> But you're using an arbitrary definition of 'less' that most people do not use, and have never used.
Contradicted by this:
http://grammar.quickanddirtytips.com/less-versus-fewer.aspx
And this:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fewer_vs._less
And this:
http://oxforddictionaries.com/words/less-or-fewer
And this:
http://afterdeadline.blogs.nytimes.com/2011/03/01/fewer-vs-l...
A quote from the last link: "The basic rule for precise use of 'less' and 'fewer' is simple (though we slip often). Use 'fewer' with countable, individual things, and 'less' with uncountable amounts, volumes, etc. So: 'I should drink less coffee,' but 'I should eat fewer doughnuts.'"
> 'Smaller keystrokes' is, in context, nonsensical.
Yes -- which is why I posted in the first place.
You can't redefine words and then complain when people don't use your new definition.
"Less keystrokes = optmal laziness." is perfectly clear in context. 'Smaller keystrokes' is, in context, nonsensical.