Continuing to believe that they haven’t gotten an answer because they haven’t gotten an answer they like is why some people never get anywhere.
Continuing to believe that they haven’t gotten an answer because they haven’t gotten an answer they like is why some people never get anywhere.
So then if you were to bring up two conflicting orders from your boss, say to purchase 20 new printers [with some minimum set of requirements] AND to keep the price below a certain limit, because there doesn't exist any printer with those requirements with a low enough cost that you can buy 20 of them and getting a "Fuck Off!" when requesting clarification on which requirement should be relaxed is reasonable? That such a response is "an answer"?
Or would you insist that your problem be heard?
What court has even heard the evidence and given an answer? There is no pretending that we haven’t been given an answer; it is a fact.