JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > Hi Ben! Great to hear from you yet again! lamer
> Ben Tremblay wrote: > > JTK <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote in message >news:<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>... > > > jesus X wrote: >> > > Blake Ross wrote: >> > >> Fact: you are terribly misinformed. >> > >> The number of bugs has skyrocketed over the years because the number of >> > >> people reporting them has skyrocketed over the years, and because we >> > >> have more features and components than we used to. [...] >> > > You are 100% right. In fact, I call it Bugzilla Inflation, and go into >> > > detail in that article under the Bugzilla Inflation and Bugzilla Facts >> > > sections. thanks go to Asa for helping me compile those numbers, too. > > > AH! So *THE LORD* is the one behind that article! Wonderful! Why no > > > attribution, or did I just miss it? > > What is this in aid of? We all know you're an asshole ... no need for > > further evidence of that. > Ah, pleasant and refreshing! That's my Benny! wrong on all counts, lamer ... you see yourself living in some sort of parallel universe? >> > > "To get technical for just a moment, the total number of bugs at any >> > > given time is a function of the number of Bugzilla reporters, not a >> > > function of the quality of Mozilla." > > > So you mean to say that: > > > N_bugs_in_bugzilla = A * N_registered_bugzilla_users > > > for some suitable A? > > Ever heard of abstraction, dipshit? > Why no Ben, what's that? And how does it apply to anything we're > discussing here? Is dipping shit an "abstraction" of something? > (<===bait) Take it as question one of an aptitude test, loser. > > How about Heisenburg's cat? > BAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAAHAHHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAAAAAAAA!!!! > Well now, I've heard of Werner Heisenberg (note the spelling), A single type gives you that big a laugh? Pathetic. > and I've heard of cats. Did Mr. Heisenberg have a cat? If so, why do > you bring it up? That was Q2 ... your score: 0 > Oh excuse me, I meant to say, "why do you bring it up > _assrammer_?", so's you can understand it Benny. I can see you're inspired by this style. > ("Oh no, he can use foul language better than I can! I better run and > hide!") You into "hide and seek"? Rape fantasies as well? or what that be telling? > Word to the wise, or in this case you: take a few seconds and crack an > encyclopedia before making yourself look like a HI-LARIOUSLY inept > teenager in front of all the other inept teenagers in here. They're > laughing at you even harder than I am. What was this in aid of, except to flaunt your ability to spell en.cy.clo.pe.di.a? > > How about the sound of a tree falling if no one's there to hear it? > Much like your posts from the junior high library, huh? _non sequitor_ ... your brain's thrashing already? > > How about granularity? > Yeah, isn't that what sand comes in? Yes, now go play on the beach where you can be as pissy as you want without bothering others. > > Given a complex project, > ...which Mozilla is not, compared to many other projects which have > delivered in less than a decade... rrrrrriiiiiiggggggggggggggghhhhht ... what smehly clohsut dihd you just crawhl out of?! > > the number of bugs reported is directly related to the number of eyes > > looking and the number of hands typing, > And not at all related to the number of bugs in the software, huh? Of course not, you pathetic fruit cake ... you just dream this up in order to have some pretext to continue your rant. Point: it's entirely about your pathology and only peripherally about the project. > So if BizarroMozilla had absolutely zero defects, the number of reported > defects would be the same as if it had nothing but defects? *the sound of JTK's brain thrashing* > > Welcome to the wonderful world of OpenSource, ya friggin' twit. > A world where bugs that don't exist count the same as those that do. That's how you see it? You really do have your head up your ass. > Wow. Ya friggin' fudgepacker. Point: this is how you react to something that exists only in your piss-stained mind. > > > All it does then is track entries made by registered users, which may in > > > fact be bugs in Mozilla, or bugs in other products, or recipies, or > > > porn, or maybe they're just using it as a substitute for NNTP or email, > > > whatever. > > yada yada yada ... the sound of one twit flapping > Ah, an interesting perspective you bring Benny! And not even punctuated > remotely properly. You're fixated! You really believe this is about punktuashun? ... lamer > > > BTW: I know you won't take this for what it's worth, but I read both > > > articles in their entirety. While yours is written better, his is more > > > factually correct and less biased. > > *Yikes!* I _knew_ you weren't iredeemable! *I'mma gonna shoot that > > word!* > You're gonna have to learn how to spell it first, dickless. the point stands > > _credit where credit is due_ ... wow ... JTK is not _entirely_ > > bereft of positive aspects! > Of course I am, what are you talking about, dumbass? That's just your way of squirming away from anything other than self-indulgent trash. (Self-deprecatory as well, one might note.) > > Man, ain't that a light on the horizon! > Well let me look here... yep, that's what it looks like alright! And > for God's sake clear out some of that ear wax, Christ, ya ever hear of > "Heisenberg's Q-Tips"? Let me step through your logic here: you agree that giving credit where credit is due's light on the horizon, and therefore I should get Q-Tips to clean my ears ... nope laddy, no entailment there ... just the sound of you splashing around in the piss-warm world of your solipsism. *When it falls off a cliff and crashes through the wind shield of your car, it becomes immediately clear that a rock is a rohk is a rawk.*
