EL7900

te:

I didn't suggest any construct - clumsy or otherwise. I just pointed out a grammatical error.

pages of

Pages of pedantry? My impression is that I rarely post more than half a page of text.

That must have been on sci.electronics.basics, where the audience is less critical.

Depends on the criticism. If I'm being criticised for something I didn't actually say, by a nitwit who can't correctly parse complex sentences, I do get peevish.

te:

"Found in prose"? This is incoherent rubbish.

Like I said, I wasn't constructing anything, just identifying a grammatical error. Spoiling the grammatical coherence of a sentence seems to me to be at least a criminal - perhaps more criminal, since meter is merely a mechanism to make the information content of poem easier to memorise and reproduce and more palatable to the listener who has to endure it, while grammar articulates the information content.

Since you can't parse complex sentences reliably, this may be less salient to you.

gh pages of

How would you know? You've proved, time and time again, that you can't make much sense of appreciable chunks of my output, but that's a problem in your comprehension, not my English expression and it makes you a trifle implausible when you try to pontificate about the quality of the content.

Telling them that the NE555 is the best thing since sliced bread is not - perhaps - the most progressive and constructive advice that might be given. An impartial observer might see your "helpful" activities as more like peddling out-of-date stock to an uncritical market.

Only if they are wrong, which happens rather more often than you like to think.

s-2

pages of

No one deserves you, Maynard.

te:

or

It's my ability to understand what you intended to say - and your failure to find an appropriate form of words to express that - that allows me to dismiss the line as incoherent rubbish. What does a "grammatical error found in prose" have to do with a grammatical error that cropped up verse (even bad verse). Grammar works without reference to the rhyme and rhythm that differentiate poetry from prose.

Tastes differ. In fact "That is incoherent rubbish" implies a slightly different - less personally involved - critical stance than the one I adopted, so you are trying to adjust the meaning of what I wrote, rather than correcting a - non-existent - error.

So much for your grammatical insight.

Since I wasn't editing the line, but merely inserting the missing word to demonstrate the existence of the grammatical error, this is just one more of your misperceptions.

No, it's your poetry which is onerous to the listener. I don't have particularly good taste in poetry - I like G.K.Chesterton - but good poetry can be a pleasure to listen to. Shakespeare did well from time to time. You don't.

You do it for me.

Between 1971 and 1981, perhaps. The number of situations for which the NE555 is any kind of optimal solution has shrunk rather dramatically since then, and today is vanishingly small.

Perhaps. I content myself with saying that I don't know of any problems that couldn't be tackled better and cheaper some other way.

What you thought was an untenable situation.

nics-2

used

It is quite pointless to explain correct to Sloman. Just publish notice of error and be done with it.

?-)

It's pretty pointless when your notion of "correct" happens to be wrong. John Fields "notices of error" contain a disproportionate number of false positives, but josephkk might not be aware of this.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Typical Sug-Man.

Jamie

ce

Typical Jamie. He doesn't actually say what he's objecting to - that carries too much risk of exposing the fact that he doesn't know what's actually going on - but as usual he contrives to inject maximum obnoxiousness into minimal content.

I should kill-file him, but then I'd lose the occasional chance to express my disdain for his self-satisfied and incorrigible ignorance.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

Good Idea.

Plus, I see very little coming from Sloman which is constructive instead of being just argumentative, so I think just ignoring him and using that saved time for more positive pursuits will be my new strategy. :-)

ed

ce

John Fields doesn't get involved in the more interesting and demanding threads, and wouldn't understand much of what was going on if he lurked.

Should keep any number of newbies happy on sci.electronics.basics. At least until they find out that there's more to electronics than the NE555.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

I would have been disappointed if you said any less.

No bill, you live just to be a wart on peoples toe, why would you limit your reading material when it serves you for the next drivel post, which you seem to be addicted to.

At your age, you should be laying back and enjoying your retardment.

Jamie

sed

ce

The plethora reflects the rather limited digital components available in the LTSpice library at the time. It would all fit inside a single relatively small and cheap programmable logic device.

The Baxandall approach doesn't lend itself producing multiple phase- shifted versions of the same waveform. I posted the circuit just as an example of digital logic used to produce a modified sine wave (albeit not quite the modified sine wave you should have been trying to produce).

I'm sure you would, granting how clumsy your solution was.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

tice

Jamie has some weird ideas.

That's pretty much what I just said, and you've duly generated that next drivel post.

If I had any retardation to enjoy, this might be good advice (not very likely, coming from Jamie, but he could have got this right, despite his consistent enthusiasm for getting stuff wrong), but since you seem to be as retarded as they come and post regular evidence to that effect, it's clearly not advice that you follow, so I can't imagine that it is sincere.

-- Bill Sloman, Nijmegen

used

be

notice

Since i don't see his posts directly, i will have to wait until someone responds to it; with the sim file intact.

?-)