No, I think Bitt's complaining (tongue-in-cheek) about the "Really" part of "Really unique". Either it's one-of-a-kind, or it's not. It can't be "really" one-of-a-kind, any more than it can be "nearly" one-of-a-kind.


But what if you had something that was one of a matching pair, and there was only 2 of them. Wouldn't that be "nearly" one-of-a-kind?