Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Richard J. Hanak
Fortis wrote:
Quote:
|
Playing fair, can you define the idea of Richard J Hanak in an unambiguous way?
|
Because the expression ‘the idea of Richard J. Hanak’ has several different meanings and because a number of other people also have that name, your question is too ambiguous to answer in an unambiguous way. If you would tell me how your intent in that question is relevant to this thread, I would gladly help you to revise the question.
|
Since you are so "fond" of dissecting what others post, lets take a second and dissect what you have posted,
shall we?...
Quote:
|
Because the expression "the idea of Richard J. Hanak' has several different meanings...
|
Really? I find nothing vague about
Fortis' question. He basically is asking, "what is the reasoning going on in your head?" or "What is your intention with all of "this?" or to put it simply..."What is your "point"??? From reading this thread, it's
obvious that you have no "point", so I can see why you don't want to answer that question.
Quote:
|
...and because a number of other people have that name...
|
Irrelevant...
Fortis was asking
you the question, not someone who shares your name. I'm surprised that you would think that you could post that,
as if it was a "case of mistaken identity".
Quote:
|
...your question is too ambigious to answer in an unambigous way.
|
Not "ambigious",
at all. I know that you
want it to be that way so you can continue to make this thread you personal "word playground", but that won't work. The only "ambigious" poster here is
you.
Quote:
|
If you would tell me how your intent in that question is relevant to this thread, I would gladly help you revise the question.
|
Relevant?? How could anything be "relevant" when this whole thread is simply a "game" with no answers. It doesn't have anything to do with
Against the Mainstream theories, either, since you haven't proposed
any theory. You simply want to "play" with the definitions of words. Why didn't you just title this thread, "What
is is?" That would have made as much sense.
And if any "definition is possible", then "any answer is possible"...
Read the 2nd quote in my sig...