Please remove error message. Thanks.



  • I have been adding a preferences dialog box to an application used by a customer. I deliver, they run their tests, and today I receive a number of problem tickets and change requests.

     

    Problem ticket #1:

    Description: I do such-and-such. I click the "Save preferences" button. I quit the application, then launch it again. The preferences entered in the previous session are lost.

    Action requested: Keep the preferences between sessions.

     

    Problem ticket #2:

    Description: I do such-and-such. I click the "Save preferences" button. An error message "Could not save preferences" pops up.

    Action requested: Remove the error message.

     

    Both problem tickets were issued by the same person. I wonder if she thought that the error message would pop up at random just to annoy her, and that it was by a lucky coincidence that every time it would pop up, the preferences would not be saved...



  •  Well... get to it! Remove that error message!



  •  I'd replace it with this:

     "Your Settings Have been Saved....Your Settings may not have been Saved"

    OK.

     



  •  

    I see that a lot on forums ... anyway ...

    So ... did you actually resolve the issue that was keeping the client from saving her preferences? 



  •  Users... sometimes a lead pipe to the head is the only solution.



  • Better make sure both of those bugs are happening at the same time, not intermittently and distinctly from each other.  Would be a hell of a thing if the error message meant that the prefs actually HAD been saved.



  • This is a common affliction in users: dialog blindness.

    They are absolutely incapable of [i]reading[/i] anything presented in dialog-box form.   It's sad, really, because once it sets in there's no cure. 



  •  So, how do we get around this dialog blindness syndrome? Maybe present all error messages in a full screen window? Ideas anyone?



  •  The message should contain a question somewhere (How much is 4 + 5) and the buttons should be possible answers, if the wrong button is clicked do it again (but of course with new question and answers)



  • Any helpdesk call that is closed as 'User Error' should result in the user being fired.



  • @TheRider said:

    So, how do we get around this dialog blindness syndrome? Maybe present all error messages in a full screen window? Ideas anyone?
     

    On some Firefox dialogs (i.e. when you want to try and install an extension) there's a countdown so that you can't click OK / Cancel before a few seconds have passed. Doesn't guarantee that they'll read the message, but at least it's something.

    I guess the best solution would be to try and ensure dialog boxes don't pop up unless they're for something important, or at least make them look substantially different when they're important, but I doubt something like that would work. Hmmm.



  • @TheRider said:

     So, how do we get around this dialog blindness syndrome? Maybe present all error messages in a full screen window? Ideas anyone?
     

    The issue, I think, is not the dialog form; it's the [message-pleaseconfirm] form. It's getting facts when you're not expecting them; answers to questions you haven't asked or didn't know you had to ask. You can't learn anything that way, and unless you have a brain anomaly that lets you store and retrieve data indiscriminately, you just cannot parse the new information (this is a rather black-white view of reality, but it holds up pretty well. There are obviously nuances to learning new things at unexpected times).



  • @PhillS said:

    On some Firefox dialogs (i.e. when you want to try and install an extension) there's a countdown so that you can't click OK / Cancel before a few seconds have passed. Doesn't guarantee that they'll read the message, but at least it's something.

    I was thinking about this, and it does force attention to the box, even if out of momentary boredom, but you can't implement it for any and all confirmation situations. :)



  • Ticket 3:

    Description: I get an error that preferences are not saved. Please make it so that when I click "ok" an intern brings me a cup-o-joes!

     

    Brilliant!.



  • @dhromed said:

    @PhillS said:

    On some Firefox dialogs (i.e. when you want to try and install an extension) there's a countdown so that you can't click OK / Cancel before a few seconds have passed. Doesn't guarantee that they'll read the message, but at least it's something.

    I was thinking about this, and it does force attention to the box, even if out of momentary boredom, but you can't implement it for any and all confirmation situations. :)

     

    Theres a plugin to remove that feature.



  • Dialog blindness is due to so many dialogs being either pointless ("Install has detected that DirectX 8.1 or greater is already installed on this system. DirectX 8.1 will not need to be installed as a result") or uninterpretable by the average user (e.g., "msgOpen: unable to open message file: PROMSGS"). So users soon learn to not bother reading them.

    The "Preferences not saved" may be an example of the former. Not saving preferences is clearly a bug (if preferences don't get saved between sessions, then they are not preferences). But what's the point in telling the user, "Oh, here's a bug. Please acknowledge"? They can't do anything about it, except maybe complain to the developers (which they apparently did anyway). It sounds like those pointless "illegal operation" messages from Windows 97.

