>haha, Alexander where are you now?
>
>Except that a sword won't help us, because we will still have to figure out if the non-statement: "this is not a message" is true, and thus, whether or knot (ahem) "this thread is not true" is not true or not through some sort of non-extension or other. But since there is no we if there is no thread, then does that mean the thread exists even if maybe the message doesn't?

Hmm, sounds almost exsistential to me. "I thread, therefore, I am"? Jim's post (or rather lack thereof) has a rather nihilistc bent to it.

Personally, I would prefer the Zen approach ("See the UT, be the UT") to either of those. Of course, I use this in design as well ("See the data, be as one with the data. Learn to see past the superficial differences in the data"). As opposed to the exsistential ("I have PEMs, therefore I am") or the nihilistic (IF ISNULL(oObject)...).