The "bracket system", or "bracketing system" (as named by myself).

basmic · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:29

I think I'll join Angus in this, and take part in the pointless, annoying, PC+1 session.

One More Solo · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:29

Your system is basically an affront to my eyes and all that I know of as the English language. Furthermore, it seems to be a wind-up due to the inconsistencies in your so-called "system" which I'm sure you would otherwise be keen to irradicate.

Angus-Higgins · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:29

Defcon5 said:
I agree with you Moses99p, however with two 'medical professionals' as parents they cant have missed that surley?

Angus, how do you construct verbal communication? As precise as your written, or from a more colloquial angle?

As one tends to 100% accuracy, one tends to perfection (thus I choose accuracy [to the dismay of some people {I gather}]).

Angus Higgins

WotDa · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:29

basmic said:
I think I'll join Angus in this, and take part in the pointless, annoying, PC+1 session.

I shall join you then.

beh · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:29

Are you playing up this trait to annoy us?

Defcon5 · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:30

Angus-Higgins said:
OK, this is a simple system (developed a while ago).

One merely has a scale, from minus infinity to positive infinity. One then allows every person met to be at 0. One then grades the things that the person does, adding a value for good things, and subtracting for bad things. One then can apply a scale to this value, and thus determine the status. (With large groups, one can estimate [using empirical evidence {assuming representation (and a microcosmic nature [if this is understood])}]).

Angus Higgins

How would you describe love?

Angus-Higgins · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:31

Defcon5 said:
How would you describe love?

I cannot. (My explanation [which is wrong {apparently}] is that it is the same as "like" [albeit slightly higher on the scale {"scale" being that of "liking"}]).

Angus Higgins

Mat · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:32

malolo said:
maybe it's better if it's kept in one.

Couldnt agree more... but it wont be

wedgie · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:32

Angus-Higgins said:
I cannot. (My explanation [which is wrong {apparently}] is that it is the same as "like" [albeit slightly higher on the scale {"scale" being that of "liking"}]).

Angus Higgins

What??

Shotgun_ned · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:32

You make my brain bleed. I said previously that I didn't really care about your use of brackets, it was just your total lack of humour. Well, I've changed my mind.

memyselfandi · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:32

I can see from your post what you are trying to say about having different "levels" of information so that by ignoring different more extreme levels of brackets the reader can still the gist of the post just with differing levels of details.

The problem is that in a forum like this, (or maybe even anywhere else), it is not possible to to sensibly skip over these deeper levels in the way you say without concentrating on the text to an extent that you are reading and interpreting them anyway.

I think that problem that people are having is the extreme number of levels that are appearing and at times some of the levels of nesting appear over the top, for example a pair of brackets which only hold one word are probably taking things to far ... i.e. how is [disabled {even}] clearer than just [even disabled]?, and also the repetition of the same explanatory sets of brackets within the same thread ... i.e. we know you named this system.

2blue4u · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:32

I don't think the OP was intended to be taken seriously. Seriously.

KNiVES · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:32

I'm honestly not bothered by Angus' posting style. Granted, it's not the easiest thing in the world to read, but there are far worse around here.

furnace · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:33

2blue4u said:
I don't think the OP was intended to be taken seriously. Seriously.

You obviously haven't seen the OP's other posts...

Sinque · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:33

Angus-Higgins said:
I cannot. (My explanation [which is wrong {apparently}] is that it is the same as "like" [albeit slightly higher on the scale {"scale" being that of "liking"}]).

Angus Higgins

Have you had any tests for any form of illness or mental problem? As there is obviously something wrong. What kind of person rates there friends with numbers? :confused:

manoz · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:33

KNiVES said:
I'm honestly not bothered by Angus' posting style. Granted, it's not the easiest thing in the world to read, but there are far worse around here.

Name and shame sir!

Samione · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:34

If no one likes reading what you type in that format then that's got to be more of a hinderence than the ambiguity of content? Your last post sounded like it was coming from Data off of star trek :/

Angus-Higgins · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:34

Moses99p said:
okay, you can't rationalise it, but have you ever looked into someones eyes and just felt amazing, as though nothing else matters?

I do not like looking into the eyes of a person. (The eye is one of the subjects which interested me not [during Biology {at GCSE}]).

Angus Higgins

M0T · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:34

Haven't you been in Doctors all week fixing the computers?

slambo69 · 20 Oct 2007 at 23:35

OMG!

I love this guy, its always a good time when I see those brackets, although I did come into this thread expecting a maths thread (due to using brackets in maths[factorisation for example]) so perhaps you may wish to consider changing the name(of the bracket system[which you named])? I'm no good at it really...

PS Dont stop using those brackets!