 | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Jon Palmer
|
| | | Hmm let me take a shot... 1. substitute are for is 2. errors is misspelled. 2. there are only two errors in the sentence. -Jon "David M." <ElectroTX@webtv.net> wrote in message news:G4B7nt.FFn@lugnet.com... (...) (24 years ago, 20-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | |
| | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Jon Palmer
|
| | | | So was I right? "Jon Palmer" <jpalmer@oklahoma.net> wrote in message news:G4B9xn.JI7@lugnet.com... (...) (24 years ago, 21-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —David Martineau
|
| | | | (...) Yes you are... But I was hoping to start a discussion on whether or not the third error is untrue. Or is it? Cleverly yours, theirs, and everybody's, --Electro-- (24 years ago, 22-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | (...) This is a restating of the "Liar Paradox" a la "Everything I say is a lie." If I recall my Logic course correctly, a statement of that sort has no distinct truth value one way or the other, in that (in context) it cannot be definably true or (...) (24 years ago, 22-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) I agree. c.f. Goedel. This statement has the truth value "undecidable" (24 years ago, 22-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Dave Schuler
|
| | | | | | (...) I'm sorry, but my knowledge of Goedel is incomplete. Dave! (24 years ago, 22-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Andrew Lipson
|
| | | | | | | (...) Mine is inconsistent. Andrew (24 years ago, 22-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Larry Pieniazek
|
| | | | | | (...) I wasn't able to predict you'd say that, given the premises available to me in this frame of reference! ++Lar (24 years ago, 24-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Thomas R. Sibley
|
| | | | (...) Yes, it is untrue. There should be two spaces after the period, not one. Of course you could argue that the spaces are not part of the sentence. :) Cheers, (24 years ago, 24-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | | (...) Not generally true in common internet style. Furthermore, *defintely* not true when using proportionally-spaced fonts. With e-mail and news, everybody should be using a monospaced font, so using two spaces is acceptable [1], but if you're (...) (24 years ago, 24-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Thomas R. Sibley
|
| | | | | | (...) Well, I'll have to disagree with you on that one. I always put two spaces in between sentences and I always will. I find that it looks cleaner anyway. Cheers, Tom (24 years ago, 2-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | | | (...) You're welcome to. Just be aware that you're wrong. :) (24 years ago, 3-Dec-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —David Martineau
|
| | | | (...) That's an out-dated concept taught by keyboarding instructors who were originally taught on fixed-width font systems e.g. typewriters. There is no longer a need to extend distances between the end of one sentence and the beginning of another, (...) (24 years ago, 25-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Constantine Hannaher
|
| | | | | (...) Not to mention that modern word processing software takes cares of inter-sentence spacing by itself. The typing of a second space is a wasted keystroke. (24 years ago, 25-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | (...) Or, uh, e-mail and usenet news (like lugnet), which should *always* use fixed-width fonts. (24 years ago, 25-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Shiri Dori
|
| | | | (...) But, reading lugnet on the web, it doesn't. -Shiri (24 years ago, 25-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Matthew Miller
|
| | | | (...) Yeah, I've got mixed feelings about that. :) (24 years ago, 25-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
| | | | | | Re: Figure This One Out... Kinda Neat —Todd Lehman
|
| | | | (...) I've always hated it. Historically, the reason it uses Times Roman (or else the browser's default) rather than Courier (or whatever <PRE> results in) is because the default fixed-width font in both NN & MSIE on low-end 640x480 displays (common (...) (24 years ago, 26-Nov-00, to lugnet.off-topic.geek)
|
| | | | |
