Kerry or Bush

[ChrisGibboGibson]

I'm jusy typing this as nothing electronic seems to be happeneing.

As none of you lot seem happy with either of them, and it seems more a case of
voting for Kerry because you don't like Bush or vice versa, why not vote for
none of them.

When one gets elected to power, with votes of 9 to 3 (actual votes not
percentage) do you think he will believe the country is behind him?

Gibbo
<ducking>

 

[Julie]

ChrisGibboGibson wrote:

I'm jusy typing this as nothing electronic seems to be happeneing.

As none of you lot seem happy with either of them, and it seems more a case of
voting for Kerry because you don't like Bush or vice versa, why not vote for
none of them.

When one gets elected to power, with votes of 9 to 3 (actual votes not
percentage) do you think he will believe the country is behind him?

I think that they are both idiots. I was actually contemplating Nader
(although I'll admit that I didn't and still don't know what his platform is),
until I took one of those candidate tests, and Bush came out as my top choice,
kind of disappointing, but, I'm presuming that score is mostly based on
non-Iraq issues.

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:57:16 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:

I think that they are both idiots. I was actually contemplating Nader

Gosh, I hate to tell you this, but he's an idiot too.

Sorry.

John

 

[Julie]

John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:57:16 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:

I think that they are both idiots. I was actually contemplating Nader

Gosh, I hate to tell you this, but he's an idiot too.

Sorry.

Ya -- I'm finding that out...

Next (non-idiot!) choice???

 

[Ken Smith]

In article <m531n01md0eaip7g4td4fqa95f9int7ncr@4ax.com>,
John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:

Speaking of electronics (is that allowed?)

No but we'll let it slide.


[...]

But just lately, some, too many, units are losing lock. It appears
that they are humidity sensitive on a very slow (weeks/months) time
scale, with high humidity pulling down the frequency. I did find some
defluxing gunk in some of the piston caps, from the boad cleaning
operation, and that added a nasty positive capacitance-humidity effect
to tha cap. But with clean caps, there's still a problem.

Did you use "no clean" flux or allow it to get anywhere near the PCB?
If yes, did you then use any sort of hydrocarbon based cleaner afterwards?

If yes to both of these, you now have boards that have to be cleaned with
environment ruining stuff to get the ionic materials off the surface.

Are PC boards hygroscopic?

If you mean "hydro", they are a little. The wator vapor pressure inside
the PCB will increase until it is equal to the environment. Coating the
boards slows the process down but in the long run doesn't help.

And does moisture absorption increase
capacitance?

I think the capacitance and losses both rise. I've seen humidity raise
the noise due to tiny leakage currents too.


--
--
kensmith@rahul.net forging knowledge

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 03:33:49 +0000, Ken Smith wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:

Are PC boards hygroscopic?

If you mean "hydro",

Probably not:
----- from kdict -----
No definitions found for 'hydroscopic'. Perhaps you mean:

web1913:
Hygroscopic

wn:
hygroscopic
----------------------

And, yes. Almost everything is, but mostly you can ignore it.

Cheers!
Rich

 

[John Larkin]

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:48:19 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:57:16 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:

I think that they are both idiots. I was actually contemplating Nader

Gosh, I hate to tell you this, but he's an idiot too.

Sorry.

Ya -- I'm finding that out...

Next (non-idiot!) choice???

My dream team was Diane Feinstein and Colin Powell: 8 years with one
as prez and one vp, then swap for 8 more.

John

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 04:54:16 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 03:33:49 +0000, Ken Smith wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:

Are PC boards hygroscopic?

If you mean "hydro",

Probably not:
----- from kdict -----
No definitions found for 'hydroscopic'. Perhaps you mean:

web1913:
Hygroscopic

wn:
hygroscopic
----------------------

And, yes. Almost everything is, but mostly you can ignore it.

Cheers!
Rich

Apparently, hydroscopic boards absorb wator.

John

 

[Clarence]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in message
news:6ea1n0d2auok7qb2mnbns6q1vl2bm3rkoj@4ax.com...

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:48:19 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:57:16 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:
I think that they are both idiots. I was actually contemplating Nader
Gosh, I hate to tell you this, but he's an idiot too.
Sorry.
Ya -- I'm finding that out...
Next (non-idiot!) choice???

My dream team was Diane Feinstein and Colin Powell: 8 years with one
as prez and one vp, then swap for 8 more.

Your dream, the worlds nightmare!

