Yes - that’s a sign of reliability. The places where spamming goes unmoderated are much less reliable.
It used to be, but then they fixed being a injection site for malware a few years ago.
Alright, this is unreliable. emphasized text
Sites don’t get injections
Thar would be a figure of speech. In this context, synonyms could include insertion, entry, “back door” and many other words. Using a figure of speech is not by itself a measure of how reliable a statement may be.
I don’t think I have ever seen a useful answer on either of those sites?
To the extent that I never seek them out, and if one shows up, I skip it immediately…
When do they hand out the nice red uniforms?
You only get it if you bring us a Shrubbery! (I know, I am mixing skits…)
After they definitively established How Was Babby Formed, there was no reason to go on.
I’ll contact Mr. Webster and ask him to change them to your method.
No offense, but that’s pretty unreliable.
THREE weapons, intelligence, knowledge, ruthless efficiency, and pedantry. All right, FOUR weapons. Intelligence, knowledge…
I for one am pretty reliable when I post sober. Don’t know much about pedantry, but my nitpicks are always spot on.
FIVE weapons …intelligence, knowledge, ruthless efficiency, pedantry, and extreme repetition late at night while insufficiently sober.
:gron:
Hey, that’s my line! It’s because they’re Reliant on the customer rather than Reliable to the customer.
ETA I was thinking of Reliant Energy.
we can be relied on to cut to the salient points of another dopers comments…
and we double down when we’re bending the rules…
Ok, so I need a reliable ruling on whether I have I broken a rule here.
Nah…I’m pretty sure you’re sitting pretty.
Thanks for calling me pretty tho’. Makes my day.
Pretty funny, huh?
I made me laugh.
Nit-pickery, don’t forget.
I don’t think it’s hyphenated.