On Tue, 20 Apr 2004 15:01:28 -0400, Lee Bell <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> "Giovanni Marola" wrote:
>
>> > I own 5 dive computers including one that is air integrated.  None of
>them
>> > have settable degrees of conservativeness.
>>
>> I have two dive computers and both have a settable degree of
>conservativeness.
>> Suunto dive computers have settable degrees of conservativeness.
>> Uwatec dive computers have settable degrees of conservativeness
>
>
>At any rate, we've counted 7 computers, 5 of which aren't adjustable.

Bean counter, and willy-size comparer.   NONE of the above is relevant,
to the question of "deserved" or "undeserved" hits or the risks
associated with them.


>That's not "most."  If you want to continue the claim, you're going to
>have to count more computers than you have so far.
>
>Lee

Typical silly Lee challenge.

1.  Regardless of how many, in the count, the answer is irrelevant!

2.  If Giovanni was counting, he would be counting ONLY the
    air-integrated ones, since he doesn't dive with anything else.

    So, Giovanni's count would be CONDITIONAL on AI.  So, of the
    3 AI computers owned by both Lee and Gio, 2 are adjustable.
    Add Crusty's Nemesis.  That's THREE out of FOUR.
    That's "most" of the AI ones counted. :-)  That's all IRREVANT. :-))

Lee, the master of rhetoric based on the irrelevant!

-- Bob.