Driver to drive?

On Jan 31, 10:57 am, fungus <to...@artlum.com> wrote:
This is either the most brilliant troll ever or
we've found the greatest waste of oxygen
on the planet. I can't decide which.
Oh wait, I can decide. "John Doe" knows far too
much about Usenet to be the clueless numpty
he's pretending to be.

His editing of followups, etc., gives him away.
 
On 31 Jan 2012 08:15:15 GMT, John Doe <jdoe@usenetlove.invalid> wrote:

I did that, when I had IDE cables. I used to remove every little
crease. And I shortened them. And removed unnecessary headers.

You are a true and complete idiot, if you cut headers off IDE cables.
 
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 03:58:31 -0500, "P E Schoen" <paul@peschoen.com>
wrote:

"John Doe" wrote in message
news:4f27a313$0$27035$c3e8da3$fdf4f6af@news.astraweb.com...

I don't suffer from obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD)
as much nowadays.

But still enough to annoy the hell out of most everyone here. Perhaps your
statement above explains much. Plus you seem to be getting what you crave: a
lot of attention. Even if it's bad, it's still attention. When a dog
constantly begs, paws, and barks for attention, even if you yell at him,
it's better than being ignored, so he is positively reinforced to continue
his annoying behavior. So, you sure are getting it here. But respect, heh,
not so much...

Bye!

Paul
The idiot won't get it. You have been placed onto the "poster with too
much ego" shelf by the OCD retard.

If the little bastard has an age that conforms to what society refers
to as "adult", then he should match it with actual mature behavior.

Currently, he is a pathetic, immature, top-posting, group disrupting
SPAM troll.

If he is an adult aged person, his father should take him out back and
shoot the retarded fuck.
 
On 28 Jan 2012 02:44:56 GMT, John Doe <jdoe@usenetlove.invalid> wrote:

I developed
It is fucking pathetic, and you take 5 seconds longer to actually
perform the move than any normal person would take. Your video shows you
to be a dopey, poor dexterity fucktard.

The fact that you were to much of a pussy to accept comments on it is a
tell as well.

You know most of the comments would match mine, right?

Go back to the kook group, boy.
 
fungus <tooby artlum.com> wrote:

John Doe <j... usenetlove.invalid> wrote:

Anything is possible, that's why we have disclosure. Show a
credible example of my method being used prior to this time.


This is either the most brilliant troll ever or we've
The voices in your head?

Either you're posting from Spain, or you are using a proxy. Could
your problem have something to do with prejudice?

found the greatest waste of oxygen on the planet. I can't decide
which.
Just another something you don't know. Disclosure is the ordinary
way you stake claim to an idea/method/whatever. It's common
knowledge.

Either way, it's not worth replying any more
IOW... You are running off to play with your imaginary kill file
friend, until it eludes you again.

but thanks for the laughs.
Anytime. I don't nym-shift, so you know what to expect.

--











See also Google Groups
Path: news.astraweb.com!border6.newsrouter.astraweb.com!news.glorb.com!postnews.google.com!c21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com!not-for-mail
From: fungus <tooby artlum.com
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.basics
Subject: Re: Simple way to bind wires, without ties
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 01:57:56 -0800 (PST)
Organization: http://groups.google.com
Lines: 12
Message-ID: <35b392ac-d42b-45d1-a117-c08a7e511651 c21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com
References: <4f236128$0$32059$c3e8da3$40d4fd75 news.astraweb.com> <jg0jc5$kdq$1 reversiblemaps.ath.cx> <039aeb06-570b-47e0-910f-13cff41fa53e bs8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <4f267ae1$0$2163$c3e8da3$c8b7d2e6 news.astraweb.com> <24cdba95-3381-4170-b656-c984ac3e4836 q8g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> <4f26a561$0$32221$c3e8da3$670ba073 news.astraweb.com> <bd4d7189-75e2-48ee-964f-eacc65a9fe69 hs8g2000vbb.googlegroups.com> <4f26b765$0$2170$c3e8da3$c8b7d2e6 news.astraweb.com> <d82a26bc-02de-42c3-9acf-bfa735115fb7 s9g2000vbc.googlegroups.com> <4f26f2c2$0$9617$c3e8da3$9b4ff22a news.astraweb.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 87.221.151.76
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
X-Trace: posting.google.com 1328004734 5275 127.0.0.1 (31 Jan 2012 10:12:14 GMT)
X-Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 10:12:14 +0000 (UTC)
Complaints-To: groups-abuse google.com
Injection-Info: c21g2000yqi.googlegroups.com; posting-host=87.221.151.76; posting-account=gLolegoAAAC00kFSw5zQA_tVgjwJpNvY
User-Agent: G2/1.0
X-Google-Web-Client: true
X-Google-Header-Order: HUALESNKRC
X-HTTP-UserAgent: Mozilla/5.0 (Windows NT 6.1; WOW64; rv:9.0.1) Gecko/20100101 Firefox/9.0.1,gzip(gfe)
 
