Posted by dorayme on 10/02/25 11:56

In article <AGpHg.10986$Z77.4778@reader1.news.jippii.net>,
"Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> wrote:

> dorayme <doraymeRidThis@optusnet.com.au> scripsit:
>
> > In article <gQFGg.9204$sf2.5912@reader1.news.jippii.net>,
> > "Jukka K. Korpela" <jkorpela@cs.tut.fi> wrote:
> >
> >> Old HTML Slinger <nothere@nowhere.invalid> scripsit:
> >>
> >>> On rare occasions I need to show words or letters being crossed out.
> >>
> >> No you don't.
> >
> > You have evidence for this?
>
> The proof is trivial. Anyone who multiposts hasn't analyzed his problem
> properly. Whatever he might need in general, his real need with the problem
> at hand is to analyze the problem better. Hence he does not need to try to
> solve the wrong problem. QED.

OK, I like this sort of evidence. The above argument is not
entirely consistent but I will let it pass as it enters so
magnificently into the spirit of a Wild Strategic generalization.

You operate at the rarefied level of GHQ, I am too miserably
conscious of the effects of this on the actual troops that had to
get out of the trenches at the Somme and walk over open machine
gun raked ground....

--
dorayme

[Back to original message]