The proper way to post to a group

[John Fortier]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:9ckapv4di7r3bahtjtjvsljd998e0n7a54@4ax.com...

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 15:06:50 GMT, "John Fortier"
jfortier@rochester.rr.com> wrote:


Why would anyone want to be an expert on an obsolescent chip which has
more
information on it on the net than just about any other. Designing using
the
555 is like designing using the 741 op amp; it may work, but there are
so
many better ways to achieve what you need.

---
Shirley you jest.

What with the introduction of the new 7555, so many possibilities have
opened up which were not viable using the classic workhorse 555 that it
boggles the mind.

--
John Fields

"Stop calling me Shirley!" From Airplane

Seriously, John, I know it's really impossible to be an expert in all areas
of electronics any longer. Personally, I've become an expert on DSL and
transmission systems, but isn't being an expert on just one particular chip
narrowing the field just a little too much?

I'm not going to go into any easy quips about how easy it must be to boggle
your mind, but surely, if I need to use a 555 or 7555 for any purpose, the
information is all out there in the net. I just, honestly, don't see the
point in not broadening your horizons.

John Fortier

 

[DarkMatter]

On 21 Oct 2003 02:28:36 -0700, bill.sloman@ieee.org (Bill Sloman) Gave
us:

Keith, John Fields is a minor - if all too regular - contributor, and
his field of expertise - applications of the 555 - is not all that
demanding.

You know no more about him than you do about any other poster in
usenet. Fukin' nil.

Offending him is not difficult, and he generates so many
offensive postings that one is more or less obliged to take every
possible opportunity give him a dose of his own medicine.

Troll baby bullshit.

That you can see him as a "core" contributor doesn't say anything good
about the quality of your perceptions.

As if your E-1 grade assessments have any credence.

Or maybe your apples have worms
in their cores?

We're posting to one right now.

Bill Sloman, Nijmegen, the idiot

yes, you are.

 

[DarkMatter]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:28:40 GMT, "Ross Mac"
<macroeng@example.invalid> Gave us:

You're a total idiot for counting them......get a life TardMaster......

The number of lines contained in a post appears in my header browser
before I even download the post, dipshit.

Get a real news client, then become one.

 

[DarkMatter]

"DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news3i9pvs3rj9iotuq2gd9e8tg98f2hkhamj@4ax.com...
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 22:13:56 GMT, "Ross Mac"
macroeng@example.invalid> Gave us:

You always say that....your replies DO show up...just not your original
posts....


You're an idiot. OTHER peoples replies that have my texts quoted
show up, dipshit.

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:30:40 GMT, "Ross Mac"
<macroeng@example.invalid> Gave us:

Like I said....you used one of the usual 5 lines...."dipshit" this
time...expand your vocabulary loser.....

Interesting how you conveniently overlooked the fact that you were
100% fucking wrong!

 

[DarkMatter]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:30:40 GMT, "Ross Mac"
<macroeng@example.invalid> Gave us:

Like I said....you used one of the usual 5 lines...."dipshit" this
time...expand your vocabulary loser.....

Your name should be Dingus Con. You are a Penis Head.

 

[DarkMatter]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:37:34 GMT, "Ross Mac"
<macroeng@example.invalid> Gave us:

No doubt.....and ya gotta laugh at the munged address...

You wouldn't know what a "munged address" was if one bit you in the
ass.

False email address declarations in usenet are NOT an example of a
"munged address", retard boy. Now go get a clue.

 

[DarkMatter]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:40:53 GMT, "Ross Mac"
<macroeng@example.invalid> Gave us:

There is a big difference between knowing a subject and just doing a "cut
and paste" from the internet.....
I could cut and past pieces from and article on motion control and not
really understand the concepts involved...It is not about memorization....it
is about understanding the concepts invovled...
That is what I meant!

Hey, jackass! I can post photos of the hardware, and can even
include me flipping you the bird. You can't cut n paste that from
Google, you top posting retard.

I designed and manufacture the product I described. Period.

Too bad that you are too much of a loser to get past the fact that
your claim was wrong.

 

[Ross Mac]

Ok then "TardMaster" you are an idiot for quoting it...and look it "butt
plug" I do have a fine newsreader, just because I don't use your "Fart
Agent", "Tard Humper", does not make me clueless.....As for youself, you are
so freaking low "You give Cock Roaches Head!!".....
Get a life and new vocabulary kid!



"DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:tj6bpvc0vhvr36e13nt86iajcf8os66jui@4ax.com...

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:28:40 GMT, "Ross Mac"
macroeng@example.invalid> Gave us:

You're a total idiot for counting them......get a life TardMaster......

The number of lines contained in a post appears in my header browser
before I even download the post, dipshit.

Get a real news client, then become one.

 

[Ross Mac]

Try again Roach Knobber!


"DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:fn6bpvg14d3aghlnvtookpf4bhb2bmfs9f@4ax.com...

"DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in
message
news3i9pvs3rj9iotuq2gd9e8tg98f2hkhamj@4ax.com...
On Mon, 20 Oct 2003 22:13:56 GMT, "Ross Mac"
macroeng@example.invalid> Gave us:

You always say that....your replies DO show up...just not your
original
posts....


You're an idiot. OTHER peoples replies that have my texts quoted
show up, dipshit.


On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:30:40 GMT, "Ross Mac"
macroeng@example.invalid> Gave us:

Like I said....you used one of the usual 5 lines...."dipshit" this
time...expand your vocabulary loser.....

Interesting how you conveniently overlooked the fact that you were
100% fucking wrong!

 

[Ross Mac]

Very good, very good! Now see you CAN do better, better than what I have no
idea! And since we have gone to medieval insults, I suppose that would make
you "Tardis Maximus"!
Enjoy Roach Knobber...I will NEVER give up....I am on your ass BIG
TIME!....So have another bong, pillow-biter!! I await your next moronic
dribble!


"DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:0r6bpv45olkk811cir23g1i8id1kihh5s0@4ax.com...

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:30:40 GMT, "Ross Mac"
macroeng@example.invalid> Gave us:

Like I said....you used one of the usual 5 lines...."dipshit" this
time...expand your vocabulary loser.....

Your name should be Dingus Con. You are a Penis Head.

 

[Ross Mac]

Oh really....try again, Tard Boy. Once again you are wrong, wrong, wrong....
http://members.aol.com/emailfaq/mungfaq.html ...This is what AOL thinks it
is...but of course, we know you are smarter than they! Why don't you try a
new munged address...such as PillowBiter@shemales_from_Southern_California!



"DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news:c27bpvkpds38bgfdn3vv2j507n70ao0t5j@4ax.com...

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:37:34 GMT, "Ross Mac"
macroeng@example.invalid> Gave us:

No doubt.....and ya gotta laugh at the munged address...

You wouldn't know what a "munged address" was if one bit you in the
ass.

False email address declarations in usenet are NOT an example of a
"munged address", retard boy. Now go get a clue.

 

[Ross Mac]

So you work in shipping do ya Tard Boy???

"DarkMatter" <DarkMatter@thebarattheendoftheuniverse.org> wrote in message
news77bpvg9qed1md9o4g1dq64gu8or9jdtai@4ax.com...

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 12:40:53 GMT, "Ross Mac"
macroeng@example.invalid> Gave us:

There is a big difference between knowing a subject and just doing a "cut
and paste" from the internet.....
I could cut and past pieces from and article on motion control and not
really understand the concepts involved...It is not about
memorization....it
is about understanding the concepts invovled...
That is what I meant!


Hey, jackass! I can post photos of the hardware, and can even
include me flipping you the bird. You can't cut n paste that from
Google, you top posting retard.

I designed and manufacture the product I described. Period.

Too bad that you are too much of a loser to get past the fact that
your claim was wrong.

 

[John Fields]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 20:20:21 GMT, "John Fortier"
<jfortier@rochester.rr.com> wrote:

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:9ckapv4di7r3bahtjtjvsljd998e0n7a54@4ax.com...
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 15:06:50 GMT, "John Fortier"
jfortier@rochester.rr.com> wrote:


Why would anyone want to be an expert on an obsolescent chip which has
more
information on it on the net than just about any other. Designing using
the
555 is like designing using the 741 op amp; it may work, but there are
so
many better ways to achieve what you need.

---
Shirley you jest.

What with the introduction of the new 7555, so many possibilities have
opened up which were not viable using the classic workhorse 555 that it
boggles the mind.

--
John Fields

"Stop calling me Shirley!" From Airplane

Seriously, John, I know it's really impossible to be an expert in all areas
of electronics any longer. Personally, I've become an expert on DSL and
transmission systems, but isn't being an expert on just one particular chip
narrowing the field just a little too much?

