Re: A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- From: Stewart Pinkerton <patent3@xxxxxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Tue, 28 Feb 2006 18:09:44 +0000 (UTC)
On Tue, 28 Feb 2006 12:32:39 -0500, "Henry Pasternack" <foo@xxxxxxx>
wrote:
"John Byrns" <jbyrns@xxxxxxx> wrote in message news:jbyrns-2802061055310001@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
Not only that but it also tells us a lot about your fears that Andre so
expertly plays upon. Henry, I think you are finally beginning to gain a
glimmer of understanding.
John, you live for nitpicking. And you're just trying to provoke me with
your comment.
Go nitpick somebody else, for cripe's sake.
He's been trying to.
What, you thought his 'challenge' was genuine? :-)
I'd be mired in a never-ending 'shouldn't that resistor be 3.7%
larger?' series of snipes and nitpicks for ever, if I was dim enough
to put forward any such design. However, there are lots of other valid
reasons for not doing it, which I've already listed.
--
Stewart Pinkerton | Music is Art - Audio is Engineering
.
- References:
- A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- From: John Byrns
- Re: A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- From: Iain Churches
- Re: A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- From: Andre Jute
- Re: A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- From: Henry Pasternack
- Re: A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- From: Ned Carlson
- Re: A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- From: Henry Pasternack
- Re: A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- From: John Byrns
- Re: A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- From: Henry Pasternack
- A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- Prev by Date: Re: A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- Next by Date: Testing tubes
- Previous by thread: Re: A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- Next by thread: Re: A Challenge for Stewart Pinkerton
- Index(es):
Relevant Pages
|