Archived from groups: alt.games.creatures (
More info?)
"emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
news:slrncbub5a.gkr.the_emmel*whatever*@btcips73x12.cip.uni-bayreuth.de...
> On 2004-06-01, Refractor Dragon <wanderer@beeb.web> wrote:
> > "emmel" <the_emmel*whatever*@gmx.net> wrote in message
> > news:slrncbo5qd.sd.the_emmel*whatever*@storm.mlnet...
> {Suddenly the air became damp and condensated in tiny water drops.
>
> s/condensated/condensed/}
>
> >> >> >> > Just to check, is 'condensated' the right word here? Not
> > certain...
> >> >> > the
> >> >> >> > right meaning, but the right form?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Erm, I'm not sure what you mean...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Just... go over it again, carefully, making sure that it's what
you
> >> > meant.
> >> >> > Oh, and should that be 'in' or 'into'?
> >> >>
> >> >> 'into', most probably. Still, I'm not so sure why there could be a
> >> >> problem with 'condensated'...
> >> >
> >> > Probably because I don't fully remember how the word's supposed to be
> > used.
> >> >
> >> > condensate // n.
> >> > a substance produced by condensation.
> >> >
> >> > condensation // n.
> >> > 1 the act of condensing.
> >> > 2 any condensed material (esp. water on a cold surface).
> >> > 3 an abridgement.
> >> > 4 Chem. the combination of molecules with the elimination of water or
> > other
> >> > small molecules.
> >> > [Late Latin condensatio (as condense)]
> >>
> >> Maybe I should use 'condensed' instead...
> >
> > Maybe. *searches*
> >
> > condense // v.
> > 1 tr. make denser or more concentrated.
> > 2 tr. express in fewer words; make concise.
> > 3 tr. & intr. reduce or be reduced from a gas or vapour to a liquid (or
> > occasionally a solid).
> > condensable adj.
> > [French condenser or Latin condensare (as com-, densus 'thick')]
>
> And?
Erm, draw your own conclusion(s). Oh, and did you address the 'into'/'in'
question?
> {Before anybody realized, village had been covered in thick fog, making
> it impossible too see hand before the eyes.
>
> s/village/the village/
> s/too see hand before the eyes/to see the hand before eyes/}
'to see hand before eyes'.
> >> >> >> > 'Before anybody realized what was happening', I think.
Otherwise,
> >> > what
> >> >> > is
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Just "it"? Shouldn't it be obvious?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Just because something is obvious once someone stops to think
about
> > it
> >> >> > doesn't mean that it's correct. And I don't think 'it' would
refer
> > to
> >> > 'what
> >> >> > was happening'... it would refer to something that didn't fit in
> > there.
> >> >>
> >> >> Still, putting in all this stuff seems so... wrong?
> >> >
> >> > How so?
> >>
> >> I'm not sure - it's an overload of words, if you know what I mean.
> >> (please, please, please)
> >
> > Maybe. This morning, I was alternately praised for my brilliant
writing,
> > and verbally flayed for my amateurish style and clutter. So you can
> > (hopefully) see how I'm on less firm ground that I tend to usually be.
>
> Erm... who did that to you?
Someone whom I view as more knowledgable than me on this subject.
> {Elias, however,
> unimpressed by the phenomenon, listened into the white void.}
>
> >> >> >> > One does not listen into something... 'listened to the white
> > void',
> >> > I
> >> >> >> > think.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> No, no. The void doesn't make any sounds, so that would be
> > completely
> >> >> >> wrong, IHNSHO. It's more like... listening to what's behind it -
> > more a
> >> >> >> direction than a fixed point.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Fair enough. The best suggestion I have is to spell it out more
> >> >> > explicitally--'listening for noises emanating from the white
void',
> > for
> >> >> > example.
> >> >>
> >> >> That just doesn't have the same ring to it... do I *have* to?
> >> >
> >> > Listening doesn't inherently have a direction... you can assign
> > directions,
> >> > but they aren't there by default. If you think of an equally good
way
> > to do
> >> > it, if it makes sense to me I'll support it. *nod nod*
> >>
> >> I'll think about it.
> >
> > Thank you.
