quoting it as an explanation for your reasoning seems misguided.
This line seems to have caused some confusion downthread. On Percent_Carbon’s view, t’s a very good explanation for the reasoning, in that it seems to have generated understanding of the reasoning.
Well, I don’t know about “very good.” But it worked this time. I don’t think that was a good way to do what I wanted done, though. So I’ll probably not do that again.
This line seems to have caused some confusion downthread. On Percent_Carbon’s view, t’s a very good explanation for the reasoning, in that it seems to have generated understanding of the reasoning.
Perhaps equivocating on ‘explanation’?
Well, I don’t know about “very good.” But it worked this time. I don’t think that was a good way to do what I wanted done, though. So I’ll probably not do that again.
Thanks for the defense, though.