(May 30, 2015 at 12:15 pm)SteelCurtain Wrote: Is it possible that it is both a crusher and a sorter? Why does it have to be one or the other? I'd ask you to stop shifting the burden of proof, but that would be futile with you sorterists.
It WOULD be possible, but this is not the case here. It clearly is a sorter, with sorting being its sole purpose. You managed to miss the point like a true crusherist