Some netcop wannabe

JW <none dev.null> wrote:

Path: news.astraweb.com!border6.newsrouter.astraweb.com!npeer02.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!newsfeed1.swip.net!news.astraweb.com!border6.a.newsrouter.astraweb.com!not-for-mail
From: JW <none dev.null
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.basics
Subject: Re: Simple way to bind wires, without ties
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 06:08:41 -0500
Message-ID: <lsifi7thi6grfgj2kh1hcgp65edfr1h6qk 4ax.com
References: <4f267ae1$0$2163$c3e8da3$c8b7d2e6 news.astraweb.com> <24cdba95-3381-4170-b656-c984ac3e4836 q8g2000yqa.googlegroups.com> <4f26a561$0$32221$c3e8da3$670ba073 news.astraweb.com> <9hlei7ppaim5edlnnpii47g8dvoerui6v8 4ax.com> <4f275aaa$0$27960$c3e8da3$f017e9df news.astraweb.com> <o5nei7p3s00c9anlfa0i8s702jt69e1ol5 4ax.com> <4f275f67$0$2171$c3e8da3$c8b7d2e6 news.astraweb.com> <hdpei71fu8jm1t86fbr9tetg7llrlb0iir 4ax.com
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 6.00/32.1186
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Lines: 13
Organization: Unlimited download news at news.astraweb.com
NNTP-Posting-Host: 2b7ef9fc.news.astraweb.com
X-Trace: DXC=1MIHG69 eYndoV f]470JnL?0kYOcDh jCdYYWVo^;db=`CGFDfdLbdhK cL?CJ0>kX`j^AO7l;Pia8Vd=ZX]`9dD28YWko5XfjWVT^4iU[Jbj

On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 19:54:00 -0800 Pueblo Dancer
Kachina AllHopiIsLost.org> wrote in Message id:
hdpei71fu8jm1t86fbr9tetg7llrlb0iir 4ax.com>:

On 31 Jan 2012 03:26:32 GMT, John Doe <jdoe usenetlove.invalid> wrote:

Why

STOP SPAMMING THESE GROUPS, YOU RETARDED FUCK!!!

His Breidbart Index is more than likely over 20 by now, why don't you
report him to Astraweb instead of raving at him like the nutter that you
are?
 
"P E Schoen" <paul peschoen.com> wrote:

"John Doe" wrote

I don't suffer from obsessive compulsive disorder (OCD) as much
nowadays.

But still enough to annoy the hell out of most everyone here.
I don't nym-shift, so you don't have to be annoyed unless you want
to be annoyed.

Perhaps your statement above explains much. Plus you seem to be
getting what you crave: a lot of attention.
Nobody forces anybody else to do anything on UseNet. Your mother
should have taught you self-control.

Even if it's bad, it's still attention.
Most of it coming from one of this group's most active
nym-shifting trolls.

When a dog constantly begs, paws, and barks for attention, even
if you yell at him,
I enthusiastically treat barking dogs as if they are friends. It's
simple psychology that works wonders on ordinary dogs.

it's better than being ignored, so he is positively reinforced
to continue his annoying behavior.
Apparently you don't know anything about handling dogs, either.

So, you sure are getting it here. But respect, heh, not so
much...
In fact, there are lot of old people in here who apparently have
never seen my method. The silence from them says a lot of good
stuff (me knowing that the method is a good one). But a troll
doesn't see it from my perspective.

Until the next time you feel like trolling...

--













Paul




Path: news.astraweb.com!border6.newsrouter.astraweb.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!eternal-september.org!feeder.eternal-september.org!mx04.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: "P E Schoen" <paul peschoen.com
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.basics
Subject: Re: Simple way to bind wires, without ties
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 03:58:31 -0500
Organization: A noiseless patient Spider
Lines: 1
Message-ID: <jg8apv$anh$1 dont-email.me
References: <4f236128$0$32059$c3e8da3$40d4fd75 news.astraweb.com> <jg83f3$vde$1 speranza.aioe.org> <4f27a313$0$27035$c3e8da3$fdf4f6af news.astraweb.com
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; format=flowed; charset="Windows-1252"; reply-type=original
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Injection-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 09:04:00 +0000 (UTC)
Injection-Info: mx04.eternal-september.org; posting-host="nGGXvXLL6GwyB23nJ4M9mQ"; logging-data="10993"; mail-complaints-to="abuse eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX1/0XpgRr9Wg5h803tUpiN+/R8rrfGR8/Qw="
In-Reply-To: <4f27a313$0$27035$c3e8da3$fdf4f6af news.astraweb.com
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Windows Live Mail 15.4.3538.513
Importance: Normal
Cancel-Lock: sha1:erghEhJ3MBwyOZvWrxd709C8JoU=
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-MIMEOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V15.4.3538.513
 
I didn't say that I cut headers off of IDE cables,
you raving lunatic troll.