>
> NAJISBU
>
> {The muted
> sounds reaching his ears were almost as good as actually seeing what
> was going on; it was just a question of training.}
>
> >> >> >> > Hrm... Replace 'good' with 'useful'. *nods*
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Not sure... it doesn't have the right ring to it.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > The sounds reaching his ears are of use. In themselves, they
aren't
> >> > 'good'.
> >> >> > Good for what? It doesn't say. If it /did/, it would work.
'almost
> > as
> >> >> > good as actually seeing for determining what was going on; it was
> > just'.
> >> >> > But that's more clunky. Oh, and it could be 'almost as good as
> > actually
> >> >> > being able to see for determining', which would make it work
better.
> >> > But I
> >> >> > still suggest 'useful'.
> >> >>
> >> >> were almost as good -> worked almost as well ?
> >> >> I just don't like 'useful' here...
> >> >
> >> > Pity... it at least appears to fit well.
> >> >
> >> > 'worked almost as well' has the same problem as 'were almost as
> > good'--it
> >> > doesn't address the /functionality/. Namely, what they work as well
> > /at/,
> >> > or what they're almost as good /at/. Whatever it is, they do so
almost
> > as
> >> > effectively as actually seeing, but what is 'it'? There needs to be
> >> > something to say what it's for.
> >>
> >> Hmm....
> >
> > Hrm?
>
> Thinking...
>
> 'were almost as good an information source as actually seeing'? No, most
> probably not...
Maybe 'were almost as good a source of information as actually seeing'. It
has the desired effect, but it's clunkier.
> [The villagers, on
> the other hand, panicked finally and now people were constantly
> bumping into, stumbling and falling over each other. Elias stepped to
> the side, narrowly the man crashed into the wall next to him and
> continued listening closely.
>
> s/the man crashed/avoiding a man who crashed/]
>
> {There was something else, something
> moving from the border of the village towards the stake, in what
> seemed like a more or less straight line. A hothead for sure, but a
> good one, damn good.}
>
> >> >> >> > Hmm... {'moving inwards from' and 'village toward'} if you
wish.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> If I _whish_?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > No, /wish/.
> >> >>
> >> >> &*#$!
> >> >> If I _wish_?
> >> >
> >> > *nods* I don't think a change is necessarily necessary... sort of,
at
> >> > least... but it might--just might--help to change it. 'moving from
A
> > to B'
> >> > suggests a straight line between two points. However, 'the border of
> > the
> >> > village' is a circle. The addition of the 'inward' adapts the phrase
> > for an
> >> > area surrounded by a line. It still may not be perfect, but it's
> > better.
> >> > Maybe, at least.
> >>
> >> Erm...
> >
> > I'm just imagining it, aren't I? *paranoid*
>
> Could be...
Skah.
> >> > And on the subject of 'toward' and 'towards', I'm not at all certain
> > which
> >> > should be used in which context.
> >>
> >> Damn.
> >
> > Sorry. *searches*
> >
> > toward prep. & adj.
> > prep. /, , / = towards.
> > adj. // archaic
> > 1 about to take place; in process.
> > 2 docile, apt.
> > 3 promising, auspicious
> >
> > towards /, , / prep.
> > 1 in the direction of (set out towards town).
> > 2 as regards; in relation to (his attitude towards death).
> > 3 as a contribution to; for (put this towards your expenses).
> > 4 near (towards the end of our journey).
> > [Old English toweard (adj.) 'future' (as to, -ward)]
>
> So 'towards'? (Help?!)
I think, yes. *nod nod*
> {She made it. She could see where she was going; now someone ought to
> say it was too hard a spell for her, but it wasn't the time to priding
> herself.
>
> s/ought/should/
> s/it wasn't the time to priding herself/now wasn't the time for pride/}
>
> >> >> >> > Firstly, not 'ought'--that's saying that someone should say
> >> >> > such-and-such.
> >> >> >> > 'some might say it should have been too hard'. *nods slightly*
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Erm, yes. "ought"->"should"?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *frowns, not understanding, then looks at the suggested correction
> >> > above*
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ...You would replace it with 'now someone should to say it was'!?
> >> >> > *twitches* Augh... 'ought to' is basically the same as 'should',
> > and
> >> >> > 'should' is what /doesn't/ work there, because of what it means.
