Given that you've replied more seriously to me in this thread (and one or two others, IIRC) than you have replied to other participants, it is clear that my importance to you is a non-zero amount.
As for the second, z needed a little lesson as to his level of importance to me.
A few people took some small measure of interest in me. I obliged them with some information. z took that and concluded that, as one of those posters, he was a supermassive object in my universe and that I was trapped within his gravity well. Rather than attempting to disprove that by going hyperbolic, which he would have falsely taken as being uniquely evident of a great deal of force over me, I simply just repositioned.
While it's possible to warp this, too; at least it gives him slightly more surface area with which to get it right.
I can see that, but would you be comfortable helping your daughter study for this test?
Given that you've replied more seriously to me in this thread (and one or two others, IIRC) than you have replied to other participants, it is clear that my importance to you is a non-zero amount.
Yes, but you have translated "non-zero" to mean, "significant." The proper negation of zero implies no such thing.
You win the pony challenge, but here's my pony response anyway:
...because Pinkie Pie is also puzzled at that transform.
Is it appropriate for 16-18yo's in an AP class? Yes.
Do parents have a right to complain? Yes.
Must the school do as the parent(s) desire? No.
Should the parents have the right to remove their child from a specific class or school? Yes.
Yes, but you have translated "non-zero" to mean, "significant." The proper negation of zero implies no such thing.
I think PonyCraft 2 is going to be released this upcoming week.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JJbAT1wzS8U
If you'll recall, what I originally said was something to the effect of: "To the extent you continue to reply to me and play the game ...".
You tied significance of you to my replying when no such thing is necessarily implied. I can idly post. I can also respond to stimuli presented by you for reasons that have nothing to do with you.
I am set up to ask questions and then seek out the answers. When you ask questions you mimic my entry behavior, triggering SOP. This does not mean that you are significant. I have no use for my model of you before the point where I am translating the answer for transmission, nor do I have use to communicate with you as I'm checking branches. You do not appear to be of a level to test my test structure, so the highest set of test criteria I have available to me on these paths is my own. Holding myself to a high standard out of habit doesn't mean that I am locked to seeking an answer, though. I can flip between activities with ease.
I should really go out and find a challenge that will grab me, but I've been in a lazy mood lately.
I never characterized my importance to you as significant, only as "non-zero".
Nowhere in that post do I mention significance.
you do revolve around me.
Now you're just being tedious.
You forgot to include the modifier: "To the extent you continue to reply to me and play the game ...".
So, in order for you to interpret that as "significant", you'd have to initially assume or conclude that replying to me is significant.. which is not an assumption or conclusion supported or advanced by anything I've said.
Generality is a superset of specificity. Working in it has its advantages, as it allows easy movement between specificities.
In your lack of skill you have painted yourself into a corner. So think outside that plane. Jump up to generality, see how the field of possibilities moves -- understand the bounds of the underlying concept -- and then step your way down.
It translates to" If "reply," then, "revolve around me."
And as you've now wrapped yourself in retardation which would require more than casual passes though my entertainment plane, and as there is no benefit to me in actually putting any work into you, it's time for you to be removed from my FOV.