MrTallyman <MrTallyman BananaCountersRUs.org> wrote:

changes subject line
nym-shifting
See also:
BarnCat <BarnCat keepingthevermindownatthebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:
Hellequin <Hellequin yourpipesaremypipes.org>
MassiveProng <MassiveProng thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:
MrTallyman <MrTallyman BananaCountersRUs.org>
Numer0 Un0 <Numer0Un0 abettermanthanyou.org>
Pueblo Dancer <Kachina AllHopiIsLost.org>
scorpius <scorpius thewormholethatemptiesontheothersideoftheuniverse.org>
TheKraken <ReachUpandSuckYouDowntotheDepths yup.org> wrote:
UltimatePatriot <UltimatePatriot thebestcountry.org> wrote:
....maybe dozens more

Path: news.astraweb.com!border6.newsrouter.astraweb.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!de-l.enfer-du-nord.net!feeder1.enfer-du-nord.net!gegeweb.org!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: MrTallyman <MrTallyman BananaCountersRUs.org
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.basics
Subject: Re: Simple way to bind wires, without ties
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 04:25:56 -0800
Organization: Banana-Tallyers-R-Us
Lines: 8
Message-ID: <acnfi7hf7qrimvj8ee07h7t302pof2ua24 4ax.com
References: <4f236128$0$32059$c3e8da3$40d4fd75 news.astraweb.com> <jg83f3$vde$1 speranza.aioe.org> <4f27a313$0$27035$c3e8da3$fdf4f6af news.astraweb.com
Reply-To: Your Uncle, Bob.
NNTP-Posting-Host: TH92m7xmdtAEYG0fVwcpyg.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse aioe.org
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118

On 31 Jan 2012 08:15:15 GMT, John Doe <jdoe usenetlove.invalid> wrote:


I did that, when I had IDE cables. I used to remove every little
crease. And I shortened them. And removed unnecessary headers.


You are a true and complete idiot, if you cut headers off IDE cables.
 
MassiveProng <MassiveProng thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:

John Doe <jdoe usenetlove.invalid> wrote:

I developed

It is fucking pathetic,
A raving lunatic nym-shifting troll is entitled to his opinion.

and you take 5 seconds longer to actually perform the move than
any normal person would take.
So it's even better than I thought. I've been using it for years,
but I'll have to work on my speed...

Your video shows you to be a dopey, poor dexterity fucktard.
I can juggle three balls!

I'm not as coordinated as a drummer, but probably a lot more
coordinated than any raving lunatic nym-shifting troll on UseNet.
And here we have another example of a troll dissing somebody
without having anything to show for himself.

The fact that you were to much of a pussy to accept comments
on it is a tell as well.
Actually, comments aren't disabled. Maybe YouTube globally
disables the comments of raving lunatic nym-shifting trolls.

You know most of the comments would match mine, right?
Yes, if most of the comments ARE yours. But you can't parade
around YouTube as dozens of different users like you do here on
UseNet. What is your YouTube ID? Show us how coordinated you are.
My crystal ball says you are too chicken to answer that.

--













Go back to the kook group, boy.



Path: news.astraweb.com!border6.newsrouter.astraweb.com!news.glorb.com!feeder.erje.net!news.mixmin.net!aioe.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail
From: MassiveProng <MassiveProng thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.basics
Subject: Re: Simple way to bind wires, without ties
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 05:01:05 -0800
Organization: I am the Ballrus
Lines: 14
Message-ID: <mapfi7tk3mqgc3a6lhtthrms0s2r7hklof 4ax.com
References: <4f236128$0$32059$c3e8da3$40d4fd75 news.astraweb.com
Reply-To: MasiveProng yourhiney.org
NNTP-Posting-Host: TH92m7xmdtAEYG0fVwcpyg.user.speranza.aioe.org
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Complaints-To: abuse aioe.org
X-Notice: Filtered by postfilter v. 0.8.2
X-Newsreader: Forte Agent 4.2/32.1118
 
Lostgallifreyan <no-one@nowhere.net> wrote in
news:Xns9FEB1AAA6770Dzoodlewurdle@216.196.109.145:

If there are any other problems I haven't seen any.
Just found one... If I model a voltage follower and feed it with a negative
voltage while running with a single supply rail, the output is -1.14211V. Tt
should be impossible to sustain a negative voltage in this situation. I
imagine small spikes might go south of the negative rail due to any
inductance or capacitance present, but not DC.
 
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 19:58:18 -0800 (PST), George Herold
<gherold@teachspin.com> wrote:

On Jan 30, 10:32 pm, "k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
k...@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 19:18:41 -0800 (PST), George Herold





gher...@teachspin.com> wrote:
On Jan 30, 10:18 am, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
On 28 Jan 2012 20:48:21 GMT, Jasen Betts <ja...@xnet.co.nz> wrote:

On 2012-01-26, Tim Williams <tmoran...@gmail.com> wrote:
On Jan 25, 9:55 pm, John Larkin
jjlar...@highNOTlandTHIStechnologyPART.com> wrote:
I don't exactly understand the situation. Got a sketch?

