Nope, you're wrong. Funkle is the whole set of posts. A set of posts less than five might be referred to as a "funkle-let", but probably only if there are at least three. An individual member of a funkle-set is just a post. It contributes to the degree of funkleness of the whole set, but it itself does not contain more qualities than any normal post would.
"Nope, you're wrong."
Orville:
No, I'm Wright :)
Hmmm--funkle-let--funklet--sounds like a good word to add to the lexicon. . .What is the verb form of "funklet", then?
"It contributes to the degree of funkleness of the whole set, but it itself does not contain more qualities than any normal post would."
Degree of funkleness is an interesting idea (and I guess that could be measured with a funklometer). However, how can the post itself not contain more qualities than a normal post if it contributes to the degree of funkleness? By virtue of participation in the funkle-set doesn't the post become part of a whole rather than merely existing in itself as an individual post? In other words, isn't this just an example of the old saying, don't overlook the funkle for the trees? :)