Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Pastimes : Scammy Awards... Thursday, Feb 25, 1999 at 9pm EST -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: TEDennis who wrote (103)	1/9/1999 11:45:00 AM
From: The Street	Respond to of 445

10-4 Good Buddy. This is the Bandit. 104

To: TEDennis who wrote (103)	1/9/1999 12:19:00 PM
From: Arcane Lore	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 445

But, why? ... 102 is a ... plain ol' post? Ah, but - There are no uninteresting post numbers. Proof(By induction): Basis step (N = 1): Reply #1 is a perfect palindrome and it is the very first reply. Induction step: Assume the statement is true for the first N post numbers and assume reply #N+1 is the first uninteresting post number. But being the first uninteresting reply number makes it interesting. QED Notwithstanding the above "proof", I have it on reliable authority that reply #105 is the first uninteresting post number. P.S. Not sure who was the original author of the above proof - but it wasn't me.