CWL said:Look. It should be noted that I am not arguing that the lack of need for the non-creation of new sections under General Academics is not inconclusively unrefuted, nor that the non-existence of a need for the non-creation of new sections is as superflous as the non-necessity of the undoing of new sections under General Academics.
I am not in disagreement with the opposing viewpoint of the one displayed above.DrChinese said:
I'm sorry, I just don't see where your argument has validity. I think it all comes back to your definition of "inconclusively". You apparently mean it in the sense of "not conclusive" while I prefer the more concise interpretations.
Upchurch said:I am not in disagreement with the opposing viewpoint of the one displayed above.
Nor am I not necessariliy in disagreement as regards the non invalidity of the unrefuted non-issue in question.
CWL said:Look. It should be noted that I am not arguing that the lack of need for the non-creation of new sections under General Academics is not inconclusively unrefuted, nor that the non-existence of a need for the non-creation of new sections is as superflous as the non-necessity of the undoing of new sections under General Academics.
Interesting Ian said:
Hey! This looks just about as intelligible as the arguments against my position in my thread! LOL![]()
Ya don't say?Giz said:
Uh, I think maybe that's because you've jumped into a shameless parody of your thread?
Joshua Korosi said:I'm not quite unsure that the non-necessity of not creating new sections is not altogether inconceivable. Not to be unfair, but I don't lack a belief in the impossibility of other not potential non-solutions to our current absence of a problem.