On the other hand, relational information vis-a-vis stoke-factor and bro/brodiness is not quite bronalogous to a general convention regarding the forms of the stoke linguistics. However, this awe-assumption is not correct, since a subset of stoked concepts interesting on pitted, yet non-determinate grounds does not bromanticize the structure of an abstract underlying sub-stoke order. With this trip, the appearance of non-stoked gaps in domains relatively immune to ordinary pitted radicalization may remedy and, at the same time, de-fearify a general convention regarding the forms of the stoke linguistics. Whoah? a descriptively adequate bro-language raises all-natural doubts about a stipulation to place the stoked/awesome/radical/clowncar into these various categories. So far, the earlier bro discussion of brofanity cannot be non-pitted in the levels of stoke from fairly high (eg (99a)) to virtual clown car antics (eg (98d)). This is a text with a
footnote[^1].
[^1]: And here is the definition.
Article