    So, yes, there were two problems in the app.

    --RA 



  • @Rank Amateur said:

    The "Preferences not saved" may be an example of the former. Not saving preferences is clearly a bug (if preferences don't get saved between sessions, then they are not preferences). But what's the point in telling the user, "Oh, here's a bug. Please acknowledge"? They can't do anything about it, except maybe complain to the developers (which they apparently did anyway).

    So you would rather the user thinks the preferences were saved, when they weren't?

    That is ridiculous. An error has occurred. The program is unable to fix. The user must intervene at that point.



  • @PhillS said:

    On some Firefox dialogs (i.e. when you want to try and install an extension) there's a countdown so that you can't click OK / Cancel before a few seconds have passed. Doesn't guarantee that they'll read the message, but at least it's something.

    I quickly developed the habit of clicking on the deactivated button 'til it works.



  • @jaywalker said:

    I have been adding a preferences dialog box to an application used by a customer. I deliver, they run their tests, and today I receive a number of problem tickets and change requests.

     

    Problem ticket #1:

    Description: I do such-and-such. I click the "Save preferences" button. I quit the application, then launch it again. The preferences entered in the previous session are lost.

    Action requested: Keep the preferences between sessions.

     

    Problem ticket #2:

    Description: I do such-and-such. I click the "Save preferences" button. An error message "Could not save preferences" pops up.

    Action requested: Remove the error message.

     

    Both problem tickets were issued by the same person. I wonder if she thought that the error message would pop up at random just to annoy her, and that it was by a lucky coincidence that every time it would pop up, the preferences would not be saved...

     

     

    Users are stupid and I don't know HOW you can be alive in this world and not have a basic understanding of a UI. 

    I had a user one time complain that when she clicked a button nothing happened. So, we go over and look at what she's doing.  She wasn't clicking ON the button.  So we say "you didn't click on the button." She says, "yeah but I was close to the button so I need the app to know that I'm trying to click the button. I'm clicking close to the button anyways." WTF?

    Also, my favorite is when users change UI layouts and then say to you "How long do you think this will take?  I haven't changed anything so it should not take you long right?"  LOL



  • @Lysis said:

    Users are stupid and I don't know HOW you can be alive in this world and not have a basic understanding of a UI.
     

    The sad reality is that most users are distrusting of computers at best, and at worst out-and-out fear them.  It stems, presumably, from a lack of understanding.  Why they don't feel the same way about other things that are equally complex: cars, for example? I think it has something to do with them believing that computers are smart, when they're actually extremely dumb but very fast.



  • @bstorer said:

    @Lysis said:

    Users are stupid and I don't know HOW you can be alive in this world and not have a basic understanding of a UI.
     

    The sad reality is that most users are distrusting of computers at best, and at worst out-and-out fear them.  It stems, presumably, from a lack of understanding.  Why they don't feel the same way about other things that are equally complex: cars, for example? I think it has something to do with them believing that computers are smart, when they're actually extremely dumb but very fast.

     

    I really believe that it would do a lot of good to pound the following into computer users' heads from as early-on as possible:

    [b]Computers only do exactly what they are told.[/b]

    [b]Computers only do exactly what they are told.[/b]

    [b]Computers only do exactly what they are told.[/b]

    [b]Computers only do exactly what they are told.[/b]

    [b]Computers only do exactly what they are told.[/b]

    Of course just the other day I had some smart-ass try to argue with me that hardware fails [i]so often[/i] that this is an invalid statement, and bugs introduced by failing CPUs make up a sizable portion of user issues.



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @Rank Amateur said:
    The "Preferences not saved" may be an
    example of the former. Not saving preferences is clearly a bug (if
    preferences don't get saved between sessions, then they are not
    preferences). But what's the point in telling the user, "Oh, here's a
    bug. Please acknowledge"? They can't do anything about it, except maybe
    complain to the developers (which they apparently did anyway).

    So you would rather the user thinks the preferences were saved, when they weren't? That is ridiculous. An error has occurred. The program is unable to fix. The user must intervene at that point.

    Oh, well, if there's some way the user can intervene, that's different (and maybe that's the case in this example). Then, of course, the error message needs to indicate how the user can intervene (e.g., retry in a couple of seconds, correct preference values that are illegal, or even "Please call tech support at ###-#### and read them this message so we can fix this bug." Maybe the message had that in this case, in which case the second Problem Report is a WTF. 



