Who's the biggest dork here?

[Denny]

When was the last time you were right-royally shagged?

You seem to be craving attention.

Are you not getting enough?

I'm getting far too much attention from you, that's for sure!

[sasguru]

Dorks are not daft, instead they have delusions of being bright and so think they are writing intelligent, impressively knowledgeable answers that don't convince anyone. Dorkdum is the province of the deluded and unaware, not the daft.You would fail hopelessly because you don't even attempt to appear brainy.

A few strategic miscalculations on the maths thread, a few aimless comments and misdirections on recruitment and ir35 matters, make friends with Malvolio and the title's mine.

Plot, plot, plot, plot.....[read Machiavelli] plot....plot....plot....

Ah the irony is exquisite.

[El_Diablo]

Oh Denny you poor thing

[Nicky G]

Though we are blessed with many, many nerds on this forum.

On the bright side, you are also blessed with me. I am the biggest **** here.

[BrowneIssue]

You see that -----> .

That's you and the validity of your opinions, that is.

Brilliant! I shall steal that response, claim it as my own and recycle it many, many times.

As for Dorkism, I've got a personal reference for being a geek (see .sig) does that count?

[The Lone Gunman]

No no, I never ever win anything. I am desperate to be acknowledged.

[TheFaQQer]

Brilliant! I shall steal that response, claim it as my own and recycle it many, many times.

As for Dorkism, I've got a personal reference for being a geek (see .sig) does that count?

Why is 65535 important in your signature?

[BrowneIssue]

Why is 65535 important in your signature?

If you have to ask... you're in the wrong thread!

Because if 5X's subsequent post had brought CUK crashing down about our keyboards, mine would have been the last CUK post ever.

[TheFaQQer]

If you have to ask... you're in the wrong thread!

Because if 5X's subsequent post had brought CUK crashing down about our keyboards, mine would have been the last CUK post ever.

Oh - in the same way I had 32767 which would have been the last one if BATTS broke it by exceeding 32k.

Why would it be a 64k limit though? 32767 is much more significant, if you ask me.

[NickFitz]

Oh - in the same way I had 32767 which would have been the last one if BATTS broke it by exceeding 32k.

Why would it be a 64k limit though? 32767 is much more significant, if you ask me.

32767 (0111 1111 1111 1111 in binary) is significant if it's contained in a 16-bit word which is treated as a signed two's-complement value, because incrementing it would cause it to wrap around to -32768 (1000 0000 0000 0000 in binary). If a 16-bit word is treated as an unsigned value then the maximum value it can contain is 65535 (1111 1111 1111 1111 in binary) - when incremented beyond that it would overflow and be reset to zero (0000 0000 0000 0000 in binary).

So they are of equal significance depending on context - for example, it was VB treating a 16-bit value as signed two's-complement that wiped out all the posts on the 10 Downing Street web site's forum when post 32768 (which is actually -32768) was submitted. Had the post ID been treated as an unsigned value, then the incompetence of the developer(s) (and therefore at the heart of Government, as they hired them) wouldn't have been exposed for another few months.