Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="N8Ball" data-source="post: 4911739" data-attributes="member: 63757">Respectfully, Bob, I think there is some progress being made.  The recent discussion with Flipguarder on the subject of "automatic hit" was progress since we came to an understanding that at least those explicit terms were not required.CovertOps Stated that he "finally" saw where I was comming from but disagreed with the assumptions I had made.I acknowledged that one of my assumptions did not have much prescedent, but pointed out that this situation may be a new case that hasn't been since "automatic hit".And even Dracosuave, despite his allegations on my lack of intellectual honesty, brings up a good point about the contradition that is involved with hitting on numbers not good enough to hit.  As far as I can remember, nobody had yet pointed out that "automatic hit" has the exact same contradiction that is resolved by an understanding that isn't explicit, but that we all accept.Of course there is some rehash of previous arguments, but there is new aspects of the issue being explored as well.</blockquote>