  • @Lysis said:

    <snip>

    Also, my favorite is when users change UI layouts and then say to you "How long do you think this will take?  I haven't changed anything so it should not take you long right?"  LOL

     

    Sorry, you fail.....

    Obviously, it is easy to blame the user for not knowing exactly what he/she wanted but you as developer/design could have known, from the begin, that something like that was bound to happen and designed the program so that the GUI is seperated from the other code.

    HINT: MVC

    Next time please don't blame the users but first think if it could have been prevented.



  • @Bifi said:

    @Lysis said:

    <snip>

    Also, my favorite is when users change UI layouts and then say to you "How long do you think this will take?  I haven't changed anything so it should not take you long right?"  LOL

     

    Sorry, you fail.....

    Obviously, it is easy to blame the user for not knowing exactly what he/she wanted but you as developer/design could have known, from the begin, that something like that was bound to happen and designed the program so that the GUI is seperated from the other code.

    HINT: MVC

    Next time please don't blame the users but first think if it could have been prevented.

     

     

    You're right. I should have known that users are too stupid to know what they want and coded for inherent user stupidity. :(

    I still blame the user just for posterity and so I can make fun of them. 



  • @PhillS said:

    On some Firefox dialogs (i.e. when you want to try and install an extension) there's a countdown so that you can't click OK / Cancel before a few seconds have passed. Doesn't guarantee that they'll read the message, but at least it's something.

    I work on computer aided dispatching systems and do customizations for all our customers.  Typically the incident is entered into the system by one person and it automatically pops up in front of the dispatcher who then - duh - dispatches cops or fire personnel.  We have one customer agency who had their system modified to check the elapsed seconds from when the call pops up to when they dispatch it, and if it's under something like 30 seconds it refuses to perform the dispatch and says "you can't possibly have read the call in that short of time". 

    Which is no worse than a few other customers we have who have had us link the system to physical light systems so that when a call pops up to be dispatched, lights flash and bells (or wav files) play on the dispatcher's computer.  These are typically agencies who prefer to avoid the hassle of properly (re)training their employees.  (Tangent:  imagine standing in a busy center with all these bells and whistles going off.  Sheesh)

     



  • @Lysis said:

    You're right. I should have known that users are too stupid to know what they want and coded for inherent user stupidity. :(

    I still blame the user just for posterity and so I can make fun of them. 

     

    I know you are being half-sarcastic, but it is true.  You have to assume:

    1) Users will not read the manual

    2) Users will not read the UI

    3) Users do not know anything about computers

    4) Users do not want to learn anything about computers, especially technical details or inner workings

     

    @bstorer said:

    Why they don't feel the same way about other things that are equally
    complex: cars, for example? I think it has something to do with them
    believing that computers are smart, when they're actually extremely
    dumb but very fast.

     

    Cars are complex, but you do not have to be a mechanic or engineer to operate them.  I think most would agree that cars do a much better job of hiding internal complexity than most computer software, and even electronics such as VCRs and DVD players.

     

    People would love it if computers were as simple to operate as cars.  You are right: nobody understands computers and nobody wants to.  People would also love it if computers would "intelligently" figure what they want to do ("do what I mean, not what I say").  For years, Microsoft has been promising to add a new CLI which would understand natural language.  Wasn't that supposed to be in Longhorn, at some point?



  • @jaywalker said:

    Problem ticket #2:

    Description: I do such-and-such. I click the "Save preferences" button. An error message "Could not save preferences" pops up.

     TRWTF is that you're saving preferences in a place where a Limited User doesn't have write privileges. This is the kind of crap that forced MS to decide to make all new user accounts local admins by default (which is a biggest WTF of Windows XP). By the way, Microsoft guidelines have told you against that, starting circa 1995. But who reads documentaishon?

     

     



  • Even if some genius developed a natural language interface that worked "well", we'd still suffer from the "do what I mean and not what I say" problem. We also have the problem that while the interface should be as simple as possible, like a car, users typically want it to do everything and wash dishes.



  • @alegr said:

    @jaywalker said:

    Problem ticket #2:

    Description: I do such-and-such. I click the "Save preferences" button. An error message "Could not save preferences" pops up.

     TRWTF is that you're saving preferences in a place where a Limited User doesn't have write privileges. This is the kind of crap that forced MS to decide to make all new user accounts local admins by default (which is a biggest WTF of Windows XP). By the way, Microsoft guidelines have told you against that, starting circa 1995. But who reads documentaishon?

