it would depend on which one of us is the 220 year old
22-year-old.
dontcha think?
> At 7:20 PM +0000 1/16/01, Russell Whitaker wrote:
> >It's encouraging that you're taking the time to respond
> >to statements forwarded to this list, so thanks, but...
> >all I'm asking of you is to disambiguate your statement
> >above, to assure that the inevitable disagreements
> >with it are disagreements with your _actual_ position.
>
> What might be the difference between a 22 year old 22-year-old and a
> 220 year old 22-year-old?
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b30 : Mon May 28 2001 - 09:56:19 MDT