on quantification existential universal there exists for all my dear argues you can't use the term some critics when you're listing the same bloke twice my emphasis heh it is a 'blockquote' too as long as the universe of discourse contains at least one member with the predicated quality logic tells me i am empowered to use the existential quantifier in english that's some now that's to be distinguished from 'several' which is a usual indicator of more than say two or three so to use the word 'several ' in an argument is to imply at least more than two so when an acquaintance of ours name of known to block and recently given some wiki admin priviliges ap cites in his ap pleading he has been in dispute with several editors he's padding his case since blacketer full well knows that the only folks giving grief were block blacketer this came about because i started adding much more material to the wiki entry on natascha engel and in my innocence i sidled up to the village pump to seek advice on the substantiation of some of my contributions i was particularly perplexed by the problem of my knowing certain facts through my personal correspondence with her extensive source is available on the talk page for the engel article about what transpired next well anyway galloglass left the scene pretty quickly so that left me contending with block and blacketer now correct me if i'm being stupid but to me that leaves two then mid ocean block jumps ship claiming a syndrome he named 'wikibonked' i think i've no idea what it means but i think i'm getting to the stage where i may have caught a dose so that left one blacketer so 'one' is blacketer's version of 'several ' and then you made him an administrator i've brought blacketer to the stage since he's part of the same story of the 'double standards' and 'hypocrisy' that i've discovered around here oh if you get a chance and want a cheap laugh ask blacketer what being a 'candidate' connotes to be continued