I'm not going to go into any easy quips about how easy it must be to boggle
your mind, but surely, if I need to use a 555 or 7555 for any purpose, the
information is all out there in the net. I just, honestly, don't see the
point in not broadening your horizons.

---
John, after reading this post and most of your other replies to posts
that I have made containing double entendres and wry humor, I have come
to the the conclusion that you either read my witty commentary,
understand it, and are afraid to venture into waters which you feel may
be too deep for you, or it goes completely over your head because you
are only able to communicate at a very basic, literal level.

I'll explain:

The "Shirley you jest" preface should have alerted you to the fact that
humor was following, and the mention of the "new" 7555 and "mind
boggling" possibilities should have clinched the bit as being seriously
tongue in cheek.

Unfortunately, you took it literally and chose to reply with an
unprovoked insult, something you have said you find onerous. That
action further reinforces my belief that you are not what you pretend to
be. Time will tell, and I'll be watching you.

--
John Fields

 

[DarkMatter]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 07:34:29 -0700, "Baphomet"
<fandaDEATH2SPAMMERS@catskill.net> Gave us:

Oh, you mean the posts that you don't make, aren't archived by Google, and
if they are, are forged by someone other than yourself? Those posts?

Look, retard... I'll try to spell it out for you ONE MORE TIME.

He accused me of looking my ANSWER to his question up on google, you
dipass, not looking up a post of mine.

Try actually reading the thread next time.

 

[DarkMatter]

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 10:39:45 -0500, John Fields
<jfields@austininstruments.com> Gave us:

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 15:06:50 GMT, "John Fortier"
jfortier@rochester.rr.com> wrote:


Why would anyone want to be an expert on an obsolescent chip which has more
information on it on the net than just about any other. Designing using the
555 is like designing using the 741 op amp; it may work, but there are so
many better ways to achieve what you need.

---
Shirley you jest.

What with the introduction of the new 7555, so many possibilities have
opened up which were not viable using the classic workhorse 555 that it
boggles the mind.

I must agree. Still in quite wide use.

 

[John Fortier]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:vrcbpvs7fkohf4nbis1tspufi72v8hf0qp@4ax.com...

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 20:20:21 GMT, "John Fortier"
jfortier@rochester.rr.com> wrote:


"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:9ckapv4di7r3bahtjtjvsljd998e0n7a54@4ax.com...
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 15:06:50 GMT, "John Fortier"
jfortier@rochester.rr.com> wrote:


Why would anyone want to be an expert on an obsolescent chip which has
more
information on it on the net than just about any other. Designing
using
the
555 is like designing using the 741 op amp; it may work, but there
are
so
many better ways to achieve what you need.

---
Shirley you jest.

What with the introduction of the new 7555, so many possibilities have
opened up which were not viable using the classic workhorse 555 that it
boggles the mind.

--
John Fields

"Stop calling me Shirley!" From Airplane

Seriously, John, I know it's really impossible to be an expert in all
areas
of electronics any longer. Personally, I've become an expert on DSL and
transmission systems, but isn't being an expert on just one particular
chip
narrowing the field just a little too much?

I'm not going to go into any easy quips about how easy it must be to
boggle
your mind, but surely, if I need to use a 555 or 7555 for any purpose,
the
information is all out there in the net. I just, honestly, don't see the
point in not broadening your horizons.

---
John, after reading this post and most of your other replies to posts
that I have made containing double entendres and wry humor, I have come
to the the conclusion that you either read my witty commentary,
understand it, and are afraid to venture into waters which you feel may
be too deep for you, or it goes completely over your head because you
are only able to communicate at a very basic, literal level.

I'll explain:

The "Shirley you jest" preface should have alerted you to the fact that
humor was following, and the mention of the "new" 7555 and "mind
boggling" possibilities should have clinched the bit as being seriously
tongue in cheek.

Unfortunately, you took it literally and chose to reply with an
unprovoked insult, something you have said you find onerous. That
action further reinforces my belief that you are not what you pretend to
be. Time will tell, and I'll be watching you.

--
John Fields

John, you're backing down and trying to disguise it by pretending to have
been joking.

You've tried this tactic before and it didn't work then and it doesn't work
now.

