Testing the TK Tar Baby

[evolvingape]

I have NEVER made death threats against anyone ever in my entire life.  THAT IS SLANDEROUS

Yes you have I saw you do it.

WE MOST CERTAINLY HAVE PERFORMED DEFINITIVE BATTERY DRAW DOWN TESTS therefore your 'edited for accuracy' comment is UTTERLY INVALID.

NO you have not. If you have PROVE IT!

And your excuse to 'duck' accountability is clearly because you are that cowardly.  But an email address may be enough for serving a complaint.  I'm not sure about it.  I know one needs to establish some kind of legal correspondent in the locale of any party to a legal action.  But I'll check up on it.  If an email address is enough then I'll certainly be forwarding you some notification in the near future.

Rosie Pose

Go ask eatenbyagrue, your legal representative, I am sure you can advise yourself adequately.

[mrsean2k]

What malice, Rosemary? Just facts and a straight statement of my position.


That email address is valid and under my total control, tough if you don't like it.


But note, assume I'll feel free to repeat any correspondence you or any representatives send to it, so you should only engage with that full understanding.


Now what matters technical opinion do you want me to consider for agreement?

[Rosemary Ainslie]

Yes you have I saw you do it.

Then evolvingape - you'll need to PROVE that I've made death threats.

NO you have not. If you have PROVE IT!

We have submitted more than adequate proof.  We now intend going beyond adequate to CONCLUSIVE.  But PROOF is there.  In COPIOUS QUANTITIES.  Starting with COP>17 and moving on to the EVIDENCE in these multiple scopeshots that TK's trying so hard to DISCOUNT.

Go ask eatenbyagrue, your legal representative, I am sure you can advise yourself adequately.

My legal representative is actually NOT eatenbyagrue - but is someone who actually shares your own surname.  How's that for irony?  And rest assured.  You'll be hearing from him. Either through the good offices of our Forum Owner - or directly - if our Forum Owner sees fit to release this.

Rosie Pose[/quote]

[poynt99]

Poynty?  You know, TK knows - WE ALL KNOW - that a capacitor CANNOT enable that oscillation.  And we ALL KNOW WHY.  Why then are you getting cryptic.  Just say it.  Outright.  And then TELL US WHY.

Rosie Pose

Rosemary,

The simulation of your circuit will run perfectly fine using a big capacitor as the source rather than batteries, and with the oscillations abundantly intact as always. Why wouldn't it?

I am just curious why TK wants to see this.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

My dear sean,

What malice, Rosemary? Just facts and a straight statement of my position.

You stated - very clearly - that you wanted me to advise you on the insults to me or about me - that TK gratuitously offers in every second sentence.  Then you proposed that you would 'repeat' them.  Then you proposed that I could then take action against you.  SHOULD you repeat those insults then that would be both malicious - and criminally actionable. 

That email address is valid and under my total control, tough if you don't like it.

Since the email address is an insult in and of itself it will NEVER be accessed by any legal representative anywhere.  You need to allow a viable service address.  I'm not sure that an email address is EVER viable.  I'll find out in due course.  But I KNOW that the email you offered will NEVER be accessed by any self-respecting professional.

But note, assume I'll feel free to repeat any correspondence you or any representatives send to it, so you should only engage with that full understanding.

I have NO idea what you are trying to say here.  It's gibberish.

Now what matters technical opinion do you want me to consider for agreement?

I have no intention to engage with you on any discussion of any nature at all.  I only wish to contradict any MISINFORMATION that anyone on this thread indulges.

Rosie Pose