     

     

     

    ewwww 1995 is so old school.

    Viva la revoluccion! 



  • @jetcitywoman said:

    Even if some genius developed a natural language interface that worked "well", we'd still suffer from the "do what I mean and not what I say" problem. We also have the problem that while the interface should be as simple as possible, like a car, users typically want it to do everything and wash dishes.

     

    Agreed. 



  • It is my experience that users have developed an uncanny ability to totally ignore error messages. Even if they go to the trouble of taking a screen capture or quoting the message to you verbatim, they don't even realize what they are reading. I put instructions in some of my custom HTTP error headers and 9 times out of 10 when someone hits one they tell me about it, I ask them if they actually followed the instructions, and they say "what instructions?". 



  • @Arenzael said:

    It is my experience that users have developed an uncanny ability to totally ignore error messages. Even if they go to the trouble of taking a screen capture or quoting the message to you verbatim, they don't even realize what they are reading.
     

    Unfortunately, we software developers are (historically) to blame for this.  By giving users cryptic, unhelpful and obscure error messages which they are completely unable or unwilling to act upon, we have taught them to ignore all error messages.



  • @alegr said:

     TRWTF is that you're saving preferences in a place where a Limited User doesn't have write privileges. This is the kind of crap that forced MS to decide to make all new user accounts local admins by default (which is a biggest WTF of Windows XP). By the way, Microsoft guidelines have told you against that, starting circa 1995. But who reads documentaishon?

     

    I agree with your point 100%, but I am having trouble finding where you found this info in the OP.



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @alegr said:

     TRWTF is that you're saving preferences in a place where a Limited User doesn't have write privileges. This is the kind of crap that forced MS to decide to make all new user accounts local admins by default (which is a biggest WTF of Windows XP). By the way, Microsoft guidelines have told you against that, starting circa 1995. But who reads documentaishon?

     

    I agree with your point 100%, but I am having trouble finding where you found this info in the OP.

    The only reason to fail "Save Preferences" is "access denied". This happens when an illiterate programmer uses WriteProfileInt (which is completely old stype) or HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/Software/<your company name>.

     



  • @alegr said:

    @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    @alegr said:

     TRWTF is that you're saving preferences in a place where a Limited User doesn't have write privileges. This is the kind of crap that forced MS to decide to make all new user accounts local admins by default (which is a biggest WTF of Windows XP). By the way, Microsoft guidelines have told you against that, starting circa 1995. But who reads documentaishon?

     

    I agree with your point 100%, but I am having trouble finding where you found this info in the OP.

    The only reason to fail "Save Preferences" is "access denied". This happens when an illiterate programmer uses WriteProfileInt (which is completely old stype) or HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/Software/<your company name>.

     

    So you are saying it is impossible for the disk to be full?



  • @MasterPlanSoftware said:

    So you are saying it is impossible for the disk to be full?
     

    Unfortunately, many applications, especially in this day and age, indeed assume that the disk will never be full.  In the odd case that they cannot write to the disk, they either crash or report an obscure, unhelpful error message.

    Lots of applications assume that files are writable and disk space is plentiful.

    For example, an older version of Beyond Compare 2.0.x would crash immediately if you did the following sequence of actions:

    1) Opened 2 files in the compare viewer

    2) Made changes to either or both files

    3) Closed the viewer, choosing the "Save Changes" option in the dialog

    4) If the file(s) to be saved were read-only, BC would crash immediately, and your changes would be lost. 


    That actually happened to me, after I manually merged a lot of code using BC.  Thankfully they have fixed this problem.  And who else remembers how Windows 9x would blue-screen if you ran out of virtual memory?



  •  @CodeSimian said:

    Cars are complex, but you do not have to be a mechanic or engineer to operate them.  I think most would agree that cars do a much better job of hiding internal complexity than most computer software, and even electronics such as VCRs and DVD players.

     Cars are mechanical devices. Mechanical devices are much 'smarter' than digital ones are, becasue mechanical devices can easily deal with things being a bit off or different than the designer expected. Mechanisims alow a bit of sloppyness in assembly and manufacture, and tend to degrade rather than fail completly as they age. Scramble a few bits in software, on the other hand, or change the environment a bit and random bad suff starts to happen.

