On Tuesday 15 June 2004 04:03, Jeff Mitchell wrote:
> [ANN] self.promote.com/energizer
>
> self.promote.com/energizer is a non-arbitrary framework for smashing
> pink bunnies.  Some might call this an arbitrary way to re-implement a
> package.  It is not.  It is different -- that is to say, not
> arbitrary.
>
> There is absolutely no part of self.promote.com/energizer which is
> arbitrary.  Nothing.  Next to nothing, considering the smashing part.
> And bunnies.  But apart from the smashing and the pink bunnies, there
> is no other part which is arbitrary.  Random is right out.
>
> I'm taking the power away from you, aren't I?  You want it to be
> arbitrary.  But I've built a package contrariwise.  Is there any part
> which could be construed as not arbitrary?  This could never happen.
> I could absolutely not accept less than what I re-implemented.  I mean
> yes, there is no part which is non-arbitrary.  In any case, the point
> is that it's not arbitrary.  Nowhere.  In some places, it is EXTRA
> non-arbitrary.  Which is possible, believe me.
>
> So, to summarize: not arbitrary.  Much like a pink bunny before
> getting smashed.  The same, bereft of arbitrariness.  It keeps going,
> and going, and going, and going,...

Another mature one.

	Sean O'Dell