 

[me]

As none of you lot seem happy with either of them, and it seems more a
case of voting for Kerry because you don't like Bush or vice versa, why
not vote for none of them.

I like bush...


----== Posted via Newsfeeds.Com - Unlimited-Uncensored-Secure Usenet News==----
http://www.newsfeeds.com The #1 Newsgroup Service in the World! >100,000 Newsgroups
---= East/West-Coast Server Farms - Total Privacy via Encryption =---

 

[Rich Grise]

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 22:22:26 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 04:54:16 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 03:33:49 +0000, Ken Smith wrote:

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote:

Are PC boards hygroscopic?

If you mean "hydro",

Probably not:
----- from kdict -----
No definitions found for 'hydroscopic'. Perhaps you mean:

web1913:
Hygroscopic

wn:
hygroscopic
----------------------

And, yes. Almost everything is, but mostly you can ignore it.

Cheers!
Rich


Apparently, hydroscopic boards absorb wator.

No, hygroscopic boards absorb water. Hydroscopic boards exist only in the

twilight zone, since there is no such word as hydroscopic. Please see
my previous post, conveniently re-quoted for you above.

Thanks,
Rich

 

[Jim Yanik]

John Larkin <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in
news:6ea1n0d2auok7qb2mnbns6q1vl2bm3rkoj@4ax.com:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:48:19 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:

John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:57:16 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:

I think that they are both idiots. I was actually contemplating Nader

Gosh, I hate to tell you this, but he's an idiot too.

Sorry.

Ya -- I'm finding that out...

Next (non-idiot!) choice???


My dream team was Diane Feinstein and Colin Powell: 8 years with one
as prez and one vp, then swap for 8 more.

John

I wouldn't trust either of them to uphold the Constitution,especially the
Second Amendment.

--
Jim Yanik
jyanik-at-kua.net

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:49:43 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com>
wrote:

Clarence wrote:
"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in message
news:6ea1n0d2auok7qb2mnbns6q1vl2bm3rkoj@4ax.com...

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:48:19 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:


John Larkin wrote:

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:57:16 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:

I think that they are both idiots. I was actually contemplating Nader

Gosh, I hate to tell you this, but he's an idiot too.
Sorry.

Ya -- I'm finding that out...
Next (non-idiot!) choice???

My dream team was Diane Feinstein and Colin Powell: 8 years with one
as prez and one vp, then swap for 8 more.



Your dream, the worlds nightmare!



It must be wonderful to have such certain knowledge of what's best for
the world- only a paid hack Bush campaign operative would take such a
position.

Can I get paid too?

John

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <10n15kh5v5v36d9@corp.supernews.com>,
Tim Wescott <tim@wescottnospamdesign.com> writes:

ChrisGibboGibson wrote:

I'm jusy typing this as nothing electronic seems to be happeneing.

As none of you lot seem happy with either of them, and it seems more a case of
voting for Kerry because you don't like Bush or vice versa, why not vote for
none of them.

When one gets elected to power, with votes of 9 to 3 (actual votes not
percentage) do you think he will believe the country is behind him?

Gibbo
ducking

Well, Bush already _got_ elected with less than half the votes, and
treats it like a landslide.

AFAIR BJ Clinton got less of the percentage of the popular than BushII.

John

 

[Rich Grise]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 09:23:03 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

Please see Ken's post for the derivation of both words.

Please refresh my memory - which post was this?

Thanks,
Rich

 

[John Larkin]

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 20:23:56 GMT, Rich Grise <rich@example.net> wrote:

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 09:23:03 -0700, John Larkin wrote:

Please see Ken's post for the derivation of both words.

Please refresh my memory - which post was this?

About 7 above this one.

John

 

[Clarence]

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in message
newset2n0l4f3so7eu962oik9lrsbr8lbamfs@4ax.com...

On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:49:43 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com
wrote:
Clarence wrote:
"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in
message
news:6ea1n0d2auok7qb2mnbns6q1vl2bm3rkoj@4ax.com...

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:48:19 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:57:16 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:

I think that they are both idiots. I was actually contemplating Nader
Gosh, I hate to tell you this, but he's an idiot too.
Sorry.
Ya -- I'm finding that out...
Next (non-idiot!) choice???
My dream team was Diane Feinstein and Colin Powell: 8 years with one
as prez and one vp, then swap for 8 more.

Your dream, the worlds nightmare!

