--- In
BoundaryPoint@yahoogroups.com, "Flynn, Kevin"
<flynnk@r...> wrote:
> My comments were not off topic given the thread.
i didnt say or imply they were offtopic
just substantially offpoint
a significant distinction traditionally here at bp
since the very name of our game is try pointing
& you cant even begin to imagine you have made your point in
this case kevin
without willfully & doggedly disregarding nearly all the relevant
boundary points involved in what you are trying
in this
you are very substantially offpoint
& you are substantially offline
tho you were always & still are most graciously ontopic
or at least on what we may have thought was the topic
i certainly acknowledge
& silly of me if you had the wrong impression
> 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.
are you sure
i recall the original question as a practical absurdity
& yours expressed here as a subsequent refinement of it
but anyway i would agree if you would that this exact formulation
would be a good place to start
right now
especially now that we have established that we are try pointing
together here at bp
just trying to determine the truest available truth of something
rather than necessarily doing something practical with it
which actually would present not only a novelty but almost an
anathema for some of us
& also this way we can rescue you from actually having to walk
the right high waterline of the red river in order to salvage any
semblance of try pointing authenticity for your try at a human
measurement of it
> That's no tripointing, except
> that this longest boundary would begin and end at tripoints.
right
not much tripointing
in particular
but we could still have oodles of try pointing
in general
if you really wish to try your question in a try pointing venue
> So the "off
> point and offbeat" nature isn't my contribution.
right
that is only my characterization & appreciation of your
contribution in bp terms
> 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.
ahh thanx
at last a sensible reason for all this
what a relief
well in that case i would build the fence straight from oksw to
aroktx & save plenty
& you might lose a fortune following all those meanders with it
but we could stop here or start fresh
as i havent added anything more below
better yet
what did you think of the new njny answers
> > From: acroorca2002[SMTP:orc@o...]
> > 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
> >