13 Nov 09
Originally posted by SeitseThen why doesn't it have a 7 in it? We need to subtract 3 from the total or the Naked Chancellor will veto the movement without remorse.
I am not going to express it in Boolean terms.
I thought it was clear during the last Wet Buffaloes' meeting.
13 Nov 09
1 edit
Originally posted by hopscotchThe position of the Naked Chancellor has been weakened after the extravagant
Then why doesn't it have a 7 in it? We need to subtract 3 from the total or the Naked Chancellor will veto the movement without remorse.
abridgment by Deacon Supreme.
I wouldn't worry that much for the 7 when The Catharsis Level II is imminent.
13 Nov 09
1 edit
Originally posted by KJCavalierI wouldn't worry too much. On the grander scale of things this is probably not even 0.[WORD TOO LONG] of a waste of binary space - just on this site. 😉
WOW!!! Total and complete nonsense in a thread!!
Well I guess its like all the rest after all.😞
Edit: Press 'quote and reply' to see my post! 😏
13 Nov 09
Originally posted by SeitseRec for "recursively enumerable". Wow, Seitse... and to think some of my miserable convoluted stuff gets perceived as abstruse.
Moreover, young man, as you already know, any [b]profile envelope is recursively enumerable.
I hope we won't have this conversation anymore.[/b]
~~~ GB 😀 SOA~~