Richard Wallis <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

.

Dear Mister/Doctor/Professor/Whatever Waliss,

 

WCSWSW rules (see Meeting Summary of July 23, 1947, page 33, notes iv, vi and xiii) dictate that in a series such as you have presented, where there is substantial doubt as to the motives and the exact intent of the author, bearing in mind that there can be no presumption of innocence because of the tender age of the scrawler, although he or she displays a notable precociousness by having scrawled such a message in the first place, which on the face of it bears little resemblance to the model presented at the last convention of the WCSWSW, which may or may not have had a sufficient number of attendees to constitute a quorum, which under more propitious circumstances would not have been required, it is, therefore, obvious that we must start the analysis, however much we might desire a more precise explanation of the context which must be presumed in the absence of other clarifying nomenclature, at the back end, that is to say, with the word "hands".

 

I'm sorry but the convention hall is full and the first speaker is about to speak on the proper placement of the umlat relative to the cranispote, which is often encountered (the problem, that is) on the rare occasions when the ompah is in the lower case referenced by the renisding. I hope you will understand.

 

I will of course complete this answer to your inquiry at the earliest opportunity, which will in no case be later than the next weekly meeting of the World Council for the Suppression of Writing on [Outhouse] Walls (WCSWSW).

 

.brad.13nov09.