If by "if-by-whiskey" you mean the fallacious, flip-flopping, cowardly practice of pandering, then certainly I am against it. But, if when you say "if-by-whiskey" you mean the circumspect, open-minded, responsive practice of consideration, then I am certainly for it. This is my stand. I will not retreat from it. I will not compromise.

 If by "if by 'if by whiskey'" you mean to circularly employ the same manipulative tactic of deceptive self-promotion, then I am certainly against it. But if by "if by 'if by whiskey'" you mean to strategically exercise the same practice out of admiration of its effective and pacifying avail to reason, then I am certainly for it. That is my position. I will not waver.
 If by "If by \"if by 'if by whiskey'\"" you mean you're offering me some whiskey to help with trying to comprehend this level of nesting, then yes please :-)
 What is the fixed point of this function? Is there one? Quick, someone apply the y-combinator!
 For some reason this reminds me of Quine Central[1]. :-)
 This is starting to look like some horrible regex nightmare!
 if by "regex nightmare" you mean "regex" then I am opposed to it!
 If your "if by 'if by "if by whiskey"'" comment means to regurgitate the tired and immature recursive "100 pushups" style threads so popular at Reddit, then these sorts of comments add nothing to the discussion, worsen the HN community, and are completely uninteresting to me. But if you mean to inject more clever and lighthearted humor into the overly dry and serious HN community, then I believe you do this community a great service, and I commend you for it. Don't bother arguing with me.
 If by 'if by "if by 'if by whiskey'"' you mean to usurp primacy by passing judgement, I remind you, judge not lest ye be judged. But if by 'if by "if by 'if by whiskey'"' you mean to shed light on these proceedings, to guide your fellow citizens, then I am certainly for it. These are my morals. They will not falter.
 Well done, both of you.

Search: