On Fri, 13 Jan 2006 15:49:43 -0600, Mike Berger wrote:
I didn't mean that to be entire serious. The problem is that we
use subjective terms to describe everything and they don't have
the same meaning to all of us.

I would say your description was incomplete. I saw some old
mainframe computers that were removed from service due to
obsolescence and were in otherwise perfect condition -- until
the people who removed them chopped cables with an axe to
disconnect them.

But, that would be a "known or visible" problem, wouldn't it? I wrote
that particular description to say, in effect, "I know it worked when we
stopped using it, but I have no way of testing it (thermal insulative
properties of a liquid nitrogen dewar) so here's the deal". Should I
just say "It was good when we retired it, it's been stored
appropriately, and although I have no way to test it, I have no reason
to think that it has degraded in any way in the time it has been out of
service"? Seriously. How do I convey what I'm trying to say in the
best way, given the tendancy (warranted or not) to not trust anyone
selling anything?