User blog comment:P進大好きbot/Introduction to the Termination of Pair Sequence System/@comment-30754445-20181122093355/@comment-35470197-20181122114338

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

Of course, if "the same" means an apprpriate meaning.

> And why do you insist on being so vague in your claims?

Not vague at all. You know what "compatible" means, but just do not want to accept any reference to actual BMS made by computer-language.

> Since we're getting to the point where you're pointing your fingers to others and telling them "your version is rubbish",

I appologised the rudeness (while you have never). In addition, I have never said "your version is rubbish". If you read my blog post, you would not think that I am regarding your version as rubbish.

> I think it is reasonable to expect you to actually show some of your work.

Really? You expect it, without appologising your rudeness at all?

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

I guess that you will skip writing your proof by reasoning in that way.

I emphasise that stating that you can prove better than me without starting writing is absolutely rude.