longdog wrote:TheNewSaint wrote:As odd as this may sound, I think these contradictory definitions can co-exist. Many English words have different meanings depending on context (e.g., present tense "read" vs past tense "read"). Since this phrase and its two meanings sprang to life organically, I am loath to declare one correct and the other incorrect. You just have to be clear which you mean:
Could we not distinguish between the various Crawfords by the simple expedient of using subscripts? A Crawford1 being the loss of the value of the property and a Crawford2 being the loss of the value of the property plus an equal amount in legal fees etc.
This principle could of course be extended to apply to VICTORYS!!!!11!! such that when somebody is given a free house by the courts like Tom and that lunatic client of ExpertInFuckAll were hoping for. On those occasions we can simply use a superscript as in "With the help of ExpertInFuckAll I am now the outright owner of 17 and 17A... A Crawford2" These will of course rarely be used and could best be described as totally-fucking-irrational numbers.
Or maybe what you get when you multiply a transfinite by the null set.