A question about coil winding

nevertheless, is

English...heehee....Now look at the guy above^ He said: "heat disapation".

born here, >how can you let an alien beat you huh?

Sew wat ar u, the speling Natzie. Watz it two ya! Dyd u hav trubel undorstadn wat waz sed?

Her is a notr on for yu, yu can tke ot evry thrd leter or so an stil mak sens o it. Englsh is vry redndant contanin far mor letrs than necesry for comunicatin.

!!dias ylecin

You imply that top posting is a backwards communication. But ya know, you don't have to pick through the s*it to find the corn with top posting.

Did you?

English...heehee....Now look at the guy above^ He said: "heat disapation".

here, how can you let an alien beat you huh?

There's some Usenet law to the effect that posts which complain about spelling or grammar errors always contain errors of their own.

Still true.

Do you know anything about electronics? Tell us.

John

Geeesh. Please don't f*ck wit the atural order of your newsreader. It makes a mess of the thread and confuses the hell out of anybody actually caring about who posted what. Your bwoser was made to top post with the attachments at the bottom, keep the headers with the respective text and be easy to use.

Look at the mess you have made of this thread with bottom posting.

The bottom post argument is the favourite troll of the bored and stupid. This thread is prime example of this.

BTW: Trimming is good but please don't sign your initials over and over. You're not that important.

Yup, top posting is the favouite troll of the unoriginal ones.

I can read either but most bottom posted polls longer than one page are not read by me or most others.

Cite source for "most others"

-- "Electricity is of two kinds, positive and negative. The difference is, I presume, that one comes a little more expensive, but is more durable; the other is a cheaper thing, but the moths get into it." (Stephen Leacock)

I must say I do like the way the browsers were designed to top post. I hate scrolling to the bottom and then reading backwards to find the top of their statements.

Just look at a thread where epople haven't trimmed and the big inserted lexical levels are hard to pick out and the outside lexical levels are useless as nobody can count that many right carets to figure out who said it. The result? People read the previous posts to know who said what, confusion results in fights from people disagreeing with the wrong people and just general mass confusion of information, especially with the browsers meant to download binary files, mainly.

Look at this beautiful format. This is the way every browser I have seen so far is designed to work. It is always a favourite troll post of the lazy trolls when losing an argument. "Your format is wrong" makes a good distraction from the real issue.

Now read very closely in the attached reference posts I may have interlaced a comment, somewhere...LOL

On Dec 22, 7:55 pm, John Fields wrote: Your idiotic predilection for top posting assumes that what you have to say is important enough that everyone should read it first and then go thrashing about, scampering through the thread in order to determine what you were talking about.

Aside from your use of the word "browser". (Microsoft Outlook Express isn't a browser, it's a mail client / rudimentary news client). there are no quotation marks (>) against the quoted part of your posting.

That, combined with top posting, makes it almost unintelligible.

Learn to bottom post and quote properly or stay the hell out of sci.electronics.* groups.

Actually, by reading this thread with a 'news-reader' such as what I'm using, John's posts and headers make nice, chronological sense. Each one seems to be in direct reply to the message it is linked to.

Perhaps if you weren't using a bwoser [sic] it would look better for you. By using a web-based news reader, you're at the mercy of how that web server reads the headers and such. Most likely it is your web-based news service that has mad a mess of things.

daestrom

How arrogant of you to presume to speak for 'most others'.

You certainly don't speak for me.

daestrom