Resolved: The intentionally unclear thread!

FWIW, Mr. C makes a good point in the pit that we jargonize and babelfish our interrogetories so as to render them impossible to decipher for the non SDMB personages, and render us unto Master Debaters with our cloaked form and ciphered manner. AFAICT, this hardly ever happens, and when it does, it is de minimus – YHO is? :wink:

IANAL, and YMMV, but AFAIK, IMHO this rarely happens.

FWIW, I can’t go one day W/O seeing some sorta acronym and not be confused by it – and that’s just at work!

Tripler
“Um, hey Bill, what the hell is a TIA-396, and why is it still on DOS 2.06?”

Naturally, I think that the quantita one of esoteric of this thread of the spiral relegates the minutae to the vanguard of the segun of fiasco the thing testified until the moment. I propose we that they are confused but and but until that we have not lived to Confusion

Etsi aliquam est qui non potentior neque stultior sit, faciet quem habet maximo puero ést lupum ponem. Itaque nam fortius erat, vir movet, rana orvet, et putrem et lurem cum alies exerorbiunt. Sine exaltior porriant?! Vera que non treies qui ne anus ne malus ne penus prefexebantur…

Nam et fortior (ali erbi est nam frons ponitus), returnabaveruntur pluralis etque canabis siunt pol miuntur. At verio manos fates itaque frenulum pax vobiscum me feriunt. Salve “acehole”! Qui habitas in fornice!:wink: me tuus sua novibuscumuntur praeterritior insularium … sed non adabat!!!

Or pleistice, habitas, meunt gravitior cum ordii et sine bales magiountur, cum frons penitenties sedebatne … nolo contendere qua es bono propter aliud robus. Sac in lacrimarum vale etus moviuntur qua aliud, qua aliud, qua aliud in atrium ventriculuntur sum possiur erat bonax.

Zevulum iam est qui ponent bacem in his qui, especiuns e libris, forens hiis revus ordeor san regilis.

Et quam ponens, gravitans, fortior, carpe.

Stultior!

Good point, Mr. C. As I was saying to Justhink at the Hitchens’s house, the esoterica harmonized with the erotic, and the intelligance virtualizes, naturally focusing it’s white-hot actinic glare on male virgance, and ocelots which both to with the sacrificing make. Or as, I’m sure G. Orwell, the O’G’ would say, my mad smarts gets me mad honeys. The spectrum of M-M on this axis of course, MV.

Aujourd’hui, I plan to obfuscate les fenetres chez moi to make it plus difficile to defenestrate things.

Suggestions?

Especripibirpi lospo posts enpe jeperipigonpozapa ypi enpe espepapapñolpo

Frodo

Oh, just consume defecation and utter gutteral canine-like cacaphonies in the general direction of the lunar orb!

Si on veut faire cela, on doit les fermer a clef; on sera plus chaud, biensur, mais dans l’hiver c’est une chose bonne:)

[sub]Okay, that was actually real. "If you want to do that, you must lock them; you’ll be hotter, of course, but in the winter that’s a good thing:)[/sub]

Hein? Cxu vi ne parolas la SKanglan, bitte? :smiley:

Welcome back, Ace.

It’s good to see you playing nicely with the other posters.

Unless this is some sort of oblique jab at Mr. Cynical, in which case I will retract the “playing nice” part.

You went out for the Debate Team, I went out for football and the Science Club.

We may not understand each other.

But what really is there to be said of “worth”, if we objectify the term and consider it outside of the subjective discourse within which it is so often cloaked? Is it even possible to arrive at that which could be considered by the average layman to be a quantitative measure that can be given to a concept which is so heavily enriched with relativistic meaning? Indeed, our individual values, as people of differing status; be it socio-economic, psycho-social, socio-political, or familial; will likely lead each of us, in turn, to arrive at independent, and quite distinct; definitions of the very term, and that being the case, it becomes a prospect fraught with complications to disentangle our identities from our identifications.

Do not ensure Exgineer, this are a recognized thread. which honestly I had hoped, a far note into September-guessed/advised threads rise. A tribute to me, indeed!

This thread needs a soundtrack by Frank Zappa

I have just signed legislation outlawing Russia forever. The bombing begins in five minutes.

Tripler
And I mean it, too. . .

And the beat goes on…

The aforementioned referencing cite to a site for sighted seeing eye dogs on a hot tin roof of my mouth breathing underwater welder of terrible secrets is made for a woman a day keeps the doctor who franchise going on and on til the break of dawn dishwashing soap and water borne molecules on my ass!

…free association is alot harder than it looks.

Unfortunately, we cannot possibly be sure that the religious ontological proof adheres enough to the fine Celtic tradition of welding wheat onto dough to make sandwiches.

Without the Smoked Oysters, we may be forced to buy the argument anyway, though. For it seems that Fox is already reporting on the incident without consulting someone from Voltaire’s bloodline, who, of course, are the leading experts in making jellyfish talk, at least the jellyfish that live off the northern coast of California.

Quid est hic res? Stultissimus estis!

See? The jellyfish speak Latin, and this is what they say.

Nam fortior est quam minus ordem bonus exeunt. ::sigh::

Sinon qua habitet in propter agricolam nihil obstulat, nihil menendebat, nihil obscuret, dox metu escaparetur quod aliud in scribulis mentes possiunt. Freunt qui ad cenam lucirei ultior gemmerarum fostiunt.

Aptos, juventis qui malestes cum patres adverabantur squalem vocibus in ea, quamquam nox, quamquam res, quamquam oculis viscerit molle et in scapulo moventur.

[sub]I know yours was real:) Or at any rate, more real than mine is![/sub]

Eschew obfuscation.

Millenium hand and shrimp!