<html>
<head>
<meta content="text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1"
http-equiv="Content-Type">
</head>
<body bgcolor="#FFFFFF" text="#000000">
On 8/15/2011 10:03 AM, john clark wrote:
<blockquote
cite="mid:1313427795.94414.YahooMailClassic@web82902.mail.mud.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
<table border="0" cellpadding="0" cellspacing="0">
<tbody>
<tr>
<td style="font: inherit;" valign="top">On <b>Mon, 8/15/11,
David Lubkin <i><a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:lubkin@unreasonable.com"><lubkin@unreasonable.com></a></i></b>
wrote:<br>
<blockquote style="border-left: 2px solid rgb(16, 16,
255); margin-left: 5px; padding-left: 5px;">
<div class="plainMail">"Unique is also considered
binary, and "very unique" or "more<br>
unique" is mocked. I have no problem with treating
unique as<br>
a fuzzy value." <br>
</div>
</blockquote>
And I HATE very unique! I hate things that are very one of
a kind. If unique is now to mean rare (we already have a
word for that and it works fine) then we will need a
replacement word for the idea unique once conveyed, and
unique was perfect, I liked the fact it had a q in it, q
may not be unique but it is odd. I might have to hire
somebody who said "very unique" because almost everybody
does, but my opinion of him would drop a notch. <br>
<br>
John K Clark<br>
<br>
</td>
</tr>
</tbody>
</table>
<br>
<fieldset class="mimeAttachmentHeader"></fieldset>
<br>
</blockquote>
" I might have to hire somebody who said "very unique"..." Sounds
like a uniquely perfect plan!<br>
<br>
FutureMan
<blockquote
cite="mid:1313427795.94414.YahooMailClassic@web82902.mail.mud.yahoo.com"
type="cite">
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>