My comments were not off topic given the thread. I didn't begin it; I only
commented on an ongoing thread. The quesiton originally was what is the
longest common boundary shared by two states. That's no tripointing, except
that this longest boundary would begin and end at tripoints. So the "off
point and offbeat" nature isn't my contribution.
And again I reject your notion that a natural boundary is of infinite
length, or that high water lines of a 10-mile river are of infinite length,
for any practical purpose. They are measured all the time. It's
theoretically fun to discuss -- like Pinto's discussion with the professor
after they all got stoned in Animal House -- but at some point, we actually
measure these things.
One useful purpose for the data: You're a fence installer and need to know
how much to buy.
> ----------
> From: acroorca2002[SMTP:orc@...]
> Reply To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Sent: Friday, May 09, 2003 12:02 AM
> To: BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com
> Subject: [BoundaryPoint] Re: American State Boundaries
>
> kevin
> > My comments on measurement of a natural boundary are
> > completely separate from the other issues such as tripointing.
>
> ahh ok
> well try pointing has been our express center of gravity here
> & my thinking & comments are accordingly deliberately on point
> & always as punctilious as humanly possible
> both on principle & because that is so much fun too
>
> & you are still most welcome to hold forth nonpunctologically or
> even entirely pointlessly here
> for this is everyones land too
> but please just let us know preferably in advance when you are
> deliberately being so offpoint & offbeat as to ignore most of the
> points you are supposedly trying for
> rather than feeling sorry if we arent following you
> for there is no need of that
>
> > it is silly to say that the
> > bank of a river that flows only 10 miles must be held as having
> infinite
> > length.
>
> fortunately nobody has been so silly as to say that
>
> both of its high water lines are of infinite length tho
> practically as soon as the river springs from it source
>
> punctologically
> it shouldnt need anything like 10 miles to reach infinity
>
> > & i also have to wonder whether there is any practical use for
> > knowing the supposed or even the actual length of a boundary
> in
> > the real world
> >
> > Of course there is; there are always practical uses to data.
>
> are you sure
> well ok perhaps
> i guess i just havent thought of any use yet in this case
>
> i suppose it might help to know of one tho
>