> >> >>
> >> >> OK... but your suggestion above doesn't work either. What I meant
was
> >> >> something along the lines of 'come on, say that's too hard for me,
say
> >> >> it again <veg>'.
> >> >
> >> > Oh. In the 'someone ought to say', what it essentially means is that
> >> > someone should say <whatever> /at that time/. That is, as she does
it,
> >> > someone (next to her, for example) should say it. But it's not
talking
> >> > about /then/, it's talking about 'saying' in general. Not in
specific.
> > The
> >> > 'should' brings it to the present.
> >>
> >> And that puts us where exactly?
> >
> > ...Not sure what you mean. But in essense, 'ought' means the same as
> > 'should', and /because of that/ should be replaced by something else.
'some
> > might say', for example, might be good... hrm.
>
> I'm in trouble...
What? How?
(And on the 'She made it', how about 'She completed the spell' or 'She
finished the spell' or 'She finished casting/whispering/<whatever> the
spell'?)
....Or, if it's continuing from the previous paragraph, 'She had made it'.
('it' referring to the fog noted in the aforementioned previous paragraph)
> >> >> >> > *after reading slightly* ...What does 'She made it.' refer to?
> >> > *looks
> >> >> >> > confused* At first, I thought it meant that she had made it to
> > the
> >> >> > stake.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> What about "She did it."? Does that make more sense to you?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hmm. A bit, but a more descriptive sentence might be better:
'She
> >> > ran.',
> >> >> > for example, or 'She darted forward.' or something like that...
> >> > Basically,
> >> >> > did what? What does 'what' mean? Then, just say the meaning of
> > what,
> >> >> > rather than the what itself.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > ...If that makes any sense.
> >> >>
> >> >> Erm, yes, it does,
> >> >
> >> > Ah, that's good.
> >>
> >> Indeed.
> >
> > Hoowah!
>
> NAJISBU
>
> >> >> although I have the strong feeling you are missing my
> >> >> point entirely. Probably my fault, though.
> >> >
> >> > Is it to do with her creating the fog? If so, then I only realized
it
> >> > toward the end of the post.
> >>
> >> If you take a close look at the end of the last installment...
> >
> > *heads in the direction of Google Groups* Ah. *tries to think of how
> > everything he's been talking about should be properly changed to
accurately
> > reflect the true state of events*
>
> Tell me what you find.
Apparently, indeed, she was responsible for the fog.
> >> >> > *after reading* ...Actually, if by 'it' it means to cast the
spell
> > that
> >> >> > allowed her to see, then things are much clearer now.... and yes,
> >> >> > Anyway, maybe something along the lines of 'She muttered the quick
> >> >> > succession of words under her breath. Now she could see where she
> > was
> >> >> > going; perhaps some might say that it was too hard a spell for
her,
> > but
> >> > this
> >> >> > wasn't the time for pride.'
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *looks over what he had written, and nods slightly to himself*
> >> >>
> >> >> Hm, we are getting closer, but we are not quite there... stand by.
> >> >
> >> > *awaits clarification as to what exactly it was that she did,
procedes
> >> > downward...*
> >>
> >> I'm just... unsure of the wording. You got it right, but I might want
to
> >> have a look at some details.
>
> JISBU?
I think that might have been your original JISBU, actually.
> [Laiva jumped up and in one movement broke into full run,
> Mynor at her heels.
>
> s/into full/into a full/]
>
> >> >> >> >> It was almost impossible to navigate through the
> >> >> >> >> headless crowd, but with an incredible show of skill she
managed
> > to
> >> >> >> >> get through them without even slowing down.
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > 'headless'? Or 'faceless'?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I think headless - like "without leader".
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I see. Probably suffices either way.
> >> >>
> >> >> Erm, what?
> >> >
> >> > Basically, whichever way the reader takes it to mean, it doesn't
matter.
> >> > More or less, actually, when you/someone consider/s that she can see
> > their
> >> > faces.
> >>
> >> I should get more sleep...
> >
> > Oh. Maybe.
>
> Definitely.
*nods, yawns*
> [At least the fires kept
> the villagers out of the center. Quickly she pulled the arrow out of
> the man's body and grabbed his dagger; she didn't need it, but there
> was no way she'd let them use it only one more time.
