Being There

1. I was there because I ate enough. I argued for enough food. Then, I bought the ingredients. After this, I made the food. I ate it.
2. I was there because of examining subparts. I reviewed the subparts of the food. I found a register of ingredients. I checked whether they were healthy. Then, I ate the food if its ingredients were healthy.
3. I was there because I found my way there. I navigated the correct path. I worked out where I was. I found this on a map. I followed the map to the destination.
4. I was there because I was good. I was good. I behaved well by following the rules. I did this by taking care to follow the laws. Also, I observed guidelines.
5. I was there because of business. The business was a standard version of being there. After a Master's degree, I wrote As for business, sales and the bot. In this way, the bot bought a product in reality. After trial runs, I read the content and business As to remove their pedagogical details, make them about one department and connect each sentence to the topic.
6. I was there because of simplifying my texts, etc. I fought back against not being allowed pedagogy in my books. First, I wrote a seen-as version that was plain. Second, I wrote research so that the text was protected. Finally, I compared it with Hegel (a humanist pedagogue), who used simple language and avoided the term pedagogy.
7. I also noticed that texts were there because of possible good connections and algorithms. I saw a secondary book by Hegel still mentioned "humanist pedagogy". I noticed that like a theology text that said "meditation", there was an A against it. Having more instances of an unusual word would take too long with more than one mention of the word. I noticed that other terms, such as "breasoning", might be entirely removed.
8. I was there because of thinking of connections. I noticed that relations started with the simplest possible form of a question about an answer. For example, I asked what was required to do that. It might be a question about a perspective on the topic. I simplified the language for the answer connection (which shouldn't be in the text).
9. I was there because of the chains of answers I put in the essay. I wrote the explanation. Then, I wrote 50 As to find the answer. Following this, I wrote 50 As about the answer. I found I could write an idea with three steps as an answer.
10. I reworked my philosophy to have arguments for algorithms, to keep my algorithms where the discussions were simple. I simplified language to remove computational terms. Finally, I placed my computer algorithms in a computer science department. Algorithms may also be in philosophy, as long as they are simple. The point of them there was to write an essay about them.
11. I was there to help. I helped with the homework. I did this by discussing the question with the student. Then, I answered her specific questions. Also, I wrote notes for them as study points.
12. I wrote an algorithm to help complete the workload. I wrote complex enough sentences by finding them out with ten different ideas. Then, I wrote the sentence containing ten new other ideas. Then, I wrote ten more ideas as reasons for the sentence.
13. I found popularity with my aim and success by holding the product in my hand. I tossed out the idea of not writing on pedagogical terms because I had read an essay about pedagogy written by an essay writing algorithm. Also, Tristram Shandy and Plato featured algorithms, although Plato featured one algorithm per essay. I wrote freely, finding out breasonings and letting the reader draw their conclusions, non obviously. I wrote algorithms to feature per sentence, which prompted thought and work on one or two algorithms by students.
14. I called logic philosophy and slightly preferred the ten algorithms to the seen-as version. It was precisely philosophy. In England, a magic school agreed with one algorithm per text, but I wanted more. I wanted 1, not ten algorithms per sentence, for clarity (I think I had read something like this somewhere). After quickly writing short algorithms for each sentence at the start, I finished the long algorithms off later.
15. I remained there by finding ideas between chapters. I checked the text's interpolation analysis (connections in similar sentences) (from br_gen.pl). I checked whether all the main conclusions in the text were in it. I used a mind reader to choose the leading contenders, or rather hand chose three of the most different and exciting candidates and wrote algorithms about them. Like br_gen.pl reconnecting sentences, I wrote a version that reconnected algorithms, finding both new methods and new aims for algorithms.
16. I noted the properties of more unique ideas and algorithms, such as their usefulness. I ran algorithm br_gen (see 15) on parts of algorithms, not just adjacent commands. I found the best connections between parts of algorithms. I also ran algorithm br_gen on adjacent commands, in fact, on the ideas that were algorithms were based on. For example, I anchored word triangles on an algorithm system and kept a log (hierarchy) of thoughts to fill in any gaps.