From: Mxsmanic on
Dave Frightens Me writes:

> And you go on to explain yourself, or do you just get less hours?

It's not either-or. I explain the rule; there isn't any explanation
for why the rule exists.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
From: Mxsmanic on
Dave Frightens Me writes:

> You just admitted you are sometimes wrong.

Yes, so?

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
From: Mxsmanic on
Stanislas de Kertanguy writes:

> You said there were no French fast food chains, I answered with
> examples such as Paul and La Brioche dor┬Łe. These are even mntioned in
> the Paris Fast food section of your website (hence the name I gave to
> the debate).

Not everything in that section is a fast-food chain in the American
sense. The French chains are mere approximations. I wouldn't call a
place that sells mainly rolls and sandwiches and has no place to sit
down and has slow service and no trays a fast-food chain.

Even in the real fast-food chains in France, the service is so slow
that they don't really qualify.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
From: Mxsmanic on
David Horne, _the_ chancellor of the royal duchy of city south and
deansgate writes:

> This is a good example of your dishonesty. You said _universal_. What
> are they?

They are universal because people can distinguish music from noise.
Without rules, that wouldn't be possible. Music uses tones and
timbres that are pleasing to the ear and arranges them in mathematical
relationships to each other that also are pleasing to the ear. Noise
does not. Thus, music follows universal rules that distinguish it
from noise.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.
From: Mxsmanic on
jeremyrh.geo(a)yahoo.com writes:

> In other words, you don't admit to mistakes you make.

I haven't made any mistakes in this context.

--
Transpose mxsmanic and gmail to reach me by e-mail.