|
Member account closed and article was on 20 so I've deleted it
|
|
|
|
|
|
Final kick delivered.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Site driving: Jean Bolvar - Professional Profile[^]
Joined today, first post, and it's generic with a link:
Thank you so much, don't forget tovisit our website :-D [link removed]
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
.
Software rusts. Simon Stephenson, ca 1994. So does this signature. me, 2012
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
...and article deleted.
Bad command or file name. Bad, bad command! Sit! Stay! Staaaay...
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Gone
There are only 10 types of people in the world, those who understand binary and those who don't.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
I'm not sure about this one.
Yes the link goes to (what I assume) his blog.
Yes the message is badly written (why the code tags...)
Yes the account is new.
Yes he replied to the wrong person.
But the information is (for as far as I can see) relevant (did not read the whole blog), at least to the OP's asked question in the subject, the question body seems to change the context of the OP's question.
Is it not allowed to link to once own blog if the link provides an answer to the question asked?
Tom
|
|
|
|
|
Not only is he replying to the wrong person, he's reply to the thread seven months after the last message was posted.
It's definitely his blog - his profile links to the same site.
The blog post seems to be little more that a vehicle to advertise his company's products and services.
Smells pink and ham-like to me.
"These people looked deep within my soul and assigned me a number based on the order in which I joined."
- Homer
|
|
|
|