>
> s/it only one/it even one/]
>
> [Then she turned
> to the stake and, with a few quick cuts, freed the girl from the
> ropes, causing her to sink to the ground. She was indeed alive, but
> hardly conscious; what had they only done to her.
>
> s/they only done to her./they done to her?/
> s/ropes, causing her to/ropes, letting her/]
>
> >> >> >> > 'what had they done to her?'
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Somehow I like "only", eh?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *nods...* Strange. Two things: Firstly, I still suggest a
question
> >> > mark
> >> >> > to end the sentence. Secondly, are you sure you want to use
> > 'causing'
> >> >> > before? It only causes it indirectly... if you can think of a
> > better
> >> > term,
> >> >> > it might be preferable.
> >> >>
> >> >> Look above. 'making' is probably an option as well, but that'd
require
> > a
> >> >> complete restructering of the sentence, I think.
> >> >
> >> > 'making' has the same problem as 'causing'--I think that the change
is
> > good,
> >> > as long as you make it 'letting her sink to the ground' instead of
> > 'letting
> >> > her to sink to the ground'.
> >>
> >> Oh, erm, yes.
>
> JISBU?
>
> [Laiva had no time to loose, though.
>
> s/loose/lose/]
>
> {The havoc wouldn't last forever and neither would the
> fog, do she put the girls arm around her shoulders and pulled her
> upright; she was heavier than she looked for sure.
>
> s/fog, do/fog, so/
> s/heavier than she looked for sure/certainly heavier than she looked/}
>
> >> >> >> > Oh, and: Introduction of interesting new character!
Interesting!
> >> > And
> >> >> >> > intrigue at the weight! Something strange? Perhaps member of
a
> >> >> > different
> >> >> >> > species, and a rebel? Or just a misjudging of weight?
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> I'm afraid I have to disappoint you... it's the latter one.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *laughs* Ah, well. *enjoys*
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm not that good at intrigue, I'm afraid...
> >> >
> >> > *pat pat* You'll learn. *grins*
> >>
> >> I'm just not made for it...
> >
> > Bah.
>
> ...
Thingamajig.
> >> {How were they only
> >> getting out of here like that?
> >>
> >> s/*/How were they going to make it to safety? She couldn't even
properly
> >> walk!/}
> >>
> >> >> >> > 'How were they going to get out of here?', or (perhaps even
> > better)
> >> > 'How
> >> >> >> > were they going to get to safety?'. ...No idea how to include
the
> >> > 'like
> >> >> >> > that' or the equivalent in there. Suggestions welcome.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> Suggestion made...
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *thinks* Maybe 'out of here in this state?'... replacing 'this'
> > with
> >> >> > 'that', perhaps.
> >> >>
> >> >> That sounds... stupid, IMHO...
> >> >
> >> > Erm, what?
> >>
> >> 'in this state'.
> >
> > 'in that state', then.
>
> That doesn't make much of a difference...
Oh. Skah. What would sound less stupid?
> >> >> >> Then again... "How were they going to make it to safety? She
> > couldn't
> >> >> >> even properly walk like that!"
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hmm. *nods to himself* Though the 'like that' could be removed,
and
> >> > the
> >> >> > beginning of that sentence replaced by 'Now, she couldn't'
> >> >>
> >> >> I don't thik I like the 'Now'. (look above) Or 'walk properly'?
> >> >
> >> > 'think', not 'thik'...
> >> >
> >> > The alteration seems good, but to address the question of the 'Now',
it
> >> > outlines the fact that once (before,) she could walk, but now (then)
she
> >> > couldn't. A simple clarification of the nature of time, causality,
etc.
> >>
> >> I liked 'like that' better...
> >
> > *considers for a moment or two, then nods* Probably it'll ('like that')
> > work, then.
>
> "She couldn't even properly walk like that!"?
That sounds good. *nods; glances worriedly towards the clock*
> {The Azanee girl was heaving a much harder time for sure, but as far as
> he could tell she was doing well. The yells and curses of the
> villagers talked their own language.