Does this involve tantalum caps?

A description should suffice [rum disclaimer inserted here]:

Yes -- I have eight output transformers in parallel from the same
current-limited PWM driver.  Now, under normal conditions, all eight
channels are working correctly, so the current shares evenly, and all
the caps are happy (the maximum supply is 5A, so they each see a
maximum of 5A / 8 = 0.6A peak, so the RMS ripple is under 0.42A, fine
for a chip tantalum, though I have ceramic specified at the moment).
But under fault, the whole 5A could flow into just one channel, which
makes things "interesting".  I may implement a "max-of-channels"
current limit for this.

Under this fault condition in the fault current passing through the
tantalum cap, or just visiting the neighbourhood?

energy density detonates tantalums, don't get them hot and
charged at the same time.

What usually detonates them is high peak current, or equivalently high
dV/dT.

--

John Larkin, President       Highland Technology Incwww.highlandtechnology.com jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom timing and laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME  analog, thermocouple, LVDT, synchro, tachometer
Multichannel arbitrary waveform generators- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

No, the worst thing about tant. caps is they get put in bakcwards*,

*MANY* moons ago, my boss was the Tantalum Cap Tzar for the corporation (how
he got that "distinction", I haven't the foggiest).  We were having all sorts
of problems with fires caused by tants in backwards.  Everything was tried,
three pins (-+-), four pins (-++-), big lead/little lead, fuses, everything.
No matter what, something like 1% of them got stuck in backwards (even to the
point that when all else went right 1% were in the tubes backwards).

One day the manager of the local manufacturing/stuffing department called
complaining that his "girls" were getting sore thumbs from sticking the
capacitors into the boards.  Yep, they were big/little lead caps and they were
trying really hard to put the big lead in the little hole.  They'd done a few
thousand that way.

I spent an hour today, trying to figure out why the current limit
kept turning on, at ~3 volts, but only under a good load???

I had a bunch go off about 2" from my ear, while I was leaning over the bench
try to figure out why the supply was limiting (I always brought systems up the
first time with the supply in constant current mode).- Hide quoted text -

- Show quoted text -

Yeah... a backwards cap finally 'dawned' on me and it took less than
30 seconds to lay my fingers on the problem. New run... they're all
in backwards, except for a few I guess.

Does under voltaging (sp) make a few last longer?
I swear I've had stuff powered up for few hours, and then get pictures
sent of a 'brown' tantalum, in backwards.
(Return costs are expensive, but ya gotta take care of your
customers!)

George H.
Conventional wisdom is that tantalums can run at -3 volts or -10% of
rated voltage, whichever is more. Or less maybe.

Why put them in backwards?


**********************************

John Larkin, President
Highland Technology, Inc

jlarkin at highlandtechnology dot com
http://www.highlandtechnology.com

Precision electronic instrumentation
Picosecond-resolution Digital Delay and Pulse generators
Custom laser controllers
Photonics and fiberoptic TTL data links
VME thermocouple, LVDT, synchro acquisition and simulation
 
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 16:19:13 +0000, John Doe wrote:

<snip>

Look, John Doe, your idea is not original. The reason that no one is
able to find any prior description of the idea is simple: The people to
whom it would be news, haven't yet learned how to read. Kids usually
learn how to tie a knot before they learn how to read - or at least,
before they are able to readily use Usenet.

Your idea is nothing more or less than tying something into an overhand
knot. If this is not the simplest of knots, it is certainly close to it;
I know of none simpler.

Coming here to tell people to tie wire into a knot is something like
suggesting that a light shines much brighter when connected to some sort
of power supply. I doubt you'll find any prior descriptions of this
idea, either. It's not because my idea is so novel that no one else has
thought of it. It's because it's so obvious no one has seen any need to
state it.

If I came here and presented such a simple-minded idea, people would not
be impressed. If I kept insisting that the idea was novel, and that no
one could show where someone else had the idea, they'd become impatient.
Kind of like what happened with you.

Now we're at the point of mutual insults. It is only a matter of time,
according to Godwin's Law, before someone makes a comparison to Hitler or
Nazis.

All this makes me wonder - what's in it for you to do this? If you're
just trolling, well, OK, you're trying to amuse yourself. But if you're
actually serious...

--
All's well that ends.
 
Chiron <chiron613 gmail.com> wrote:

Look, John Doe, your idea is not original.
Apparently it is.

The people to whom it would be news, haven't yet learned how to
read.
I bet that would include your mother.

Kids usually learn how to tie a knot before they learn how to
read
There are plenty of overhand knot diagrams on the Internet.

Your idea is nothing more or less than tying something into an
overhand knot.
There are lots of overhand knot diagrams on the Internet.

