chris_chi24 said:

Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.

Same pattern here, and in the same order. I had assumed I was the exception until I read this.

chris_chi24 said:

Worth answering the question that was asked rather than the one behind it.

Coming at chris_chi24’s question from a different direction. The version of this that has an answer is narrower than the version being asked. Narrow it and it becomes tractable; leave it broad and the thread will produce nine confident and incompatible replies.

Found this through search years later and it is still the best discussion of the question, so adding one thing. Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath. An edited-away mistake is invisible to the next person who makes it.

Ask again with the specifics and you will get a better answer than this one.

Following on from chris_chi24 — and this may be the naive question:

How long did you give it before you decided it was working?

claudia_zurich said:

Keep the original post as written when you update it, and add the correction underneath.

Careful with the causal language. Two things moving together in a period when five things changed is not a mechanism, and stating it as one makes the thread less useful to somebody reading it later.