Quote:
Originally Posted by
pejsek 
It only seems like a dozen.
Actually, a quick scan indicates I under counted.
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pejsek 
My conclusions seem to have been largely in your own head. How plausible is it that I would posit my own current personal situation as the only way to go?
Now this is better. A subtle attempt to insinuate it is me, not you, that seems to have some clear baggage with the issue of home size. I would say you should re-read your posts. Let's have a refresher, for instance, of your initial post:
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pejsek 
What fresh brand of hell is this? How much space do you need? My family of four lives in about 1700sf in San Francisco and it's more than enough for us--three bedrooms, double parlor, split bath, kitchen and dining room. I really don't want for more space. When I see 3500sf suburban houses it edges me towards a kind of vertigo. Out by where my parents live in Contra Costa County sports stars have huge compounds that remind me of motels. Where's the glamour in that?
For the record, while my own tastes are slightly more baroque, I too think the fabric is much nicer than the leather.
Why, 3.5k square feet apparently make you literally dizzy. Yes, clearly, where did I come up with these conclusions, concerning your views? Obviously made up out of whole cloth!
Quote:
Originally Posted by
pejsek 
I found your original insistence that 2000sf could in any useful way be seen as a marker of poverty and hardship to be foolish and, yes, even, as you say, extreme. I still do.
You actually had this figured out once, and then seem to have wantonly ignored it. It was all about tweaking Foof. Whom, I might add, is a much better sport than you.