If this is not the simplest of knots, it is certainly close to
it; I know of none simpler.
My method is not just an overhand knot. But that's only half of
the equation. The other half is how useful the method is. It's
useful to practically everybody in the world.

Coming here to tell people to tie wire into a knot
A new kind of knot.

is something like suggesting that a light shines much brighter
when connected to some sort of power supply.
Then why hasn't anybody seen it? If your conclusion is "because it
doesn't work", well, you can believe whatever you want to believe,
and I will continue using it like I have for several years.

I doubt you'll find any prior descriptions of this idea, either.
That's a distinct possibility, and it leads to be conclusion that
my method probably is novel.

It's not because my idea is so novel
It's because you are acting like a moron.

If I came here and presented such a simple-minded idea,
My method is not simpleminded, it's just simple. Your pride won't
let you appreciate a simple idea, because you think you're above
it all. That's what we thought before September 11, 2001, when 19
box knife carrying knuckle draggers hijacked some planes and
killed 3000 of our people with them. You can't see the simple
because the complex is in your way.

people would not be impressed.
Speaking of... Have you ever invented anything or done anything
intellectual that you can show to prove that you are some sort of
an intellectual judge? I'm not talking about your mental
masturbation here on UseNet. Anything substantial? Anything ever?
Or are you just a mouthy critic? Talk is cheap.

If I kept insisting that the idea was novel,
I haven't been insisting that the idea is novel, liar. But in
fact, there are lots of very old people in here who have not seen
my method. To me, that suggests that it is in fact novel. You
might think it means that the method is useless, but I know better
since I have been using it for years.

Now we're at the point of mutual insults.
I call it "trolling". At best you are a worthless critic who has
never done anything inventive in your life. Otherwise, care to
show us what you have done that anyone else took note of? Anything
at all? And I'm not talking about your back and forth mental
masturbation here on UseNet.

All this makes me wonder - what's in it for you to do this?
Because I feel like it. Same reason you are a troll.

--














If you're
just trolling, well, OK, you're trying to amuse yourself. But if you're
actually serious...

--
All's well that ends.


Path: news.astraweb.com!border6.newsrouter.astraweb.com!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post01.iad.highwinds-media.com!newsfe15.iad.POSTED!7ed62f90!not-for-mail
From: Chiron <chiron613 gmail.com
Subject: Re: Simple way to bind wires, without ties
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.basics
References: <4f236128$0$32059$c3e8da3$40d4fd75 news.astraweb.com> <mapfi7tk3mqgc3a6lhtthrms0s2r7hklof 4ax.com> <4f281481$0$27996$c3e8da3$f017e9df news.astraweb.com
User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 36
Message-ID: <mVYVq.15291$Sh7.7234 newsfe15.iad
X-Complaints-To: abuse teranews.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 21:19:14 UTC
Organization: TeraNews.com
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 21:19:14 GMT
 
MrTallyman wrote:
On 31 Jan 2012 08:15:15 GMT, John Doe <jdoe@usenetlove.invalid> wrote:


I did that, when I had IDE cables. I used to remove every little
crease. And I shortened them. And removed unnecessary headers.



You are a true and complete idiot, if you cut headers off IDE cables.
Yeah what you say, and he most likely does not recycle either!

Jamie
 
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:27:17 +0000, John Doe wrote:

The people to whom it would be news, haven't yet learned how to read.

I bet that would include your mother.
This was uncalled for. Nowhere have I treated you rudely or with
anything approaching disrespect. I insist on being treated with
respect. I have a killfile and I know how to use it. There's always
room for one more in there.

Coming here to tell people to tie wire into a knot

A new kind of knot.
What is "new" about this knot? Surely not the physical configuration of
the material being tied into a knot. An overhand knot is the same,
whether done with thread, rope, wire, or other length of flexible
material. So apparently your "innovation" is what? To tie a knot in
wire as opposed to rope? Or to fold the wire before tying?

is something like suggesting that a light shines much brighter when
connected to some sort of power supply.

Then why hasn't anybody seen it? If your conclusion is "because it
doesn't work", well, you can believe whatever you want to believe, and I
will continue using it like I have for several years.
Oh, by all means, continue to use your invention. Heck, maybe you can
even get it patented.

But how do you figure I believe it won't work? It's obvious that it
*will* work, because any idiot can see that tying a knot into a length of
wire (or rope, string, etc.) will cause the length to be shortened a
bit. This is nothing new. This is nothing worth commenting about. This
is so obvious that we do it all the time without even thinking about it.
I doubt you'll find any prior descriptions of this idea, either.

That's a distinct possibility, and it leads to be conclusion that my
method probably is novel.
Umm... I was referring to my bright idea concerning the improvement in
function of a light, when connected to some sort of power supply. So if
your method is novel, so is mine. However, I doubt whether anyone would
consider either of our methods innovative.

