Ozark Huckleberry

Oh, I get it now. I took a little time to explain how I got to my call, and you thought that meant I either didn't know who PWB was, or that I somehow thought I could edumacate him on the SHB. So instead of addressing the topic, you took it on yourself to inform or remind me of my place. Thanks. Got it.

Like it — basically, what I said.

Sorry you feel that way. Wasn’t disagreeing with anything you said; was pointing out that the SHB gives BOD in other situations, so BOD would be reasonable in this situation as well. Not that ‘wrong target type’ applied. Didn’t intend to be confusing.

Was answering a question — you know, going with the Socratic method.

I don't think the one excludes the other. To explain: Benefit of the doubt goes to the shooter. So a hit on the wrong type target is counted as a miss, not a P -- rather than try to determine whether it was an intent to hit the right target that went astray, or a brain glitch that put the shot on the wrong target, we just call it a miss and move on. Only the shooter knows for certain. Benefit of the doubt. There is enough vagueness in the OP to let anyone support their position. Was the first shot on the far side of the stage from the KDs, was it something that was more likely an AD, except the shooter was in the process of aiming and therefore gets a pass, was the target on the other side of the stage where the shooter would have had to move to engage it? Can't tell. So if the shooter has an 'engage 'till down' description, and wants to claim his first wild shot was really the re-engagement, that's on him. If he sweeps five straight, then it's likely he would have swept six straight as well. But if there was a required order of engagement in the stage description, then sure -- the 'make-up' shot for the failed target would have to be in the correct sequence, whether first, last, or middle. Otherwise, it's not re-engaging that specific target at the appropriate point in the string. Does that mean some shooters would work the system to their advantage? Sure. But an SHB that could keep anyone from slipping through a loose gate would get pretty big.

Ancient miners had a diet ‘. . . mainly composed of unprocessed foods.’

Indistinguishable paleofeces, disparate eon

Been going on for years. The standard sitcom family required a savvy, wise-cracking kid; a patient, accomplished wife who ‘managed’ the ‘man’ of the family into doing the right thing; and an incompetent, clumsy near-fool for the husband. The canned laugh track told us when to laugh, so we’d all know making fun of the dad was socially proper.

Good point — the room has to be occupied for the night latch to be set. I don’t think I’d shoot the burglar. It seems a good body slam against the door at the right moment would be much more satisfying.

Maybe because the number of plowshares a plow has is referred to in 'bottoms' (as in, a plow with four plowshares would be called a 'four-bottom plow'), and the plow video had a lot of bottoms, and I'll just shut up now.