for being a jerk... if I'm having an orgasm, it doesn't mean I get to act however the hell I want.

That’s just wrong.

You start teaching them how to "handle life" at the exact same time you teach them to walk—actually, maybe even earlier than that.

It is precisely those parents who wait until their kid is 15 or 16—or whatever age they deem appropriate—to finally start teaching them some basic life skills, who end up completely losing their minds wondering why things turned out the way they did with their precious little darling.

northerncyclist2 said:Facebook was taken offline just to put some pressure on the owner to finally deal with the server rights, since some of the emojis are hosted outside the forum (and still are)—which just isn't right. I pointed this out to the admin team, and they agreed with me.

Well, it’s been two months since that "pressure" started, and honestly, nothing has changed.

Admin team, seriously, what a genius plan this was... 🤦

You really think so, :faceplan: ?

ruggednomad5 said:Look, I agree with you, I was paying attention. 🙂

Anne Frank, that little Jewish girl during WWII...
it's easy to say—they're teenagers, so what if they are? Let their hormones run wild, sure, but that doesn't mean anyone else should have to suffer for it...

Look, I know you aren't talking about that kid from the Folgers coffee commercial, but—honestly—I can't for the life of me think of any way in which Anne Frank would be remotely relevant to this discussion.