🚀 go-pugleaf

On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 15:33:49 -0800 (PST), Bill Sloman
<bill.sloman@ieee.org> wrote:

>On Nov 6, 7:43�pm, John Fields <jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>> On Fri, 6 Nov 2009 09:34:43 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
>>
>> <bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
>> >On Nov 6, 4:13�pm, John Fields <jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>> >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 14:35:10 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
>>
>> >> <bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
>> >> >On Nov 5, 3:58�pm, John Fields <jfie...@austininstruments.com> wrote:
>> >> >> On Thu, 5 Nov 2009 04:56:33 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
>>
>> >> >> <bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
>> >> >> >On Nov 5, 5:15�am, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net>
>> >> >> >wrote:
>> >> >> >> John Fields wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> > On Wed, 4 Nov 2009 15:59:20 -0800 (PST),Bill Sloman
>> >> >> >> > <bill.slo...@ieee.org> wrote:
>>
>> >> >> >> > >My "unique" talents were recognised for what they were worth. I'd
>> >> >> >> > >prefer to be working at the moment, but there are enough good
>> >> >> >> > >electronic engineers around that society isn't going to founder for
>> >> >> >> > >want of my contribution.
>>
>> >> >> >> > ---
>> >> >> >> > Actually, I think society is probably less likely to founder because of
>> >> >> >> > the lack of your "contribution". ;)
>>
>> >> >> >> � �So much for Bill's lame claims on aus.electronics that he's educating
>> >> >> >> people on the sci.electronics groups.
>>
>> >> >> >Some people aren't easy to educate, and both you and John Fields would
>> >> >> >seem to fall into that catagory.
>>
>> >> >> ---
>> >> >> If, by "education", you mean hitching my wagon to your star, then I'd
>> >> >> much prefer something other than a white dwarf.
>>
>> >> >Education is getting people to think for themselves in a useful way.
>> >> >It isn't about hitching anybody's wagon to someone else's wagon train.
>>
>> >> ---
>> >> Only trouble with that definition is that for people to be able to think
>> >> in a useful way requires them to follow your lead and believe the way
>> >> you do.
>>
>> >Not necessarily. There are a variety of ways�of thinking for yourself
>> >in a useful way. You don't seem to have mastered any of them.
>>
>> ---
>> Perhaps, from your point of view, but then you can't even decipher a
>> simple metaphor so I'd say you were pretty myopic.
>> ---
>
>Deciphering a simple metaphor does depend on the simple metaphor
>having some remote relationship with reality.
>Yours didn't make the
>cut.

---
Your inability to grok the relationship is no more my fault than is your
incessant prattle about that you'd like to be working but that no one
will have you and you don't want to set up a consultancy because...
well, insert any excuse which will keep you from having to do, in the
real world, what you must if you want what you want to happen and, when
it doesn't, to blame someone else for your failure, poor baby.
---

>> >>In other words, by hitching their wagon to your wagon train and
>> >> heading for the same destination; one example of which would be to never
>> >> use a 555.
>>
>> >I've never said that one should never use a 555 - I've merely pointed
>> >out that in almost all situations there are now better alternatives.
>>
>> ---
>> Oh, please...
>>
>> You stated, once, that you'd tried to use one, that it was a crappy part
>> which didn't meet your expectations and, because of that, you'd never
>> use one.
>> ---
>
>What I actually said was that the one time that it looked like a
>serious contender, it didn't meet the - unusually stringent - quality
>requirements, but then neither did the rather better LM322. I checked
>it out from time to over the next few years for various other jobs,
>but it never turned out to be useful in the sort of work that I was
>doing.

---
While you pretend to cast an objective engineering eye on the device,
and then subjectively damn it for what you call its failings, it's
apparent from your posting history that you hate it and, perhaps its
inventor, Hanz Kamenzind (sp?) as well.

Matter of fact, you seem to hate all circuit designers.

Even Jim, who gave us OTS RS-232 with variable edge rates and for whom
you've repeatedly indicated you have nothing but scorn.

Seems the green-eyed monster has crawled under your skin, with your
permission, and now envy is eating you up.
---

>> >> That, of course, presumes you do have a wagon train, and I seriously
>> >> doubt whether you do.
>>
>> >You were claiming that my view of "education" would involve your
>> >hitching your wagon (which I seriously doubt you have) to my "star"
>> >whatever that might be.
>>
>> ---
>> You're not very good at this, are you?
>>
>> It's a simple metaphor, Bill.
>>
>> The star is your dream, what drives you, what you follow, and the wagon
>> is what I use to carry me through my life.
>
>The "star" may be your dream, and Disney seems to have made this a
>popular image for kiddy programs. Knowing that real stars are enormous
>masses of very hot gas a very long way away rather kills that image
>for educated adults.

---
Educated adults can, if they "get it", enjoy the multiple meanings and
glean wisdom from Disney's presentations.

Your hatred of all things non-Sloman turns your light down even further.
---

>> So hitching _my_ wagon to _your_ star would be tantamount to my
>> unhitching it from mine and living my life as you saw fit for me to live
>> it.
>>
>> Certainly nothing I'd even consider.
>
>Nor anything I'd suggest. 

---
You lie.

You take every opportunity to advertise whatever talents you may have as
divine and denigrate everyone else's as inconsequential.
---

>You could do with more education than you have got - 

---
Couldn't we all?
---

>a broader appreciation of what semiconductor components
>other than the 555 have to offer would be a good start. You don't seem
>to be equipped to come to grips with more difficult subjects - Laplace
>transforms and elementary statistics come to mind - of the kind I've
>run into in my career, so that aspect of my experience isn't an area
>that I'd even try to inform you about.

---
Suits me. 
---

>> >I adjusted the analogy by substituting an
>> >equally figurative wagon train for your "star",
>>
>> ---
>> Because you didn't understand the analogy?
>> ---
>
>Because is seemed bizarrely pretentious.

---
In what way?
---

>> >but since I was
>> >engaged in rejecting the idea that education involves leaders and
>> >followers, I wouldn't be offering to let you hook your wagon to my
>> >wagon train even in the remote event that I came to possess a wagon
>> >train in Texas.
>>
>> ---
>> If it's _your_ wagon train and you get to determine who "gets" to hook
>> up to it or not, then your statement carries the implicit meaning that
>> you're the boss; i.e., the leader, and those who are allowed to hook up
>> are the followers.
>
>That was your image of education. Not mine. You keep on struggling to
>set up this pathetic strawman image of me as some kind of wannabe
>leader trying to educate you into some kind of obedient follower.

---
It's not a straw man, it's not a struggle, its as obvious as the
difference between night and day, and it's not just me.

That is, you're forever harping on what's right and what's wrong and
whoever disagrees with you is either misguided, or stupid, or both.
Believing that, of course, makes you right in all things, which places
you in a position of authority and makes you a leader. 

Even when confronted with incontrovertible evidence which proves that
your point of view is untenable you still carry on with the game, doing
whatever little song and dance you have to in order to change the
subject or dodge the issue.
---

>In this you are being a little over-ambitious.

---
So I'm wrong, and I should believe that you're right, huh?

What else is new?
---

>Any sensible leader stuck with a follower like you would repudiate him
>as fast as possible out of pure self-preservation.

---
And you don't try to???

JF