Re^4: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"?

Replies are listed 'Best First'.
Re^5: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" ruffle feathers? by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Nov 22, 2017 at 20:00 UTC
If that needless repetition was an overly ambigious critique, I'll back up to ask again the why that you did not answer. I asked, why is this– Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? n/t –is inferior to this– Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? You answer apparently is, "Because. Also, if we just side-step the question and context for a moment and extrapolate to all posts ever and pretend like the word title doesn't mean something, it's obvious you're wrong to even ask why this OP was offensive."	[reply]
Re^6: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" ruffle feathers? by ikegami (Patriarch) on Nov 23, 2017 at 15:41 UTC
Also, if we just side-step the question and context for a moment and extrapolate to all posts ever and pretend like the word title doesn't mean something, You're the one pretending the word title means something different that it does. The title is useful in some circumstances (e.g. searches, RAT, etc), but it's useless (or even detrimental) when reading the post. It's the post that should have the substance, and it's the title that's the derived value.	[reply]
Re^5: Since when did "\N{U+5678}" work as an alternative to "\x{5678}"? by Your Mother (Archbishop) on Nov 22, 2017 at 19:44 UTC
The title always repeats the post, so you're arguing we should never use a title. That obviously makes no sense.	[reply]