Changes

Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 111: Line 111:     
*Do not try to insert [[deceit]] here, OldFaithful.  I alerted as well as welcomed you.  Most of us manage to do both kinds of posts, and I am sure after a while, you will be better able to multi-task as well! Carry on. --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|Ṣρёаќǃ]]</font></sup> 15:41, 6 September 2007 (EDT)
 
*Do not try to insert [[deceit]] here, OldFaithful.  I alerted as well as welcomed you.  Most of us manage to do both kinds of posts, and I am sure after a while, you will be better able to multi-task as well! Carry on. --<font color="#1E90FF" face="Comic Sans MS">[[User:TK|şŷŝôρ-₮K]]</font><sup><font color="DC143C">[[User_Talk:TK|Ṣρёаќǃ]]</font></sup> 15:41, 6 September 2007 (EDT)
 +
 +
Oh I'm not trying to use deceit, I can assure you.  I'm only interested in clarifying - to the agreement of Mr.Schlafly - the position this essay takes.  Defining the corollary of an argument is usually a very good way to define the argument itself, I find.  Thanks for your understanding, TK.  [[User:OldFaithful|OldFaithful]] 15:44, 6 September 2007 (EDT)
15

edits

Navigation menu