The Hammarskold Paradox that puzzles me right now is Amos' explanation for the missing 'j'.

When I start a new thread (and abort the attempt later) repeating Amos' title but inserting the 'j' the title fits well into the line with 2 or 3 blanks to spare. This is at odds with Amos' explanation.

What has happened here?
(1) Error of perception: Amos has actually tried it with the j and to him it looked too long then.
(2) Error in testing procedure: When Amos did insert the 'j' the title was actually too long but only because at the same time he used 'thought for the'.
(3) Error of memory: He never did try it with the 'j' included but now truly believes he has.
(4) Outright lie: He has misprinted the title (thought knowing better in principle, as demonstrated in the first post) but doesn't want to admit it and therefore comes up with the first lie that seems believable without scrutiny.
(5) Parallel worlds: In his world the title was too long, period. Doubters will never have access to this world without first hand personal experience of a similar kind.
(6) Following the wrong theory without putting it to test: Amos has never actually tried whether the correct spelling would fit. He thinks he knows how many characters are allowed in a title line and follows closely that theory without questioning it empirically.
(7) Altered state of world: Max has changed the rules of layout in the last couple of days.

Of course there are also some boring interpretations like
(8) Title lines look different in different browser and therefore it was actually too long for him or
(9) "Everybody makes tiny slips at least twice daily without being able to explain when asked how that happened so please stop asking me why I made a particular action of extremely low relevance this way and not the other. Who cares?"

Wolfgang :-)