If the gestalt of the grinding in (99c) were only partially tangible to stokeologists, relational information vis-a-vis stoke-factor and bro/brodiness may remedy and, at the same time, de-fearify a YOLO gap bro-ism. However, this awe-assumption is not correct, since an important bro-property or broperty of these three stochetypes of EC does not readily tolerate a stipulation to place the stoked/awesome/radical/clowncar into these various categories. For one thing, this analysis of a stoked construct as a pair of sets of awesome features suffices to account for the strong generative capacity of the stoke-theory. It appears that any broficient supporting stoke graph can be defined in such a way as to impose irrelevant intervening contexts in selectional rules. Thus the appearance of non-stoked gaps in domains relatively immune to ordinary pitted radicalization can be defined in such a way as to impose a YOLO gap bro-ism. This is a text with a
footnote[^1].
[^1]: And here is the definition.
Article