Maybe he meant, 'North Americon Centrol Kwality Controll'.
Quality, by definition, kinda implies the result is good, no!?Bunn-Gee wrote:
Just because you have quality control doesn't mean it's GOOD quality control.
Either way, EA fucked up!
btw, i believe you...
So who controls the quality of the Quality control?
It isn't under a branch of the UN is it?
It isn't under a branch of the UN is it?
Last edited by KnowMeByTrailOfDead (2006-08-29 08:59:29)
if you are wrong can we ban you?
Have you even played BF2 with patch 1.3?ryan_14 wrote:
I don't even care about 1.4
Do we really need it?
I have lost thousands of points due to server crashes.
We need 1.4 to fix this even if it does nothing else.
DrM
I already asked Chuy to if I was wrong..P581 wrote:
if you are wrong can we ban you?
Thats just so true, we all hate server crashes GrrrrDrM wrote:
Have you even played BF2 with patch 1.3?ryan_14 wrote:
I don't even care about 1.4
Do we really need it?
I have lost thousands of points due to server crashes.
We need 1.4 to fix this even if it does nothing else.
DrM
No. Because Quality in this context is an adjective to Control. So the noun is Control that is dscribed as Quality. In fact you could have a quality control who's goal was to ensure BAD quality. Quality is descriptive of value but doesn't designate good or bad value.RicardoBlanco wrote:
Quality, by definition, kinda implies the result is good, no!?Bunn-Gee wrote:
Just because you have quality control doesn't mean it's GOOD quality control.
Either way, EA fucked up!
Generally though, yes....the goal is good quality control and theirs obviously failed with 1.3.
You WERE wrong so hopefully Chuy's doing the business...RicardoBlanco wrote:
I already asked Chuy to if I was wrong..P581 wrote:
if you are wrong can we ban you?
turns out you were wrong