- Joined
- May 14, 2021
@Null , for your Bossman intro, BMJ thread effortpooster @Absolutely Retarded made a great video: https://kiwifarms.st/threads/austin...7-bossmanjack-irondollah.170347/post-19385392
Follow along with the video below to see how to install our site as a web app on your home screen.
Note: This feature may not be available in some browsers.
I get this is probably a Indian thing, but don't a lot of people have a hatred/fear of public toilets? Never understood it but I've heard of it.In Australia the Queensland Public Health department/ministry(whatever) want's you to know it's okay to poop at work.
View attachment 6435899
View attachment 6435900
My friend has a professor that would pee at urinals with his pants and underwear to the floorI'll never forget walking into the bathroom at work (typical multi stall, couple urinals, few sinks) and seeing ALL of some guys clothes folded neatly on the dirty bathroom floor while he shat. Then I realized we are among animals (he was black, engineer too)
that's just asserting dominanceMy friend has a professor that would pee at urinals with his pants and underwear to the floor
Thank you for giving me a good laugh at work.My friend has a professor that would pee at urinals with his pants and underwear to the floor
Thank you.Claim one - "suspicious" remote logins contain no remote workstation name. Microsoft documentation states that's expected as that workstation name is not a required field. If they were logging into the server using a remote support application of some sort, it could proxy through the remote support servers and possibly not provide a workstation name. Very plausible, honestly.
Claim two - "suspicious" remote logins somehow didn't generate a credential validation event. This part comes off a lot more as "trust us, we looked" since they say they checked and every remote login had a corresponding credential validation event logged. They just say it always generates the paired events and they've never found a case where it didn't. It's unclear if they mean in general, or on that particular election log dump. But expert testimony really is just "trust me I'm an expert" in the end.
Super cute!here's my idea for a women's shirt, it's ham, femham, and kiwi trick-or-treating.
feels good manMy friend has a professor that would pee at urinals with his pants and underwear to the floor
3am Bossman ballot drop incoming!I will not allow the sacred lolcow of the year award to be compromised by mail in vote fraud. STOP THE COUNT.
Only if you spice the stream up with some crackarooski.I feel like literally nothing has happened since Tuesday. Maybe I should just play stake.us for two hours to commiserate.
Not to say one way or another, but that section of the testimony was a lot more technical than discussing authorized paper, and he knows he has to accurately describe the technical details without being TOO technical, so I can understand that being more stressful in general. Reminds me of customers who want an explanation of something that happened, but they actually really don't care about the technical details - so they can be both pushy and overwhelmed by the information they asked for. Say something a little too technical and they lose the thread entirely and derail. And that's not even in a "defend your company from allegations" kind of situation!this part caught my attention because the witness had a clear increase in vocal stress: more stuttering, higher pitch
Nigga youre in Serbia, you can actually gamble on the .com where there's more gamesI feel like literally nothing has happened since Tuesday. Maybe I should just play stake.us for two hours to commiserate.
Americans are perpetually toetagged with amerimutt status. Can't open bank accounts in Swiss banks, can't gamble on foreign websites.Nigga youre in Serbia, you can actually gamble on the .com where there's more games