all 21 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 109 points 1 year ago (8 children)

I checked the first 4 numbers, seems fine to me. Push to production

  • source
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] [S] 17 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I thought it was prod already! What is this useless "qa" server that keeps costing us money?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 year ago (3 children)
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago

    That's actually pretty close! Only one misplaced number. Causing a shift of three others of course, but still pretty good.

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Everyone is clowning on the order, but clock faces also traditionally use IIII instead of IV.

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    It's very easy to miss if you aren't looking for it. But if you keep an eye out, you'll see most clocks with roman numerals do this.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago

    test: assert I before II

    good to go

  • source
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago*
    [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    May I recommend Japanese numbers, but ordered alphabetically by romaji?

  • source