Michael Lazzaro <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > John Siracusa wrote: >> Larry's just thinking out loud, right? > > Yes, and so is everyone else. Most posts here, including Larry's, > are stream-of-conciousness. Heck, in one of the last ones I swear > there were, what, 6 or 7 possible ways to say the same "binary op" > things. 90% of everything proposed is shot down, though sometimes > it generates a lot of noise before dying. Even many of the players > here move in-and-out of conversation, from lurker to poster to > lurker, depending on topic & free time.
And some of us have to summarize the bloody thing. Which is *so* not fun. I'm always tempted to write "The Operator Thread goes on and on, into scary territory 90% of which will turn out to be comepletely irrelevant, but your summarizer hasn't got a clue which 90% that will be. You're on your own..." -- Piers "It is a truth universally acknowledged that a language in possession of a rich syntax must be in need of a rewrite." -- Jane Austen?