[QUOTE=Batalov;238569]

These quartics are fairly unappealing.
[/QUOTE]

Why? They are certainly hard, relative to their size, but what
makes them unappealing?

[QUOTE]
There's now a backlog of obligatory quintics, too, that no one wants to touch with a 20-ft pole.
[/QUOTE]

Again, why?

Gee, I don't know why, but they are (were?) as unpopular as GNFS jobs.
I guess because people are superficial and say "bigger means better".

11,539M is sort of the easier one of the whole bunch (easier than 10,590M *); we'll shoot this one down.

__________
[SIZE=1]*) my poorly hidden attempt to revive the debate. ;-][/SIZE]

[QUOTE=Batalov;238826]Gee, I don't know why, but they are (were?) as unpopular as GNFS jobs.
I guess because people are superficial and say "bigger means better".

11,539M is sort of the easier one of the whole bunch (easier than 10,590M *); we'll shoot this one down.

__________
[SIZE=1]*) my poorly hidden attempt to revive the debate. ;-][/SIZE][/QUOTE]

I was always willing to do any number within reach of my resources.

[QUOTE=R.D. Silverman;238907]I was always willing to do any number within reach of my resources.[/QUOTE]Yay! I get to accuse Bob of imprecision in his statements! O frabjous day!

Do you really mean "any number"? If so, why don't you work on, for example, the OPN project? Plenty of numbers there within reach of your resources.

Paul

P.S. :wink:

[QUOTE=xilman;238920]Yay! I get to accuse Bob of imprecision in his statements! O frabjous day!

Do you really mean "any number"? If so, why don't you work on, for example, the OPN project? Plenty of numbers there within reach of your resources.

Paul

P.S. :wink:[/QUOTE]

The context of the discussion was obviously the Cunningham project.