Testing the TK Tar Baby

[Rosemary Ainslie]

OK Rosemary,
a quote from you on your site:

    "And they're rather sick - phsychologically.  All of them.  I don't want to go into the personality profiles of any of them - in any depth - but one of them is a closet gay - another is vulgarian of rather disgusting dimensions.  A third is a drug abuser and a fourth is - if you can believe it - a religious fanatic."

    Is this not meant as an attack on the character of the people you've referred to? Is the phrase "a closet gay" not meant to be belittling the person of whom you speak? The three characterizations that follow surely seem to be, so it's not difficult to assume that was.

Apologies if I misjudged that whole bit,

polln8r

If there is any characterisation that is censorial - it is the 'closet' part of the closet gay and there is nothing intended to belittle anyone.  It is simply a schedule of their OBVIOUS personality traits.  God knows - someone needs to point out that they're not exactly 'wholesome'.

regards
Rosemary

Here's evidence of ACTUAL 'belittling'.  Calling me a liar in every sentence.  Suggesting that my diagrams show MOSFETS engaged in sexual congruence.  Suggesting sexual congruence in his videos when he illustrated my tests.  Shouting to the world that I'm addled and senile and utterly bereft of intellect, reason or education.  Showing DELIGHT when I report the death of a close family member.  NEED I GO ON?

[poynt99]

I'm sure I speak for all Rosemary, that despite all our disagreements and debates, we hope that your health issues are mild and that your recovery is swift and full.

[Rosemary Ainslie]

I'm sure I speak for all Rosemary, that despite all our disagreements and debates, we hope that your health issues are mild and that your recovery is swift and full.

Thank you Poynty.  I am certainly NOT including you in this fiasco.  You have the rare and special talent of trying to dig for the appropriate argument. 

But time is always of an essence.  PLEASE attend to my questions.

Regards,
Rosie

[polln8r]

Rosemary,
I was mid-reply when you posted about your health. I do hope your upcoming procedures are successful and that you get well soon.
polln8r

[Magluvin]

LOL.  Sorry to see this Magsy.  You must resist that 'dark side' just a little bit longer.  I PROMISE YOU that I'll be starting my tests - just as soon as my apparatus is returned.

Brilliantly (as polln8r puts it) warm regards,
Rosie Pose

The dark side was a sarcasm. 

Well, why be involved with all the chatter, and simply get down to the matter?

What really gets me is, if you say you know this stuff about your project, then answers to all questions should be a cakewalk for you. If there are questions beyond the scope of your intentions for this project, I would be one to want to learn those things. Or even study them in order to maybe better my case defending my project.

These circuits these guys have put together, sims also(which come close to near mirror image in function and analysis), are proving a lot of fairly consistent results.

If the circuits shown in these threads are NOT the circuit you are using, then you were very wrong in presenting them as such.
Is your actual (present) circuit different than anything presented so far?

Successful people that really want people to embrace their ideas, will always give a straight forward answer to any questions, repeatedly, again and again. They would not say, "Ive already covered that"  Never. What, is it too much to keep retyping it all? Well, you been typing a lot anyways.  Why not make it count. For the record that is.
This is all a record.

If you keep on writing all that crapola, what do you think those checking you out to see what you are blogging about, will think of the way you carry yourself in these manors?

Its not all clean talk Rose, From either side. Its a BIG pile of doo doo, and you keep dancin in it, and for "EVERYONE" to see.  Well thats how seriously people are going to take you.

Its like this. What if Bill Gates, or Steve Jobs, were to have been involved in this type of behavior. Do you think it would be a building block in their great success?

Those guys would turn you for a loop.  They would not need rhetoric. If they had to argue their product, they would be able to produce answers to uphold their cases, repeatedly and consistently.

You cant just plead the 5th amendment and win.

Rose, why is that transistor not turning on?    Guys, FIFTH!  I PLEAD DA FIFF!  FIF.  Kindest regards 

Is that the hand you intend to play Rose? Is it that hard to get a pair, and just do the work and provide answers, even if you have to repeat them, with consistency.  Consistency means quality.

But all this mess? This is where you want to do the funny dance? Or do you want to get busy and type out real work, instead of meaningless doo doo on the shoes?  All them key presses lately say what Rose? Could you have made better choices in the keys you have pressed?

If you think the way you are handling this is going to build your blocks to success, then a good set of glasses isnt going to help you.

The dark sides comin and nothing is real 

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YWddBTxPDYQ     

MaGs