It must be wonderful to have such certain knowledge of what's best for
the world- only a paid hack Bush campaign operative would take such a
position.

Can I get paid too?

John

You are already getting paid.

Diane Feinstein is a Senator for the state of California, she has done
everything wrong. Voted against the interests of the state and opposes several
Constitutional provisions. She can't do anything right, or even do anything
without doing harm.

 

[John Larkin]

On Sun, 17 Oct 2004 00:00:11 GMT, "Clarence" <no@No.com> wrote:

"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in message
newset2n0l4f3so7eu962oik9lrsbr8lbamfs@4ax.com...
On Sat, 16 Oct 2004 17:49:43 GMT, Fred Bloggs <nospam@nospam.com
wrote:
Clarence wrote:
"John Larkin" <jjlarkin@highlandSNIPtechTHISnologyPLEASE.com> wrote in
message
news:6ea1n0d2auok7qb2mnbns6q1vl2bm3rkoj@4ax.com...

On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 20:48:19 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:
John Larkin wrote:
On Fri, 15 Oct 2004 17:57:16 -0700, Julie <julie@nospam.com> wrote:

I think that they are both idiots. I was actually contemplating Nader
Gosh, I hate to tell you this, but he's an idiot too.
Sorry.
Ya -- I'm finding that out...
Next (non-idiot!) choice???
My dream team was Diane Feinstein and Colin Powell: 8 years with one
as prez and one vp, then swap for 8 more.

Your dream, the worlds nightmare!

It must be wonderful to have such certain knowledge of what's best for
the world- only a paid hack Bush campaign operative would take such a
position.

Can I get paid too?

John

You are already getting paid.

Um. Good point.

Diane Feinstein is a Senator for the state of California, she has done
everything wrong. Voted against the interests of the state and opposes several
Constitutional provisions. She can't do anything right, or even do anything
without doing harm.

Well, she was about the best, and least loony, mayor that San
Francisco ever had. And about the most gracious, too.

John

 

[John S. Dyson]

In article <Tigcd.140160$He1.17774@attbi_s01>,
Robert Monsen <rcsurname@comcast.net> writes:

John S. Dyson wrote:
In article <10n15kh5v5v36d9@corp.supernews.com>,
Tim Wescott <tim@wescottnospamdesign.com> writes:

ChrisGibboGibson wrote:


I'm jusy typing this as nothing electronic seems to be happeneing.

As none of you lot seem happy with either of them, and it seems more a case of
voting for Kerry because you don't like Bush or vice versa, why not vote for
none of them.

When one gets elected to power, with votes of 9 to 3 (actual votes not
percentage) do you think he will believe the country is behind him?

Gibbo
ducking

Well, Bush already _got_ elected with less than half the votes, and
treats it like a landslide.


AFAIR BJ Clinton got less of the percentage of the popular than BushII.

John

Thats actually true. In 1992, Clinton got 43% of the vote, Bush got
37.4%, and Perot got 19% of the vote.

You make an honest statemenet above.

You should go back to making things up. Your real examples are far too
easy to debunk.

However, you show extreme personal dishonesty and lack of integrity by

implying that I was discussing the margin of the victory. Alas, in
the actual presidential election, Bush won by much more than 0.5%.

You didn't debunk what I claimed -- again, you show that Clinton got
43% of the vote in 1992. In 2000, Bush got 48% of the vote.

In essense, Bush had just as much or more of a mandate than the
Clintons.

John

 

[Robert Monsen]

John S. Dyson wrote:

However, you show extreme personal dishonesty and lack of integrity by
implying that I was discussing the margin of the victory. Alas, in
the actual presidential election, Bush won by much more than 0.5%.

You didn't debunk what I claimed -- again, you show that Clinton got
43% of the vote in 1992. In 2000, Bush got 48% of the vote.

In essense, Bush had just as much or more of a mandate than the
Clintons.

John

Bush had to have the supreme court vote him into office. If there was a
recount in florida, he could have lost. They knew that, and so they
voted along strict party lines (just like the house impeachment a few
years earlier) to put their lil buddy into office.

I'm not sure if you can recall the weeks of waiting after the election.
That didn't happen after the '92 or '96 elections.

And YOU are calling ME dishonest? That's a laugh.

--
Regards,
Robert Monsen

"Your Highness, I have no need of this hypothesis."
- Pierre Laplace (1749-1827), to Napoleon,
on why his works on celestial mechanics make no mention of God.