Means of dropping watch battery voltage by .2 Volts

I forgot to mumble something about the battery problem. See:
It sorta looks like a silver oxide cell, with a shottky diode in
series to get the 1.55VDC down to 1.33 to 1.35VDC (but I'm not sure).
<http://www.boomertime.com/3%20Accutron/A1688/A1688.htm>

--
Jeff Liebermann jeffl@cruzio.com
150 Felker St #D http://www.LearnByDestroying.com
Santa Cruz CA 95060 http://802.11junk.com
Skype: JeffLiebermann AE6KS 831-336-2558
 
Gareth Magennis schrieb:

[...]
And I was, as Arfa understood, merely referring to the fact it ran fast
with new batteries.
Click to expand...
Would you blame the car for failing when you replace the 12 V car
battery by a 24 V car battery? An Accutron watch doesn't run fast if you
replace a used 1.35 V mercury oxide battery by a new 1.35 V mercury
oxide battery. So, the running fast problem has nothing to do with using
a _new_ battery; you just have to use the right (new) battery.

Reinhard
 
"Reinhard Zwirner" <reinhard.zwirner@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:97ms49FlsgU1@mid.individual.net...
Gareth Magennis schrieb:

[...]
And I was, as Arfa understood, merely referring to the fact it ran fast
with new batteries.

Would you blame the car for failing when you replace the 12 V car
battery by a 24 V car battery? An Accutron watch doesn't run fast if you
replace a used 1.35 V mercury oxide battery by a new 1.35 V mercury
oxide battery. So, the running fast problem has nothing to do with using
a _new_ battery; you just have to use the right (new) battery.

Reinhard
Click to expand...

Reinhard, that is all totally incorrect, you haven't been listening.



Gareth.
 
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iv4mcm$drn$1@dont-email.me...
If something this minor upsets everyone, what will it take to start
another world war?????????

The issue isn't what was said, but Arfa's insistence that WE are supposed
to
accept an obscure British usage without complaint or offense. And worse,
that we are humorless fools if we don't.
Click to expand...
If the cap fits, William, if the cap fits ...

Arfa
 
"Gareth Magennis" <sound.service@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:F8rRp.3050$_r1.2278@newsfe06.ams2...
"Reinhard Zwirner" <reinhard.zwirner@t-online.de> wrote in message
news:97ms49FlsgU1@mid.individual.net...
Gareth Magennis schrieb:

[...]
And I was, as Arfa understood, merely referring to the fact it ran fast
with new batteries.

Would you blame the car for failing when you replace the 12 V car
battery by a 24 V car battery? An Accutron watch doesn't run fast if you
replace a used 1.35 V mercury oxide battery by a new 1.35 V mercury
oxide battery. So, the running fast problem has nothing to do with using
a _new_ battery; you just have to use the right (new) battery.

Reinhard


Reinhard, that is all totally incorrect, you haven't been listening.



Gareth.
Click to expand...
+1

Arfa
 
"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iv4m8l$cun$1@dont-email.me...
The user manual specifically states that the watch runs a bit fast
with
new cells, until their initially slightly high voltage "settles in" to
its
nominal value. Therefore, an Accutron will run fast with modern cells.

What a crap design then.

I repost this to point out that, in this context, there is nothing
remotely
humorous about "crap". No reasonable person would interpret it as
anything
but a slap.

Say that again when you understand English English, rather than American
English, William. As someone from the same country as the person who said
it, I can assure you that it *was* intended as humour. I understood it as
that. You, and the OP obviously didn't. I can understand him getting it
wrong, as I don't think I've seen him as a regular poster on here, so
maybe
doesn't understand the subtleties of transatlantic language exchanges,
but
you know better, as you've been involved in these conversations many many
times. In fact, come to think of it, on more than one occasion, you have
been the instigator of such interchanges, having said something that
others
have taken as offensive. Gareth has even posted to say that it was
intended
as humour, and to apologise if it was taken as anything other than that.
So
stop deliberately stirring the pot, will you ? The remark was *NOT*
intended
to be offensive to the OP, any more than mine along the same lines was.
Accept that, both of you, and get over it ...

