Just watching it now (and what a house it is). There's a TV in almost every room, and Fox News is on each of them. He says: "Yes, it is the same station on every television, because that's how the system is designed. It's designed so it'll play the same station all over the house. It happens to be Fox News, but I do flip around. It's not nailed on Fox News, in case you're wondering."
I would normally let this comment pass, but the vital importance of the topic we are discussing creates a moral imperative for me to respond. Given that "whether or not pot with a lid with holes for draining pasta" counts as a colander is not a fact subject to temporal variance, when you "owned 3 colanders" then we are left with 2 possibilities at the time of your original comment:
1. A "pot with a lid with holes in it" counts as a colander:
Given P pots with drainage lids and C "typical colanders" in your household, P+C = 3 (which is the same as in my household, and thus a tie)
2. A "pot with a lid with holes in it" does not count as a colander:
C = 3 (P+C >=3, but is irrelevant to the discussion). This is larger than the two colanders in my household so you win.
Therefore, your more recent comment indicates that you purchased something that would qualify as a colander under situation #1 (either a typical colander, or pot with drainage in the lid) in the roughly 10 hours between your two comments. May I ask what sort of colander it was?
Excellent analysis, except that’s it’s based on a misinterpretation of what I’m saying. I’m saying that I wasn’t counting pots with holes in the lids, but if we expand the definition to include them, then my count increases to 4.
