"I think I'll create a thread suggesting better macro protection."
"Huh? Why are so many people against macro protection?"
"Oh, they rely on them."
Atherman wrote:"I think I'll create a thread suggesting better macro protection."
"Huh? Why are so many people against macro protection?"
"Oh, they rely on them."
Elirian wrote:I think a lot of people have posted a lot of other reasons to be against. Valid ones too.
Jackard wrote:Jackard wrote:Is it that time again already?
Atherman wrote:Elirian wrote:I think a lot of people have posted a lot of other reasons to be against. Valid ones too.
Reasons such as "It would be a waste of time" and "I don't feel like implementing that."
DatOneGuy wrote:You should go back and actually read what jorb wrote. You clearly have problems with reading as all of your posts have indicated repeating what was previously said, misunderstanding what was written, and you (as well as Atherman) continuously posting ideas that are overused, overthought of, and would take even someone with a base IQ of 75 less than a minute of thinking to find out how bad it would be to implement.
Continuing to post in this thread is useless to you, jorb has already posted his views (several times since you didn't catch it the first time) and as it seems is not changing.
As for your 'is it safe or not', how about you read his posts and think it through.
Users browsing this forum: Claude [Bot] and 0 guests