This thread is only for words with four letters or less
 

If a word is tiny, it must be good. It has more mass, as it is wee.

Can we talk in such a way? I know it's an odd idea, but we are word folk, as it were. You know it's true!

Try it, it's not too hard.

I can't even have five? Not fair at all.

Well, let's say we go to five, only if four is full of suck.

To stay at only four need not be hard. In fact, it can be easy and set one free in a way, too.

Four does NOT suck at all, its nice.

I don't see why this is some kind of hard idea. I do this all the time, even when I don't know that I am. One time, a guy I know did this for a year. Then he said that he did not know how to stop. To this day, a word he uses can only be four or less in size.

That last part, I know, was not the very best, but I need to get back to work now.

Oh, by the way, I do not want us to use five. It can only be four, if you ask me.

Did you try to do it in real life? It's hard to talk like this... to do it both fast and well is a mind fuck!

What is the min word size for the find tool? Was it four or one less? It may be hard to find this page a long time from now.

Nice idea, but yes, find will work on four.

My tiny mind has much stuff of five or more.

This is a good test for my mind and your mind too, but does it mean that the word list from full stop to full stop must be tiny, too?

A tis or tat lest this test be lost

The word list is not very big, thus, we must make due.

I know we can do this if we try.

So what you note is that when a user, be it lad or lass, goes to make one of this type of post, you see that the end of the work they do will tend to be of a size less than it is when they make a post that does not have the same rule--that is to say, when they are not made to use less over more (as far as word size goes)?

Oh my... how I love you Flint.

I thot I cud rite a mesj with just four letr wrdz. I was rong.