Collection of Lame Jokes

[Rive]

If you have to get an appointment to a fortune-teller ...
... then it will not worth it.

 

[davenn]

HOW TO INSTALL HUSBAND :

A woman writes to the IT Technical support Guy :- ....

That's brilliant

 

[davenn]

It sure felt like it on campus..I think its still defacto premise is constant.View attachment 249999

A variation on that one ...

 

[Borg]

HOW TO INSTALL HUSBAND :

A woman writes to the IT Technical support Guy :-

I figured there were two sides to the story, so I had to google "how to install wife 1.0"...

Subject: Wife 1.0.

Dear Tech Support:

Last year I upgraded from Girlfriend 7.0 to Wife 1.0 and
noticed that the new program began unexpected child
processing that took up a lot of space and valuable
resources. No mention of this phenomenon was included in
the product brochure. In addition, Wife 1.0 installs itself
into all other programs and launches during system
initialization, where it monitors all other system activity.

Applications such as Poker Night 10.3, Drunken Boys Night
2.5 and Saturday Football 5.0 no longer run, crashing the
system whenever selected.

I cannot seem to keep Wife 1.0 in the background while
attempting to run some of my other favorite applications. I
am thinking about going back to Girlfriend 7.0, but the
uninstall does not work on this program. Can you help me,
please!

Thanks,

Joe

Tech Support response:

Dear Joe:

This is a very common problem men complain about but is
mostly due to a primary misconception. Many people upgrade
from Girlfriend 7.0 to Wife 1.0 with the idea that Wife 1.0
is merely a UTILITIES & ENTERTAINMENT program.

Wife 1.0 is an OPERATING SYSTEM and designed by its creator
to run everything. It is unlikely you would be able to purge
Wife 1.0 and still convert back to Girlfriend 7.0.

Hidden operating files within your system would cause
Girlfriend 7.0 to emulate Wife 1.0 so nothing is gained.

It is impossible to uninstall, delete, or purge the program
files from the system once installed. You cannot go back to
Girlfriend 7.0 because Wife 1.0 is not designed to do this.
Some have tried to install Girlfriend 8.0 or Wife 2.0 but
end up with more problems than the original system. Look in
your manual under "Warnings Alimony/Child Support,"

I recommend you keep Wife 1.0 and just deal with the
situation. I am thinking of having Wife 1.0 installed
myself, I might also suggest you read the entire section
regarding General Partnership Faults (GPFs). You must assume
all responsibility for fault and problems that might occur,
regardless of their cause. The best course of action will be
to enter the command C:\APOLOGIZE.

In any case avoid excessive use of the Esc key because
ultimately you will have to give the APOLOGIZE command
before the operating system will return to normal. The
system will run smoothly as long as you take the blame for
all the GPFs. Wife 1.0 is a great program, but very high
maintenance.

Consider buying additional software to improve the
performance of Wife 1.0. I recommend Flowers 2.1 and
Chocolates 5.0. Do not, under any circumstances, install
Secretary With Short Skirt 3.3. This is not a supported
application for Wife 1.0 and is likely to cause irreversible
damage to the operating system.

Best of luck,

Tech Support

 

[jack action]

The best course of action will be
to enter the command C:\APOLOGIZE.

C:\ ... It figures: another Microsoft product.

 

[Borg]

C:\ ... It figures: another Microsoft product.

In my case it's usually found on a different drive - I:\APOLOGIZE

 

[fresh_42]

In my case it's usually found on a different drive - I:\APOLOGIZE

You have to be very careful with drive "I" at the command level. There is a DOS command (Dangerous Operation Set) called AMRIGHT -y which automatically overwrites the FAT (Faulty Argument Trial) in older systems as well as the NTFS (Never Try Female Senses) of the device. It should only be used in -n Never mode, or you have to reformat the disc.

 

[Borg]

FAT (Faulty Argument Trial)

This should not be mistaken for the "Does this dress make me look FAT?" query which can result in SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES 9.0 if answered incorrectly.

 

[fresh_42]

This should not be mistaken for the "Does this dress make me look FAT?" query which can result in SERIOUS CONSEQUENCES 9.0 if answered incorrectly.

It results in serious consequences if answered at all! One of quite a few lose-lose programs! The rule of thumb is: .COMmunication programs are ok., .EXEcution programs are dangerous.

 

[fresh_42]

 

[mfb]

You'll never find it in steps of whole coffees.

https://xkcd.com/323/

 

[davenn]

 

[jack action]

 

[Ibix]

What's the best thing about living in Switzerland?

I dunno, but the flag is a big plus.

 

[mfb]

I recently joined an ambidextrous group...

It didn’t feel right, so I left.

 

[member 656954]

So I asked a physics major I know whether he ascribes to Everett's many-worlds interpretation.

"Yes and no," he replied.

 

[davenn]

todays pun

 

[fresh_42]

todays pun

View attachment 250475

Well, actually they do, by $\sim 9.36\,\%$, at least here.

 

[Borg]

Well, actually they do, by $\sim 9.36\,\%$, at least here.

I heard that the factory shut down.

 

[fresh_42]

I heard that the factory shut down.

Now that you say it. It's actually $\sim 118,72 \,\%$ since our your sticks are $2\,m$ long. The one meter sticks are more toys and ad gifts. But we do call them yardsticks, inchsticks to translate exactly.

 

[Bystander]

todays pun

I really do not get it.

 

[Borg]

I really do not get it.

It's a double entendre. You can interpret it as they don't make them any longer than a yard or that they don't make them any more.

 

[Bystander]

It's a double entendre. You can interpret it as they don't make them any longer than a yard or that they don't make them any more.

Yes; and? Yes; and?

 

[Borg]

They no longer make them?

 

[davenn]

Yes; and? Yes; and?

They no longer make them?

They make metre sticks now

 

[Ibix]

They make metre sticks now

...which are longer and why they don't make yardsticks any longer.

 

[BillTre]

 

[Mark44]

I recently joined an ambidextrous group...

I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous...

 

[Ibix]

I'd give my right arm to be ambidextrous...

If I gave my left arm, it would be really hard to falsify my claim that I used to be ambidextrous.

Actually, given my normal levels of coordination I think I may be ambisinistrous.

 

[davenn]

View attachment 250488

Haha
our tour guide gave that saying several times each time we past cyclists on the road as we were traveling through the Canadian Rockies a month ago

 

[davenn]

 

[mfb]

Shouldn't Germany just be one flag, and the first two images need to be something else?

 

[jtbell]

Three accountants and three engineers are traveling together by train to a conference.

At the station, each of the accountants buys a ticket, but only one of the engineers does.

Perplexed, the accountants ask, "How are you all going to ride on only one ticket?" The engineers respond, "Wait and see."

The train pulls in. The engineers immediately cram into a restroom together.

After the train leaves, the conductor comes by, knocks on the restroom door, and says "Ticket, please." The door opens a crack, and one arm reaches out with the ticket. The conductor takes it and goes on his way.

The accountants agree that this is a neat trick, and resolve to try it on the return trip.

At the beginning of the return trip, one of the accountants buys a ticket, but none of the engineers do.

Perplexed, the accountants ask, "How are you all going to ride without any ticket?" The engineers respond, "Wait and see."

The train pulls in. The accountants immediately cram into one restroom together, and the engineers cram into another one.

After the train leaves, one of the engineers emerges from their restroom, darts over to the accountants' restroom, knocks on the door, and says "Ticket, please."

 

[Borg]

I guess they weren't accounting for that possibility.

 

[Ibix]

I guess they weren't accounting for that possibility.

Indeed. The trick seems like social engineering.