It's not because my idea is so novel

It's because you are acting like a moron.
In what way am I acting like a moron? I suspect that the only stupid
thing I'm doing is trying to engage in a reasonable discussion with
someone who is disinclined to engage in a reasonable discussion.

If I came here and presented such a simple-minded idea,

My method is not simpleminded, it's just simple. Your pride won't let
you appreciate a simple idea, because you think you're above it all.
That's what we thought before September 11, 2001, when 19 box knife
carrying knuckle draggers hijacked some planes and killed 3000 of our
people with them. You can't see the simple because the complex is in
your way.
So you are under the impression that you know what I think? Remarkable.
Let me assure you, you haven't the slightest idea how I think. It's not
pride. It's not that I think I'm "above it all." Nothing I have said or
done has in any way suggested either possibility.

I disagree with you. That does not automatically make me stupid, nor
does it automatically make you smart. My guess is that no one is as dumb
as you think they are, nor as smart as you think you are. This is a
guess - I don't know what you think, any more than you know what I
think. However, it seems clear that you are claiming to have come up
with a clever idea, and that anyone who disagrees with your estimation is
too stupid to understand it.

people would not be impressed.

Speaking of... Have you ever invented anything or done anything
intellectual that you can show to prove that you are some sort of an
intellectual judge? I'm not talking about your mental masturbation here
on UseNet. Anything substantial? Anything ever? Or are you just a mouthy
critic? Talk is cheap.
Certainly I have. I wrote a database program for the retirement accounts
department of a savings and loan. I've done a few other things besides
that, but this should suffice. I'm quite a clever fellow, actually...

But that's not really the point. The fact that someone may never have
invented anything in his whole life, doesn't imply that he is not capable
of assessing whether some idea is innovative or original.

If I kept insisting that the idea was novel,

I haven't been insisting that the idea is novel, liar. But in fact,
But you have. You did it in a comment above; and you do it again in your
next comment. And in previous posts.

there are lots of very old people in here who have not seen my method.
To me, that suggests that it is in fact novel. You might think it means
that the method is useless, but I know better since I have been using it
for years.
Nowhere did I ever say that the idea was *useless*. All I said was that
it wasn't clever or innovative or original.

I've seen your method and used it for decades. I've used it since I was
about 5 or 6 years old. Of course, back then I didn't use it with wires,
I used it with string or rope. I didn't start to use it with wire until
I was around 12 or so and got interested in electronics. That was a
long, long time ago. I'm one of those "old people" you keep talking
about.

And you know, now that I think of it, I believe I've seen this idea
before. I believe it was in my Boy Scout's handbook, in the section on
knots (where else?). There was the sheepshank knot, which is used to
shorten lengths of rope. And as I recall there was something about
doubled lengths tied in an overhand knot. But I could be wrong about
that, and I don't have a copy of the handbook around, so I don't insist
on that.

Now we're at the point of mutual insults.

I call it "trolling". At best you are a worthless critic who has never
done anything inventive in your life. Otherwise, care to show us what
you have done that anyone else took note of? Anything at all? And I'm
not talking about your back and forth mental masturbation here on
UseNet.

Yes, yes, you're repeating yourself now. Mental masturbation on Usenet,
show us what you've done, blah-blah. See above. You have no idea what
I've done in my life. Not a clue. Just because I disagree with you,
doesn't mean I'm as dumb as you. Now, the fact that I *argue* with you
may indicate that I'm stupid.

All this makes me wonder - what's in it for you to do this?

Because I feel like it. Same reason you are a troll.
Actually, I'm not a troll by any reasonable definition of the term. I
*disagree* with you, and you don't like that, but that doesn't make me a
troll. I have consistently treated you respectfully, while you have not
returned the favor. I have avoided the use of inflammatory rhetoric and
tried to express my ideas succinctly, accurately, and without insulting
you or anyone else. I have remained on topic without resorting to ad
hominem arguments, fallacious reasoning, or other histrionics.

In the meantime, you have freely abused me, insulted my mother and me,
called me names, used fallacious reasoning, and otherwise behaved in a
manner consistent with the definition of "troll." So compare our
respective behaviors with the definition of troll, and see who comes
closer.

Anyway, enough. Talk nice, or I'll plonk you and never learn any more of
your wonderful gems of wisdom.

Good luck.


--
Everyone wants results, but no one is willing to do what it takes to get
them.
-- Dirty Harry
 
On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 06:18:19 -0500, JW <none@dev.null> wrote:

On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 22:32:49 -0500 "krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz"
krw@att.bizzzzzzzzzzzz> wrote in Message id:
3rnei7lerlb7f7s6k744pjamtvp1skcs8f@4ax.com>:

On Mon, 30 Jan 2012 19:18:41 -0800 (PST), George Herold
gherold@teachspin.com> wrote:

[...]

