Every night, researchers go to sleep glowing in self-esteem, knowing
that they have pulled in dozens of Stars and thousands of $$$ (in
tips) for their efforts.

Meanwhile, us poor Commentators lie tossing and turning wondering if
we have caused unintended offence or cracked some truly unfunny joke.

This Question should even the score.

Please nominate the Best Comment ever, so that other Commentators (or
Researchers) can ascribe Meteors, on the following scale:

    ¤ = Very Poor Comment
   ¤¤ = Poor Comment
  ¤¤¤ = So So Comment
 ¤¤¤¤ = Good Comment
¤¤¤¤¤ = Great Comment

Wondering where to start?

Why not try Question 161982? 

(I believe, several Comments have already been posted)

---

Clarification of Question by probonopublico-ga on 23 Jul 2003 07:48 PDT

Ecky Thump! 
 
You learn summat every bloomin' day.

This one.

I'll second that.

That gives me decisiveness and modesty, right?

: )

According to a search of Google Answers, there has 
already been one nomination for "best comment":

----------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Puss limit in milk
From: nronronronro-ga on 08 Sep 2002 17:31 PDT 	 

Never would have guessed milk has puss in it. 
I'll pay someone $5 to not answer this question. 
 
;-)

----------------------------------------------

Subject: Re: Puss limit in milk
From: davidsar-ga on 08 Sep 2002 18:55 PDT 	 

nronronronro-ga, 
 
Thanks for the laff.  Yours is possibly the best 
comment in the whole Google Answer archives.

----------------------------------------------
http://answers.google.com/answers/main?cmd=threadview&id=62903

How is that milk?

The ones where I correct the mistakes of the gurgle researchers

Hi, Psimon

I must have missed that ...

Can you give the reference?

PB

Hi PB 
Just off the top of my head
72761
91703
104359
108925
139081
156215
161982
179423
186174
186384
186646
192924
198514
224366
There are others of cause but modesty  and fear of embaracing the
researchers preclude a comprehencive listing
Regards Kelmo

I went and checked some, and kemlo-ga seems to be right -- in the
three comments above -- in specifying
"... where I correct the mistakes of the ... researchers" of 
"gurgle".
The situation seems slightly -- not much -- different if kemlo-ga
meant google researchers.

If Kemlo said 'Gurgle' then I am sure he meant 'Gurgle'.

Please don't try and second guess him ...

It only leads to confusion.

probonopublico-ga, you as host, should try more to stay neutral in this dispute

Probonopublico --

This would be my favorite because the question involved a
poorly-documented area of aviation history.  The answer was
authoritative, but multiple comments added to the history:
http://answers.google.com/answers/main?cmd=threadview&id=167616

This Google Answer (and comments) is an excellent indicator of the
value of the service.

Best regards,

Omnivorous-GA

Sorry, Googel, I stand reprimanded.

Nevertheless, I must thanks Omnivorous for his/her Comment. If I
wasn't neutral, then I would certainly agree and award:

¤ ¤ ¤ ¤ ¤

Five meteors.