Arfa, I think people too often take offense where none is intended. But if
you can't see that there is nothing even remotely suggesting humor or
irony
in the exchange... It is you who needs to understand us, not the other way
around.

Believe me, as someone who has been a wise-cracker all his life, and
sometimes gotten into trouble over it, I know whereof I speak.
Click to expand...
Why can't you just accept that you are wrong ? You simply don't understand
the variety of humour that was in use here. When I come to America, I don't
pretend to be able to speak your variety of the language properly. I get by.
I hope I don't cause too much offense in things that I innocently say that
may be taken wrongly, and I try not to take any offense from anything said
back to me. A lot of the time, I don't understand what people are laughing
at in your comedy TV shows, and I'm sure that the same is true for you with
some of our 'comedy' offerings. So please don't try to pretend that you
fully understand everything about the way the language is spoken and used
here, whilst implying that we understand nothing about how you take offense.
Remember also, that we have been speaking this language for a lot longer
than you, so have had many hundreds of years more to develop strains of
humour that you might not understand. I'm sorry if this type of humour is
just too subtle for you - it certainly doesn't fall into the category of
"wisecracking" - but as I know you understand, when you haven't got your
'silly' head on, there is a huge difference between typical American
'straightforward' humour, and British humour, which often relies on
linguistic subtleties and double meanings.

I don't know how many more ways that I can say it to you. It *was* humour -
allbeit a variety that you seem unable to pick the bones out of. The comment
was *not* intended to be offensive no matter what you think, and would not
have been considered so by any British person.

Now please, whether you understand that or not, stop being a total prat,
climb down off your hobby horse, and just accept what I say.

Arfa
 
"spamtrap1888" <spamtrap1888@gmail.com> wrote in message
news:6b0fd788-bc46-4fb9-8c6f-da61e0625590@g16g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...
On Jul 6, 6:18 pm, "Arfa Daily" <arfa.da...@ntlworld.com> wrote:
"Gareth Magennis" <sound.serv...@btconnect.com> wrote in message

news:vW%Qp.24258$Rw7.4612@newsfe28.ams2...











"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iv1k8c$aoh$2@dont-email.me...
"Phil Allison" <phi...@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:97ip3pFp1rU1@mid.individual.net...

But do you know [whether] any voltage drop is really NEEDED?

Gee, Phil, I thought you were omniscient.

Though you'd think the mechanical nature of the Accutron's timekeeping
process would remove any interaction with the electronics, it's not
so.

The user manual specifically states that the watch runs a bit fast
with
new
cells, until their initially slightly high voltage "settles in" to its
nominal value. Therefore, an Accutron will run fast with modern cells.

What a crap design then.

Gareth.

Makes a bit of a mockery of the name "Accutron" ...


No one could have predicted that mercury button cells would be pulled
from the market. The more so because mercury laden twisty bulbs are
becoming all but mandatory.
Click to expand...
Pay attention at the back. The comment was made in respect of the fact,
quoted from the user guide, that even with the original correct battery
type, when a new one was fitted, the watch would run fast for a few days
whilst the terminal voltage settled. Gareth suggested, with tongue in cheek
humour that is being misunderstood by William, that this made the design
"crap", a word that is used in the UK with a slightly different emphasis to
when it is used in America. I then followed on, with similar tongue in cheek
humour, that this unfortunate characteristic of the design, made a bit of a
mockery of the fact that the name was obviously based on the adjective
"accurate", which obviously, it isn't for those few days ...

The additional fact that the mercury cells are no longer available, is now
rather unfortunate for this aspect of the design, as the next nearest
available terminal voltage for a cell with the right footprint to fit the
watch, is high enough for the watch to think that it permanently has a 'new'
battery, so permanently runs inaccurately fast. Hence the OP's original
question.

