In article
<43780fe3$0$9990$5a62ac22 at per-qv1-newsreader-01.iinet.net.au>,
"Peter F" <fell_spambotswamp_in at ozemaildorcomdotau> wrote:
> > Here's a challenge - should you choose to answer these questions, see if
> > you can do it without resorting to acronyms and jargon, using words
> > found in the dictionary, in their commonly accepted senses instead of
> > some "special" meaning you've coined.
>> As always I shall try!
>> I'll explain what I have given a
> rationally incontrovertible definition,
> and is referring to with "AEVASIVE"
> (or with "AEVASIVEness", or "AEVASIVEly").
A simple "no" would have sufficed.
MK.