No, the worst thing about tant. caps is they get put in bakcwards*,

*MANY* moons ago, my boss was the Tantalum Cap Tzar for the corporation (how
he got that "distinction", I haven't the foggiest). We were having all sorts
of problems with fires caused by tants in backwards. Everything was tried,
three pins (-+-), four pins (-++-), big lead/little lead, fuses, everything.
No matter what, something like 1% of them got stuck in backwards (even to the
point that when all else went right 1% were in the tubes backwards).

One day the manager of the local manufacturing/stuffing department called
complaining that his "girls" were getting sore thumbs from sticking the
capacitors into the boards. Yep, they were big/little lead caps and they were
trying really hard to put the big lead in the little hole. They'd done a few
thousand that way.

I'd like to see them put these in backwards:
http://www.vishay.com/docs/40044/299d.pdf
That's sorta the "three pin" cap I was referring to above. These were
"tombstone" variety, but the idea is the same.

Even AlwaysWrong couldn't screw up with those. :)
Don't bet on it. Get them one position off, and what do you have? BTW, our
boards had a hole every .100" (or .125", depending on the technology in use).
 
On 31 Jan 2012 15:55:03 GMT, John Doe <jdoe@usenetlove.invalid> wrote:

I didn't say that I cut headers off of IDE cables,
you raving lunatic troll.

MrTallyman <MrTallyman BananaCountersRUs.org> wrote:

changes subject line
nym-shifting
See also:
BarnCat <BarnCat keepingthevermindownatthebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:
Hellequin <Hellequin yourpipesaremypipes.org
MassiveProng <MassiveProng thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote:
MrTallyman <MrTallyman BananaCountersRUs.org
Numer0 Un0 <Numer0Un0 abettermanthanyou.org
Pueblo Dancer <Kachina AllHopiIsLost.org
scorpius <scorpius thewormholethatemptiesontheothersideoftheuniverse.org
TheKraken <ReachUpandSuckYouDowntotheDepths yup.org> wrote:
UltimatePatriot <UltimatePatriot thebestcountry.org> wrote:
...maybe dozens more
At least a *hundred* more. Michael Terrell keeps a list of Nymbecile's nyms.
 
An incessant liar.

Chiron <chiron613 gmail.com> wrote:

Path: news.astraweb.com!border6.newsrouter.astraweb.com!npeer01.iad.highwinds-media.com!news.highwinds-media.com!feed-me.highwinds-media.com!post01.iad.highwinds-media.com!newsfe19.iad.POSTED!7ed62f90!not-for-mail
From: Chiron <chiron613 gmail.com
Subject: Re: Simple way to bind wires, without ties
Newsgroups: sci.electronics.design,sci.electronics.basics
References: <4f236128$0$32059$c3e8da3$40d4fd75 news.astraweb.com> <mapfi7tk3mqgc3a6lhtthrms0s2r7hklof 4ax.com> <4f281481$0$27996$c3e8da3$f017e9df news.astraweb.com> <mVYVq.15291$Sh7.7234 newsfe15.iad> <4f286ac5$0$2306$c3e8da3$460562f1 news.astraweb.com
User-Agent: Pan/0.133 (House of Butterflies)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Lines: 170
Message-ID: <ie%Vq.8612$ak.96 newsfe19.iad
X-Complaints-To: abuse teranews.com
NNTP-Posting-Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 23:58:06 UTC
Organization: TeraNews.com
Date: Tue, 31 Jan 2012 23:58:06 GMT

On Tue, 31 Jan 2012 22:27:17 +0000, John Doe wrote:


The people to whom it would be news, haven't yet learned how to read.

I bet that would include your mother.


This was uncalled for. Nowhere have I treated you rudely or with
anything approaching disrespect. I insist on being treated with
respect. I have a killfile and I know how to use it. There's always
room for one more in there.

Coming here to tell people to tie wire into a knot

A new kind of knot.

What is "new" about this knot? Surely not the physical configuration of
the material being tied into a knot. An overhand knot is the same,
whether done with thread, rope, wire, or other length of flexible
material. So apparently your "innovation" is what? To tie a knot in
wire as opposed to rope? Or to fold the wire before tying?

is something like suggesting that a light shines much brighter when
connected to some sort of power supply.

Then why hasn't anybody seen it? If your conclusion is "because it
doesn't work", well, you can believe whatever you want to believe, and I
will continue using it like I have for several years.

Oh, by all means, continue to use your invention. Heck, maybe you can
even get it patented.

But how do you figure I believe it won't work? It's obvious that it
*will* work, because any idiot can see that tying a knot into a length of
wire (or rope, string, etc.) will cause the length to be shortened a
bit. This is nothing new. This is nothing worth commenting about. This
is so obvious that we do it all the time without even thinking about it.

I doubt you'll find any prior descriptions of this idea, either.

That's a distinct possibility, and it leads to be conclusion that my
method probably is novel.

Umm... I was referring to my bright idea concerning the improvement in
function of a light, when connected to some sort of power supply. So if
your method is novel, so is mine. However, I doubt whether anyone would
consider either of our methods innovative.


