User blog comment:P進大好きbot/Introduction to the Termination of Pair Sequence System/@comment-30754445-20181122093355

"One strategy is to formulate PSS in a way compatible with known other versions. Indeed, I formulated in a way compatible with BM1.1, 2, 2.3, 3.1, and 3.2."

A few days ago, you've specifically said that you haven't used any of the published versions of BMS in your proof.

So what does this statement mean?

Have you created a new version of PSS and then proven that it is equivalent to the PSS portion of the versions you've listed?

Or does "compatible" simply means that your version follows the same kind of rules (good part/bad part and so on)?

And why do you insist on being so vague in your claims? Since we're getting to the point where you're pointing your fingers to others and telling them "your version is rubbish", I think it is reasonable to expect you to actually show some of your work.

(Yes, I also stated that I've proven something, but that was a off-hand remark which nobody here should have given any weight)