>
> s/talked their own language/were proof enough/}
>
> >> >> >> > What do you mean by 'talked their own language'? 'were in
their
> > own
> >> >> >> > language, and thus indecipherable' might be better.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> You may hit me more mixing up two languages. That's an absolute
> > no-do,
> >> > I
> >> >> >> know. Let's have a look at it...
> >> >> >> "The yells and curses of the villagers were prove enough."
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Ahh, that's good, just replace 'prove' with 'proof'...
> >> >>
> >> >> YIKES!
> >> >
> >> > *pat pat* Oh, and what about 'were proof enough of that'? ('that'
> > being
> >> > 'that she was doing well')
> >>
> >> I dunno, not really my style.
> >
> > Hrm... Maybe think of the 'of that' as a pointer, pointing to the
previous
> > subject?
>
> Not my style.
Oh. What is your style, then?
> [The icy air was burning the skin and the wind made them shiver.
>
> s/was burning the/burned the/]
>
> {Laiva
> had given her coat to the other girl; she wouldn't have survived for
> more than a few minutes in her thin dress. Even with the fires around
> she must have been seriously cold.
>
> s/around she must/around, she must/
> s/with the fires/with all the fires/}
>
> >> >> >> > Here, I'd reccomend replacing 'seriously' with something else,
> > though
> >> >> > it's
> >> >> >> > quite good... 'dangerously', I'd say. Maybe, at least.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Oh, and I'd suggest a minor change to 'Even with the fires around
> >> >> > she'--either 'Even with all the fires around, she' or 'Even with
the
> >> > fires
> >> >> > around her, she'.
> >> >> >
> >> >> >> Can we discuss that out?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > No 'out'. And yes, we can.
> >> >>
> >> >> Look, ... what did I want to say again? Ah, yes... dangerously
isn't
> >> >> quite what I wanted to say. Sure it's really cold, and you can get a
> >> >> serious cold, but it's still warm enough to keep you alive - for
some
> >> >> time at least. The really dangerous/deadly cold comes later and I
don't
> >> >> want to have it here already. I could say that it's break the
climax,
> >> >> but basicly it's just a question of what I feel is right - and
> >> >> dangerously IMHO doesn't quite fit in here. Does that make sense to
> > you?
> >> >
> >> > I think so--basically, more on the lines of 'extremely'?
> >>
> >> Yes, something like that.
> >
> > *nods to himself* Ahh.
>
> And?
And what? *glances again at the clock*
> >> > And on the subject of the fires--it's better, but I'd still prefer
that
> >> > 'all' to be there... 'with the fires around' raises the question:
The
> >> > fires around what? Whereas the 'all' removes them a step--It's
> > referring to
> >> > them more as a group, more off-hand. 'Ah, yes, all the plagues
around'
> > as
> >> > opposed to 'Ah, yes, the plagues around' which is directly talking
about
> >> > /specific/ plagues. And, yes, that wasn't that good an example, and
I
> > did
> >> > indeed not want an apostrophe there.
> >>
> >> ::nods::
> >
> > Good! ...Wait, did you remove the comma? *frowns* Probably will still
> > work... but comma might be bubhosh.
>
> Huh? What comma? I can't remember removing any.
'even with all the fires around, she must'
> [At least they didn't
> seem to follow them; they probably though they wouldn't get far before
> freezing to death anyway and perhaps they were right.
>
> s/to follow them/to be following them/
> s/probably though/probably thought/]
>
> [Laiva wondered
> how they managed to even get this far; what they needed now was a
> warming fire, but the deep snow made even the thought appear futile
> and and the only houses were probably the ones they were running away
> from.
>
> s/how they managed/how they had managed/
> s/and and the only houses were probably/and the only houses probably
> were/
> s/to even get/to get even/]
>
> >> >> >> > Bee) ...
> >> >> >> >
> >> >> >> > ...Eh, could have been worse. *shrugs*
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> How?
> >> >> >
> >> >> > I draw the line at actually spelling it out.
> >> >>
> >> >> I'm a bit slow at the uptake, it seems... gimme hint, please.
> >> >
> >> > ...All right. All right. Remember that Monty Python sketch? The
one
> > with
> >> > the person reading from the book, and near the end the phrase 'With a
> >> > /melon/!?'? Think of the first example. Think of the wording used.