It's not because my idea is so novel

It's because you are acting like a moron.

In what way am I acting like a moron? I suspect that the only stupid
thing I'm doing is trying to engage in a reasonable discussion with
someone who is disinclined to engage in a reasonable discussion.

If I came here and presented such a simple-minded idea,

My method is not simpleminded, it's just simple. Your pride won't let
you appreciate a simple idea, because you think you're above it all.
That's what we thought before September 11, 2001, when 19 box knife
carrying knuckle draggers hijacked some planes and killed 3000 of our
people with them. You can't see the simple because the complex is in
your way.

So you are under the impression that you know what I think? Remarkable.
Let me assure you, you haven't the slightest idea how I think. It's not
pride. It's not that I think I'm "above it all." Nothing I have said or
done has in any way suggested either possibility.

I disagree with you. That does not automatically make me stupid, nor
does it automatically make you smart. My guess is that no one is as dumb
as you think they are, nor as smart as you think you are. This is a
guess - I don't know what you think, any more than you know what I
think. However, it seems clear that you are claiming to have come up
with a clever idea, and that anyone who disagrees with your estimation is
too stupid to understand it.


people would not be impressed.

Speaking of... Have you ever invented anything or done anything
intellectual that you can show to prove that you are some sort of an
intellectual judge? I'm not talking about your mental masturbation here
on UseNet. Anything substantial? Anything ever? Or are you just a mouthy
critic? Talk is cheap.

Certainly I have. I wrote a database program for the retirement accounts
department of a savings and loan. I've done a few other things besides
that, but this should suffice. I'm quite a clever fellow, actually...

But that's not really the point. The fact that someone may never have
invented anything in his whole life, doesn't imply that he is not capable
of assessing whether some idea is innovative or original.

If I kept insisting that the idea was novel,

I haven't been insisting that the idea is novel, liar. But in fact,

But you have. You did it in a comment above; and you do it again in your
next comment. And in previous posts.

there are lots of very old people in here who have not seen my method.
To me, that suggests that it is in fact novel. You might think it means
that the method is useless, but I know better since I have been using it
for years.

Nowhere did I ever say that the idea was *useless*. All I said was that
it wasn't clever or innovative or original.

I've seen your method and used it for decades. I've used it since I was
about 5 or 6 years old. Of course, back then I didn't use it with wires,
I used it with string or rope. I didn't start to use it with wire until
I was around 12 or so and got interested in electronics. That was a
long, long time ago. I'm one of those "old people" you keep talking
about.

And you know, now that I think of it, I believe I've seen this idea
before. I believe it was in my Boy Scout's handbook, in the section on
knots (where else?). There was the sheepshank knot, which is used to
shorten lengths of rope. And as I recall there was something about
doubled lengths tied in an overhand knot. But I could be wrong about
that, and I don't have a copy of the handbook around, so I don't insist
on that.


Now we're at the point of mutual insults.

I call it "trolling". At best you are a worthless critic who has never
done anything inventive in your life. Otherwise, care to show us what
you have done that anyone else took note of? Anything at all? And I'm
not talking about your back and forth mental masturbation here on
UseNet.

Yes, yes, you're repeating yourself now. Mental masturbation on Usenet,
show us what you've done, blah-blah. See above. You have no idea what
I've done in my life. Not a clue. Just because I disagree with you,
doesn't mean I'm as dumb as you. Now, the fact that I *argue* with you
may indicate that I'm stupid.

All this makes me wonder - what's in it for you to do this?

Because I feel like it. Same reason you are a troll.

Actually, I'm not a troll by any reasonable definition of the term. I
*disagree* with you, and you don't like that, but that doesn't make me a
troll. I have consistently treated you respectfully, while you have not
returned the favor. I have avoided the use of inflammatory rhetoric and
tried to express my ideas succinctly, accurately, and without insulting
you or anyone else. I have remained on topic without resorting to ad
hominem arguments, fallacious reasoning, or other histrionics.

In the meantime, you have freely abused me, insulted my mother and me,
called me names, used fallacious reasoning, and otherwise behaved in a
manner consistent with the definition of "troll." So compare our
respective behaviors with the definition of troll, and see who comes
closer.

Anyway, enough. Talk nice, or I'll plonk you and never learn any more of
your wonderful gems of wisdom.

Good luck.


--
Everyone wants results, but no one is willing to do what it takes to get
them.
-- Dirty Harry
 
P E Schoen wrote:
Kook-Fighting! Love it!

Actually, the OP has proven itself even more clueless than Always Wrong
Missing Prong. All we need is Phil to chime in with some down under
profanity.

You do know that 'Three trolls fighting' is one sign of the
Apocalypse, don't you?


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.
 
On 31 Jan 2012 15:35:01 GMT, John Doe <jdoe@usenetlove.invalid> wrote:

Anytime. I don't nym-shift, so you know what to expect.
Utter stupidity with every post you submit.
 

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top