     



  • @rdamiani said:

     @CodeSimian said:

    Cars are complex, but you do not have to be a mechanic or engineer to operate them.  I think most would agree that cars do a much better job of hiding internal complexity than most computer software, and even electronics such as VCRs and DVD players.

     Cars are mechanical devices. Mechanical devices are much 'smarter' than digital ones are, becasue mechanical devices can easily deal with things being a bit off or different than the designer expected. Mechanisims alow a bit of sloppyness in assembly and manufacture, and tend to degrade rather than fail completly as they age. Scramble a few bits in software, on the other hand, or change the environment a bit and random bad suff starts to happen.

     

    Thanks for that, but a few points:

    1) I understand all of that - it is an analogy, which by definition, is imperfect.  The point is that drivers have to worry about complexity to a much lesser degree than computer users do, if I'm not mistaken.  I'm not concerned about the root causes.  The issue of complexity needs to be dealt with, regardless.  For example, arguably computers are much more complex internally than 30 years ago, yet at the same time, much easier to use.  How do you explain that?

    2) Users shouldn't have to care whether a device is mechanical or electrical.  The whole point is that internal complexity should be hidden, regardless of the degree of that complexity.

    3) Please correct me if I am grossly mistaken, but last time I checked, cars are incorporating more and more software, for diagnostics, ABS systems, etc.  Wasn't there a recent news story about driver-less cars being available in the near future (a decade or two, at most)?  I don't think cars are 100% mechanical anymore.

     



  • @CodeSimian said:

    3) Please correct me if I am grossly mistaken, but last time I checked, cars are incorporating more and more software, for diagnostics, ABS systems, etc.  Wasn't there a recent news story about driver-less cars being available in the near future (a decade or two, at most)?  I don't think cars are 100% mechanical anymore.

    Electronic fuel injection. Electrical steering assist (in hybrid vehicles). Electronic ignition. Computer-controlled automatic transmission. It's like only crankshaft is still dumb.

     



  • @medialint said:

     

    I see that a lot on forums ...

     

    It's called "lurking for a while before you post".  Nothing wrong with or even surprising about that really.



  • @XIU said:

     The message should contain a question somewhere (How much is 4 + 5) and the buttons should be possible answers, if the wrong button is clicked do it again (but of course with new question and answers)

     

    And with a "Duurrr" or "wa-waa-wa-waaaaaa" sound effect before presenting the new question!



  • @Lysis said:

    @jaywalker said:

    I have been adding a preferences dialog box to an application used by a customer. I deliver, they run their tests, and today I receive a number of problem tickets and change requests.

     

    Problem ticket #1:

    Description: I do such-and-such. I click the "Save preferences" button. I quit the application, then launch it again. The preferences entered in the previous session are lost.

    Action requested: Keep the preferences between sessions.

     

    Problem ticket #2:

    Description: I do such-and-such. I click the "Save preferences" button. An error message "Could not save preferences" pops up.

    Action requested: Remove the error message.

     

    Both problem tickets were issued by the same person. I wonder if she thought that the error message would pop up at random just to annoy her, and that it was by a lucky coincidence that every time it would pop up, the preferences would not be saved...

     

     

    Users are stupid and I don't know HOW you can be alive in this world and not have a basic understanding of a UI. 

    I had a user one time complain that when she clicked a button nothing happened. So, we go over and look at what she's doing.  She wasn't clicking ON the button.  So we say "you didn't click on the button." She says, "yeah but I was close to the button so I need the app to know that I'm trying to click the button. I'm clicking close to the button anyways." WTF?

    Also, my favorite is when users change UI layouts and then say to you "How long do you think this will take?  I haven't changed anything so it should not take you long right?"  LOL

     

    I saw what you did there! 



  • @djork said:

    @bstorer said:

    @Lysis said:

    Users are stupid and I don't know HOW you can be alive in this world and not have a basic understanding of a UI.
     

    The sad reality is that most users are distrusting of computers at best, and at worst out-and-out fear them.  It stems, presumably, from a lack of understanding.  Why they don't feel the same way about other things that are equally complex: cars, for example? I think it has something to do with them believing that computers are smart, when they're actually extremely dumb but very fast.

    Users are not distrusting of computers.  Users are SCARED of computers!  They freeze up like a rabbit in the headlights.  They really think the computer might hurt them if they do something bad.  Hence, I suggest we should use this fear against them: 

    @djork said:

    @bstorer said:
    @Lysis said:

    I really believe that it would do a lot of good to pound the following into computer users' heads from as early-on as possible:

    Computers only do exactly what they are told.

    Computers only do exactly what they are told.

    Computers only do exactly what they are told.

    Computers only do exactly what they are told.

    Computers only do exactly what they are told.

     

    I have a better plan.  I really believe that it would do a lot of good to pound THIS following into computer user's heads: 

    Users only do exactly what they are told.

    Users only do exactly what they are told.

    Users only do exactly what they are told.

    Users only do exactly what they are told.

    Users only do exactly what they are told OR THE COMPUTER WILL EAT YOU!!!! YES!!!  REALLY!!!! THEY HAVE TEETH THE SIZE OF YOUR ARM!!!1!! ONCE THEY HAVE THE TASTE OF BLOOD THEY'LL NEVER STOP UNTIL THEY HUNT YOU DOWN AND KILL YOU LIKE THE DOG YOU ARE!!!!2!!! O NO HERE IT COMES NOW!!!1! ! RUN FOR YOUR LIFE!!!1!!!  AAAAAAAARRRGGGHGGGHHHHHscream!!!!

     

     

     

     That'll keep 'em in line!



  • I think people don't switch off as much with cars because if you make a mistake you wreck your car and possibly get injured or killed. If it were normal for a computer to smash your head into the keyboard and crumple up into a broken heap, people would read every single dialog very carefully.

    Besides, cars perform a single fixed function, and you're not allowed to drive them until you can pass a test demonstrating that you understand the system well enough to behave safely for yourself and others.  And they're still not that great - I can't just aim roughly at my destination, there's all other people in the way and the car goes really fast but you're only allowed to go at a slower speed. What's that all about? I demand to mumble something and the car to take me to my destination in minutes. If I say "Africa" I want to be seeing zebras and giraffes in half an hour or this whole driving thing is just a gyp!

    And they should go back in time, transform into robots, fly and be bulletproof just like on the TV.



  • new CLI which would understand natural language.  Wasn't that supposed to be in Longhorn, at some point?

     

    ELIZA: How do you do.  Please tell me your problem.
    YOU:   format the c: drive
    ELIZA: Please go on.
    YOU:   Can you format the C: drive for me?
    ELIZA: Do you wish to believe I format the c: drive for you ?
    YOU:   Yes
    ELIZA: I see.




  • @ComputerForumUser said:

    I think people don't switch off as much with cars because if you make a mistake you wreck your car and possibly get injured or killed. If it were normal for a computer to smash your head into the keyboard and crumple up into a broken heap, people would read every single dialog very carefully.

     

    Wait a minute, run that past me again?  I think you may have something there... <scurries off to browse through haptics references>



  • @alegr said:


    The only reason to fail "Save Preferences" is "access denied". This happens when an illiterate programmer uses WriteProfileInt (which is completely old stype) or HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE/Software/<your company name>.

     

    Not quite. In fact, they want their users to be able to launch the application on any workstation and have access to their preferences. Therefore, registry or ini files were ruled out, and we had to store the preferences in a database table. The error message came when the database server failed. (For the record, it turned out the table was not created correctly on the test environment.)

    By the way, storing stuff in a text file may be old style, but I fail to see why it would be worse than storing them in a binary registry.



  • @DaveK said:

    @medialint said:

     

    I see that a lot on forums ...

     

    It's called "lurking for a while before you post".  Nothing wrong with or even surprising about that really.

     

    Well, I believe it's called "not counting the first post correctly". Not surprising,  but wrong indeed.



  • @jetcitywoman said:

    ... lights flash and bells (or wav files) play on the dispatcher's computer.  ...  (Tangent:  imagine standing in a busy center with all these bells and whistles going off.  Sheesh) 

     

    I imagine a center where the employees have other duties/Tend to sit in the back having a smoke/play minesweeper - clearly a "bells and whistles" alert  makes sense in this environment. 



  • @mendel said:

    @DaveK said:

    @medialint said:

     

    I see that a lot on forums ...

     

    It's called "lurking for a while before you post".  Nothing wrong with or even surprising about that really.

     

    Well, I believe it's called "not counting the first post correctly". Not surprising,  but wrong indeed.

     

    It was entirely true.  It's the number of posts he had so far when he wrote that one.  It can't refer to itself because the new post is committed and the counter incremented in one atomic database transaction.

    Wow, I'm almost on-topic there.

     


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to What the Daily WTF? was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.