> >> >
> >> > Got it yet?
> >>
> >> You know, I never got the chance to watch much (read: hardly any) Monty
> > Python
> >> around here.
> >
> > Depending on what you mean by 'much', it's entirely possible that I've
seen
> > less than you.
>
> much=hardly any=perhaps by acident, once or twice
Ah. Good luck seeing more of it in the future.
> >> >> (And I always thought death was worst. [1])
> >> >
> >> > Heh.
> >>
> >> What kind and refering to what?
> >
> > I can't tell without context.
>
> It's *your* 'Heh.'.
Yes, but what came after speaking about not really thinking that death was
the worst?
> {It wasn't as cold as she had expected, comforting
> even, surrounding her like a soft blanket. She felt so tired all of
> the sudden; a bit of sleep surely wouldn't hurt, would it? Just a
> moment or two.
>
> s/all of the sudden/all of a sudden/}
>
> >> >> >> And I think I'll keep the full stop. The sentence is a
> >> >> >> elipsis anyway, but I don't like putting the actual "..." in
there.
> > I
> >> >> >> hope that's not a problem.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > Hrm... probably not much of one. The full stop creates an air of
> >> > finality,
> >> >> > and that's not really what we want--we want it to trail off, to
slip
> >> > into
> >> >> > the mists of dreamless sleep. Or, in this case,
hypothermia-induced
> >> >> > unconciousness.
> >> >>
> >> >> 'The reader can work it out.'
> >> >
> >> > *sighs* As you wish, though in general I espouse books in which the
> > reader
> >> > is carried along without having to think, only experience, not
> > frequently
> >> > stop to work out what the book is talking about.
> >>
> >> Sorry, got carried away. In fact I was quoting the rules of software
> >> design: "Documentation: None needed, the user can work it out."
> >
> > *snorts* Funny. But you see, the software should be such that the user
> > /could/ use it without needing documentation. The problem comes when
> > documentation is necessary.
>
> There are no intuitive programs.
One day...
> >> >> I'm somewhat trying to avoid it, for reasons of general style, but
you
> >> >> are probably right. I just have to make sure that doesn't lead to
> > plenty
> >> >> of those in the text - a risk to be taken serious. Then again... I'm
> > not
> >> >> sure.
> >> >
> >> > Hmm. Thingamajig. (Oh, and 'seriously', not 'serious'. Or 'as
> > serious',
> >> > if you wish.)
> >>
> >> Ah, yes.
> >
> > *smiles, while also attempting to remember what they were talking about
> > (plenty of whats in the text?)*
>
> "..."
*sighs* ...Running out of time...
> >> Want the PDF? <eg>
> >
> > Tempting, but no thank you. Perhaps when all the installments are
complete,
> > and it's one long story. *nod nod*
>
> ::shrugs::
NAJISBU
> >> >> >> > And presumably, here's where Elias will make himself known to
> >> >> > her...unless a
> >> >> >> > third party finds her first.
> >> >> >>
> >> >> >> We'll see.
> >> >> >
> >> >> > *nods* *eagerly looks forward to the next installment, even as he
> >> > corrects
> >> >> > this one*
> >> >>
> >> >> That could take some time.
> >> >
> >> > Fair enough.
> >>
> >> True...
> >
> > *nods* (Can I use his own perversity against him?)
>
> Whose? And which perversity?
Yours.
> >> >> Things changed that drastically since I threw
> >> >> a certain teacher into action that I have to absolutely rewrite
> >> >> everything below the next paragraph.
> >> >
> >> > *grins* (Wait--what next paragraph?)
> >>
> >> In the master file. First paragraph of installment 15.
> >
> > Oh. (Wait... we haven't gotten to #15 yet, have we?)
>
> Nope, but I have it in the text file. The first paragraph, that is. And
> some more stuff...
Ooo. *interest*
> >> >> That's going to take some time and
> >> >> time is a real problem... but I'll do my best.
> >> >
> >> > Rulg.
> >>
> >> ::shrugs::
> >> That's life.
> >
> > Life. Don't talk to me about life.
> >
> > *amusement*
>
> Want me to change any diodes, Marvin?
Maybe one of the ones on the left side. *nod nod*
--
No time
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram