I read plenty. Simply because I disagree with someone's use of words doesn't mean that I'm a literary dimwit. And pulling up an essay containing a certain phrase doesn't vindicate it. Using the statement "your reasoning prowess is faulty" to mean "your reasoning prowess is a fault" is, well, faulty. There is a fundamental difference in meaning between the two, and I'm pretty sure you can see it. In one, "faulty" is used as an adjective to describe one's "reasoning prowess." According to Webster's, "faulty" is defined as "being marked by fault or defect; imperfect." You're essentially pointing out the imperfection of one's reasoning strength. In the other, "reasoning prowess," a quality of an individual, is indicated to be a weakness of said individual. There is no grammatical modifier of "reasoning prowess." And about the Yao thing, we'll just have to wait.
When we play with big men who can play down low in the block, our weakness will be revealed. Hey I'd love it if you can say "I told ya so" because that would mean we're doing great but down the stretch I believe our lack of size will expose this team. Sadly.