Arfa
 
"Jeff Liebermann" <jeffl@cruzio.com> wrote in message
news:bssb1793d1ekv2g9hdjidi0irrd06kkefg@4ax.com...
On Wed, 6 Jul 2011 17:19:47 +0100, "Gareth Magennis"
sound.service@btconnect.com> wrote:

"William Sommerwerck" <grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in message
news:iv1k8c$aoh$2@dont-email.me...
"Phil Allison" <phil_a@tpg.com.au> wrote in message
news:97ip3pFp1rU1@mid.individual.net...

But do you know [whether] any voltage drop is really NEEDED?

Gee, Phil, I thought you were omniscient.

Though you'd think the mechanical nature of the Accutron's timekeeping
process would remove any interaction with the electronics, it's not so.

The user manual specifically states that the watch runs a bit fast with
new
cells, until their initially slightly high voltage "settles in" to its
nominal value. Therefore, an Accutron will run fast with modern cells.

What a crap design then.
Gareth.

Sigh. If you have ever worn a spring wound watch of the period when
the Accutron was first introduced, you might change your opinion. When
compared to todays high accuracy, low power, LCD watches, the Accutron
is indeed inferior. When compared to the commodity watches of the
early 1960's, it was a miraculous improvement.

The Accutron has one transistor and one tuning fork. If you can build
a power supply voltage insensitive oscillator watch drive, with the
technology available in the early 1960's, you're welcome to try.

http://www.elektron.demon.co.uk/accutron.html

--
Jeff Liebermann
Click to expand...
Frankly, I'm surprised that the humour of Gareth's remark passed so
completely over your head, Jeff ... :-\

Arfa
 
"Gareth Magennis" <sound.service@btconnect.com> wrote in message
news:iflRp.16$Z04.13@newsfe07.ams2...
"TimB" <tjb@tinymail.co.uk.NOSPAM> wrote in message
news:iv3s0l$cfj$1@dont-email.me...
This is a common problem with old cameras too as they often relied on the
stable voltage of a mercury cell for exposure metering.




What a crap design then.



Gareth.
Click to expand...
LOL !!!!! Double LOL !!!!! ROTFLMAO !!! Go Gazzer, go !

Arfa
 
"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:RvsRp.28430$Zn.26182@newsfe30.ams2...

Believe me, as someone who has been a wise-cracker all his life, and
sometimes gotten into trouble over it, I know whereof I speak.

Why can't you just accept that you are wrong ? You simply don't understand
the variety of humour that was in use here.
Click to expand...
That's like saying you can hit someone over the head with a sledgehammer,
then claim it was supposed to be funny.

Arfa, I know how to write screenplays with foreshadowing and subtext! I had
a great sense of irony and sarcasm long before you were born.

The fact that calling something "crap" in English English is comic (which I
accept) is beside the point. That isn't what we're arguing about.

The issue is that you make a remark whose context to an American is
"serious" and extremely offensive -- just look at the original posting --
without feeling you have to take an responsibility for it. You just don't
get it, do you?

You are seriously devoid of common sense and common courtesy, two things I
didn't used to think you were short of.
 
Pay attention at the back. The comment was made in respect of the fact,
quoted from the user guide, that even with the original correct battery
type, when a new one was fitted, the watch would run fast for a few days
whilst the terminal voltage settled. Gareth suggested, with tongue in
cheek
humour that is being misunderstood by William, that this made the design
"crap", a word that is used in the UK with a slightly different emphasis
to
when it is used in America. I then followed on, with similar tongue in
cheek
humour, that this unfortunate characteristic of the design, made a bit of
a
mockery of the fact that the name was obviously based on the adjective
"accurate", which obviously, it isn't for those few days ...
Click to expand...
I misunderstood nothing. You refuse to apologize for an offensive remark in
a situation where the listeners did not -- COULD NOT -- know the context.
How much more explanation does that need?

You cannot say whatever you like, then refuse to take responsibility because
the poor, benighted listeners didn't know.
 
"D" <none@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4e15ec5c$0$9821$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com...
On 7/7/2011 2:13 AM, Arfa Daily wrote:
Both myself and Gareth are from the right side, and it seems to me that
you might have fallen into the usenet 'language trap', and are taking
the word "crap" to have an entirely different level of meaning...
Stop being so sensitive, and accept the remark for what it was. A simple
throw-away bit of leftpondian humour. Not a pop at you specifically, or
your hobby.

Arfa

More what I found troubling and what I was attempting to correct was the
ignorance regarding the significance of these timepieces, and the very
impressive technical achievement they represent, things which users of a
NG such as this one should find interesting. In terms of the "crap"
reference, you may be right about how the word is perceived in different
cultures, but if you and your friend made a bad choice of words, why is it
*ME* (and at least one other poster who also commented on the word) who
have "fallen into the usenet language trap". Perhaps you should stop
being so INsensitive.

Dan
Click to expand...
Oh dear. Of course we understand the significance of them and the huge
technical advance that they represented, which is what made Gareth's use of
the word "crap" (with the British accent of meaning), funny. I accept that
this is a very subtle form of humour, and perhaps one that as an American,
you don't understand. And I don't mean that to be taken as an offensive
comment to you in particular, or Americans in general. I watch a lot of
American TV, and visit America regularly, and have done for many years, so
understand at least a little about your variety of humour. I'm sure that you
would have to agree that it is predominantly straightforward and obvious -
sort of 'verbal slapstick' if you like. Sometimes that works for British
audiences, and sometimes it doesn't, because we don't understand what the
'joke' is. By the same token, British humour is often very subtle, and can
hinge even on the way a single word is pronounced, or contextually used. I'm
sure that sometimes this works for Americans, and sometimes it doesn't,
exactly the same as with us and your humour. In this particular exchange,
Gareth's attempt at humour hasn't worked for you, or William or Jeff, so as
you are all Americans, this has to tell us that it's a variety of humour
that you have difficulty with, which is fair enough, and why Gareth
immediately apologised. And there it should have lain, except that William
won't let it go.

You also misunderstand the use of my phrase "the usenet language trap". We
all fall into it from both sides of the pond. Occasionally, some little
incident like this one. 'takes off' in this way, but mostly, regular posters
on here know the problem well, and if anyone does bother to make a comment,
it usually dies out within a post or two. As I have not seen you posting on
here before - and I may be wrong on that, or you might be a long-time
lurker - I assumed that you were new to a group that has many regulars on
both sides of the pond, and had not come across these linguistic nuances
before, and that was the reason that you had become so upset by what most
would have seen as a throw-away comment.

Every now and then, William jumps on something like this, and worries it
like a dog with a bone, as he is doing right now.

As to asking me to stop being insensitive, I really think that you should
stop and consider that remark, and perhaps think how you might feel about me
telling you to stop being *so* sensitive. This is usenet. We are all
grownups, and sometimes, grownups have spats. It's life. There is no
moderation as such on here, and it is not a forum or Google group or a
subset of any other net-based front end trawler. If you honestly think that
I am being insensitive, then just carry on posting. Sooner or later, for no
apparent reason, you will set light to one of the people on here that can be
really offensive. Then you will understand all about sensitivity ...

I say again, that what was intended was humour. Nothing against you, or your
watches, or the Bulova technology. Gareth has already apologised for his
remark, and I likewise apologise if you found my similar attempt at humour,
outside your understanding, and hence offensive. Now can we please leave it
at that ? And that especially includes you, William.

Arfa
 
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011 02:05:08 +0100, "Arfa Daily"
<arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote:

Frankly, I'm surprised that the humour of Gareth's remark passed so
completely over your head, Jeff ... :-\
Arfa
Click to expand...
What humor? Besides, I only write humor, I never read it.

--
# Jeff Liebermann 150 Felker St #D Santa Cruz CA 95060
# 831-336-2558
# http://802.11junk.com jeffl@cruzio.com
# http://www.LearnByDestroying.com AE6KS
 
On 7/7/2011 6:42 PM, Arfa Daily wrote:
"D" <none@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4e15ec5c$0$9821$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com...
On 7/7/2011 2:13 AM, Arfa Daily wrote:
Both myself and Gareth are from the right side, and it seems to me that
you might have fallen into the usenet 'language trap', and are taking
the word "crap" to have an entirely different level of meaning...
Stop being so sensitive, and accept the remark for what it was. A simple
throw-away bit of leftpondian humour. Not a pop at you specifically, or
your hobby.

Arfa

More what I found troubling and what I was attempting to correct was
the ignorance regarding the significance of these timepieces, and the
very impressive technical achievement they represent, things which
users of a NG such as this one should find interesting. In terms of
the "crap" reference, you may be right about how the word is perceived
in different cultures, but if you and your friend made a bad choice of
words, why is it *ME* (and at least one other poster who also
commented on the word) who have "fallen into the usenet language
trap". Perhaps you should stop being so INsensitive.

Dan


Oh dear. Of course we understand the significance of them and the huge
technical advance that they represented, which is what made Gareth's use
of the word "crap" (with the British accent of meaning), funny. I accept
that this is a very subtle form of humour, and perhaps one that as an
American, you don't understand. And I don't mean that to be taken as an
offensive comment to you in particular, or Americans in general. I watch
a lot of American TV, and visit America regularly, and have done for
many years, so understand at least a little about your variety of
humour. I'm sure that you would have to agree that it is predominantly
straightforward and obvious - sort of 'verbal slapstick' if you like.
Sometimes that works for British audiences, and sometimes it doesn't,
because we don't understand what the 'joke' is. By the same token,
British humour is often very subtle, and can hinge even on the way a
single word is pronounced, or contextually used. I'm sure that sometimes
this works for Americans, and sometimes it doesn't, exactly the same as
with us and your humour. In this particular exchange, Gareth's attempt
at humour hasn't worked for you, or William or Jeff, so as you are all
Americans, this has to tell us that it's a variety of humour that you
have difficulty with, which is fair enough, and why Gareth immediately
apologised. And there it should have lain, except that William won't let
it go.

You also misunderstand the use of my phrase "the usenet language trap".
We all fall into it from both sides of the pond. Occasionally, some
little incident like this one. 'takes off' in this way, but mostly,
regular posters on here know the problem well, and if anyone does bother
to make a comment, it usually dies out within a post or two. As I have
not seen you posting on here before - and I may be wrong on that, or you
might be a long-time lurker - I assumed that you were new to a group
that has many regulars on both sides of the pond, and had not come
across these linguistic nuances before, and that was the reason that you
had become so upset by what most would have seen as a throw-away comment.

Every now and then, William jumps on something like this, and worries it
like a dog with a bone, as he is doing right now.

As to asking me to stop being insensitive, I really think that you
should stop and consider that remark, and perhaps think how you might
feel about me telling you to stop being *so* sensitive. This is usenet.
We are all grownups, and sometimes, grownups have spats. It's life.
There is no moderation as such on here, and it is not a forum or Google
group or a subset of any other net-based front end trawler. If you
honestly think that I am being insensitive, then just carry on posting.
Sooner or later, for no apparent reason, you will set light to one of
the people on here that can be really offensive. Then you will
understand all about sensitivity ...

I say again, that what was intended was humour. Nothing against you, or
your watches, or the Bulova technology. Gareth has already apologised
for his remark, and I likewise apologise if you found my similar attempt
at humour, outside your understanding, and hence offensive. Now can we
please leave it at that ? And that especially includes you, William.

Arfa
Click to expand...

Like I read all that. You really do have a lot of spare time, don't you?
 
"D" <none@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4e166cef$0$21186$c3e8da3$a9097924@news.astraweb.com...
On 7/7/2011 6:42 PM, Arfa Daily wrote:


"D" <none@hotmail.com> wrote in message
news:4e15ec5c$0$9821$c3e8da3$e408f015@news.astraweb.com...
On 7/7/2011 2:13 AM, Arfa Daily wrote:
Both myself and Gareth are from the right side, and it seems to me that
you might have fallen into the usenet 'language trap', and are taking
the word "crap" to have an entirely different level of meaning...
Stop being so sensitive, and accept the remark for what it was. A
simple
throw-away bit of leftpondian humour. Not a pop at you specifically, or
your hobby.

Arfa

More what I found troubling and what I was attempting to correct was
the ignorance regarding the significance of these timepieces, and the
very impressive technical achievement they represent, things which
users of a NG such as this one should find interesting. In terms of
the "crap" reference, you may be right about how the word is perceived
in different cultures, but if you and your friend made a bad choice of
words, why is it *ME* (and at least one other poster who also
commented on the word) who have "fallen into the usenet language
trap". Perhaps you should stop being so INsensitive.

Dan


Oh dear. Of course we understand the significance of them and the huge
technical advance that they represented, which is what made Gareth's use
of the word "crap" (with the British accent of meaning), funny. I accept
that this is a very subtle form of humour, and perhaps one that as an
American, you don't understand. And I don't mean that to be taken as an
offensive comment to you in particular, or Americans in general. I watch
a lot of American TV, and visit America regularly, and have done for
many years, so understand at least a little about your variety of
humour. I'm sure that you would have to agree that it is predominantly
straightforward and obvious - sort of 'verbal slapstick' if you like.
Sometimes that works for British audiences, and sometimes it doesn't,
because we don't understand what the 'joke' is. By the same token,
British humour is often very subtle, and can hinge even on the way a
single word is pronounced, or contextually used. I'm sure that sometimes
this works for Americans, and sometimes it doesn't, exactly the same as
with us and your humour. In this particular exchange, Gareth's attempt
at humour hasn't worked for you, or William or Jeff, so as you are all
Americans, this has to tell us that it's a variety of humour that you
have difficulty with, which is fair enough, and why Gareth immediately
apologised. And there it should have lain, except that William won't let
it go.

You also misunderstand the use of my phrase "the usenet language trap".
We all fall into it from both sides of the pond. Occasionally, some
little incident like this one. 'takes off' in this way, but mostly,
regular posters on here know the problem well, and if anyone does bother
to make a comment, it usually dies out within a post or two. As I have
not seen you posting on here before - and I may be wrong on that, or you
might be a long-time lurker - I assumed that you were new to a group
that has many regulars on both sides of the pond, and had not come
across these linguistic nuances before, and that was the reason that you
had become so upset by what most would have seen as a throw-away comment.

Every now and then, William jumps on something like this, and worries it
like a dog with a bone, as he is doing right now.

As to asking me to stop being insensitive, I really think that you
should stop and consider that remark, and perhaps think how you might
feel about me telling you to stop being *so* sensitive. This is usenet.
We are all grownups, and sometimes, grownups have spats. It's life.
There is no moderation as such on here, and it is not a forum or Google
group or a subset of any other net-based front end trawler. If you
honestly think that I am being insensitive, then just carry on posting.
Sooner or later, for no apparent reason, you will set light to one of
the people on here that can be really offensive. Then you will
understand all about sensitivity ...

I say again, that what was intended was humour. Nothing against you, or
your watches, or the Bulova technology. Gareth has already apologised
for his remark, and I likewise apologise if you found my similar attempt
at humour, outside your understanding, and hence offensive. Now can we
please leave it at that ? And that especially includes you, William.

Arfa


Like I read all that. You really do have a lot of spare time, don't you?
Click to expand...
OK. You want to do offensive ? You're a half baked TWAT who doesn't want to
understand. So I say to you, fuck right off, and take your pony watches with
you. Ignorant arsehole.

Arfa
 
The issue is that you make a remark whose context to an American is
"serious" and extremely offensive -- just look at the original posting --
without feeling you have to take an responsibility for it. You just don't
get it, do you?
Click to expand...
It is you who don't get it, you irritating little man. I apologised. Gareth
apologised. What more do you want me to do. I have accepted responsibility
for the remark, and the fact that you and your compadres couldn't see it as
humour. What more do you want me to do. Get on a fucking plane and come and
beg for forgiveness at your door ? Now grow up for christ sake, and drop it.

You are seriously devoid of common sense and common courtesy, two things I
didn't used to think you were short of.
Click to expand...
And for that comment, fuck you, William, fuck you >: (

Arfa
 
"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:OftRp.28431$Zn.18928@newsfe30.ams2...

Oh dear. Of course we understand the significance of them and the huge
technical advance that they represented, which is what made Gareth's use
of
the word "crap" (with the British accent of meaning), funny. I accept that
this is a very subtle form of humour, and perhaps one that as an American,
you don't understand.
Click to expand...
Stop patronizing us. (Or at least, me.) Despite being a stupid American (and
let's face it, Americans are stupid) I understand subtle and ironic humor.
THAT ISN'T THE ISSUE, though you insist on it.

Arfa, you seem to think that merely saying something -- especially in
print -- necessarily carries the context. IT DOESN'T.

Is it too much to ask that you say "Whoops! I didn't stop to think that
there was no way an American could have gotten the joke, and would have
misinterpreted it as a stupid and possibly offensive remark."?

Here's another example... In the US, "geezer" is considered somewhat
offensive, implying excessive age or senility. In Great Britain, it's
something of a compliment.
 
"Arfa Daily" <arfa.daily@ntlworld.com> wrote in message
news:aJBRp.24406$Rw7.4586@newsfe28.ams2...

I say again, that what was intended was humour. Nothing against you, or
your watches, or the Bulova technology. Gareth has already apologised
for his remark, and I likewise apologise if you found my similar attempt
at humour, outside your understanding, and hence offensive. Now can we
please leave it at that ? And that especially includes you, William.
Click to expand...
Gee, there's nothing like turning an "apology" into another offensive
remark.

Arfa, do you understand the difference beteween "knowledge" and
"understanding"?
 
The issue is that you make a remark whose context to an American is
"serious" and extremely offensive -- just look at the original posting --
without feeling you have to take any responsibility for it. You just
don't
get it, do you?

It is you who don't get it, you irritating little man. I apologised.
Gareth
apologised. What more do you want me to do. I have accepted responsibility
for the remark, and the fact that you and your compadres couldn't see it
as
humour. What more do you want me to do. Get on a fucking plane and come
and beg for forgiveness at your door? Now grow up for christ sake, and
drop it.
Click to expand...

I will leave this with a quote from the Bible: "Every man is justified in
his own sight."
 
On Fri, 8 Jul 2011 04:46:06 -0700 "William Sommerwerck"
<grizzledgeezer@comcast.net> wrote in Message id:
<iv6qmo$gea$1@dont-email.me>:

The issue is that you make a remark whose context to an American is
"serious" and extremely offensive -- just look at the original posting --
without feeling you have to take any responsibility for it. You just
don't
get it, do you?

It is you who don't get it, you irritating little man. I apologised.
Gareth
apologised. What more do you want me to do. I have accepted responsibility
for the remark, and the fact that you and your compadres couldn't see it
as
humour. What more do you want me to do. Get on a fucking plane and come
and beg for forgiveness at your door? Now grow up for christ sake, and
drop it.

I will leave this with a quote from the Bible: "Every man is justified in
his own sight."
Click to expand...
In that case, why not drop this silly argument? Sheesh.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Welcome to EDABoard.com

Sponsor

Back
Top