My meaning was different. Not that it much matters.
[ Hermann would also accept Mr. Cheng's alternative theory. Even as one with a much high probability. The Door even encourages that very sloppy amalgamation.
He has not, however, ever played Final Fantasy. ]
Yet, chances are high that in worlds with dragons, men have indeed gone to that very place, i.e. slicing open giant lizards. Therefore, it is inapplicable, though it was inapplicable to begin with, because you used the initial saying to argue for dragons having loot. Now, you advocate more generally for attacking the dragons.
Related hypotheses, perhaps, as the theoretically to obtain the loot one would need attack, but the act of 'boldly going' contributes nothing to the odds of loot.
text; i'm sorry
[ Hermann would also accept Mr. Cheng's alternative theory. Even as one with a much high probability. The Door even encourages that very sloppy amalgamation.
He has not, however, ever played Final Fantasy. ]
Yet, chances are high that in worlds with dragons, men have indeed gone to that very place, i.e. slicing open giant lizards. Therefore, it is inapplicable, though it was inapplicable to begin with, because you used the initial saying to argue for dragons having loot. Now, you advocate more generally for attacking the dragons.
Related hypotheses, perhaps, as the theoretically to obtain the loot one would need attack, but the act of 'boldly going' contributes nothing to the odds of loot.