[ANSTHRLD] Fimbriation

Tim McDaniel tmcd at jump.net
Wed Aug 8 16:10:41 PDT 2001


On Wed, 8 Aug 2001, Patrick J. Cuccurello <pat at adtelusa.com> wrote:
> If memory serves me right, it was around the time that "no more
> enflamed" was also stated.

Nope.

"Enflamed" is OK, as the (currently believed to be) period style of
little tufts of flame all over.  If the charge is on a big flame, then
it's "on a flame", not "enflamed", and the flame in this case is
considered the charge and the thing on it is a tertiary (or
"quaternary", cause for bounce).

Fimbriated of flame, however, is right out.

Daniel de Lincolia, flaming
--
Tim McDaniel (home); Reply-To: tmcd at jump.net;
if that fail, my work address is tmcd at us.ibm.com.
 "To join the Clueless Club, send a followup to this message quoting every-
 thing up to and including this sig!" -- Jukka.Korpela at hut.fi (Jukka Korpela)




More information about the Heralds mailing list