Quite frankly, anyone reading your post concerning the mind boggling
possibilities of the new 7555 would read it as I did. Someone trying to
extol the virtues of his only area of expertise by exaggerating its
capabilities.

Again, I have asked you a civil question and you reply with prevarication
and obfuscation. As for an "unprovoked insult". you have given me and the
rest of the group sufficient provocation to insult you continuously for the
next six months. Beside that, I fail to see where in my post an "unprovoked
insult" occurred. I'm merely curious as to why someone of your supposed
capabilities should confine himself to one obsolescent chip. If there are
no "mind boggling possibilities", your position becomes even more puzzling.

"I was only joking" is really a pretty pathetic cop out.

I pretend nothing, Jonny.

John Fortier

 

[John Fortier]

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:9eiapvs78oap5h2ja73eivqat86ngpaiho@4ax.com...

On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 13:44:28 GMT, "John Fortier"
jfortier@rochester.rr.com> wrote:

By the way, Jonny, does your boss know you use your work PC to post your
diatribes to the newsgroups?

---
Why? Do you plan on ratting me out, snitch?

Well, if you were working for me, I'd definitely be wondering whether I was
getting any value for money.

Basically what you are doing is dishonest and, since your employer provides
you with your PC, you should confine your activities on it to those which
benefit the company which pays you.

So yes, I very well may inform your management of your dishonest actions,
unless you cease them immediately.

I'm not joking, Jonny. In addition to being a bully and a boor, you're a
dishonest liar who bites the hand that feeds him. So I'll have no
hesitation in turning you in.

Now, go away.

 

[John Fortier]

"Baphomet" <fandaDEATH2SPAMMERS@catskill.net> wrote in message
news:vpakv3d0l4rj11@corp.supernews.com...

"John Fields" <jfields@austininstruments.com> wrote in message
news:9eiapvs78oap5h2ja73eivqat86ngpaiho@4ax.com...
On Tue, 21 Oct 2003 13:44:28 GMT, "John Fortier"
jfortier@rochester.rr.com> wrote:

The idea, Jonny, is to let them know you're not responding and thereby
build
up their frustration.

---
OK, I get it. It's just a ploy to keep them on tenterhooks and
eventually have your way with them. A great moderator _you'd_ be!
---

You see, darkmatter can be safely ignored. It has no effect on me.
You,
on
the other hand, need to be told your fortune occasionally.

---
By a seer with 20-40 hindsight?
---

By the way, Jonny, does your boss know you use your work PC to post
your
diatribes to the newsgroups?

---
Why? Do you plan on ratting me out, snitch?

I doubt that Fortier would do that to you Johnny. Who would we have to
laugh
at?

Sorry, Baph, I wouldn't hesitate. Fields is no longer funny. He's
dishonest and a liar.

One more abusive post from that machine, and he's toast.

John Fortier

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

Bill Sloman wrote:

Keith, John Fields is a minor - if all too regular - contributor, and
his field of expertise - applications of the 555 - is not all that
demanding. Offending him is not difficult, and he generates so many
offensive postings that one is more or less obliged to take every
possible opportunity give him a dose of his own medicine.

That you can see him as a "core" contributor doesn't say anything good
about the quality of your perceptions. Or maybe your apples have worms
in their cores?

------
Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Bill, even someone with your narrow view of the world should have
enough brains to see that a lot of the "How do I make a timer?"
questions are more than adequately answered with an old, but still
usable and easy to find part like the 555.

It takes a total idiot to deny the facts that someone with little or
nor electronics ability will have a hard enough time with a simple eight
pin chip and a half dozen parts for their first project. What do you
want? A rubidium standard with with NIST certification, followed by
programmable counters to blink a LED?

The next time someone asks a "How do I make a timer?" question, you
tell them how to do it without a 555, a PIC, AVR, basic stamp, or any
other common method. Then you (might) have the right to bitch. You are
getting quite boring with your repeated slams. At least John Fields
will take the time to explain it to someone who is trying to learn. All
you do is talk about how bad everything outside your little neighborhood
is, and a place you used to work that appears to be out of business.

--


Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida

 

[Michael A. Terrell]

John Fortier wrote:

I'm not joking, Jonny. In addition to being a bully and a boor, you're a
dishonest liar who bites the hand that feeds him. So I'll have no
hesitation in turning you in.

This ought to be VERY interesting. ;-)

--


Michael A. Terrell
Central Florida