This is ONE OF 3 responses to Vol 9 Roger 4 ("Blind Date response")...
Just for the sake of argument, let's say I'm interested - but on no account should work on this interfere with our Conquest schedule.
[Editor's note: We're off and running! See Vol 10 John 12]
Actually, my main motivation for responding is to note that I nearly missed another classic Cartanism (sorry, Roger) in John's base note. What? You say that you missed it too? It's worth going back for, but I'll save you the trouble:
"We may want to construct two complimentary adventures, one for each sex."