Roll on the 20th June

[spinner]

@Archer
You are a passionate man and if I know you well enough by now I know that this sort of commentary is sure to boil your blood. Your initial reaction will be "stuff you all" and you will want to chuck it in. The best way to really stick it to these sorts of comments will be to fine-tune your wheel and give them the show we've been waiting for, and show there are no strings attached.

You might think that certain people don't deserve the technology, or even the show, because of their comments and lack of gratitude. But the best reaction is to show the critics what you're made of.

Archer is used to this sort of commentary. And I am (we're) used to his reactions. But this doesn't change a thing... You've missed a few months of our "interaction", it seems?
I see no point to convince you, but if you want to know the reasons, maybe you should read from the beginning (this includes other forums and sources, too).
You like gambling? Well, you may "win a fortune with betting" on this guy, but I personally think you picked a wrong side....
An "Archurian side"....

@spinner/madsen

For Archer's reference, and so you can't keep changing the goal posts, how many turns from a standing start will it take to impress you?

I know you want a PM wheel, we all do, but how many turns would it take before you say "hey, with a bit of fine-tuning, this thing might just run indefinitely". Three was good enough for me, obviously an unobstructed video would be much more impressive but I don't think the wheel looked like it was being assisted at any stage. I might be wrong... but back to the point, give us a number so you can't come back here after Archer's next vid and say "ten rotations... anyone can do ten...". I think this is only fair. If you are setting such high standards as a critic, I really think you should qualify those standards.

Peace,

shakman

>>... and so you can't keep changing the goal posts....<< 

Jeeez..! Do you know Who is always changing the goal posts, maybe even now, while we "speak"?

Maybe you've missed that "Archer Allmighty"  knows the ultimate truth,  that He's the only human who discovered a Perpetual Motion, and He will give it to us, mortals, (for free, lol, if he feels like it"

Do you know that he's "a Savior" of the "human race"?
Do you know with what his original instructions for a FE device started with? (lol)

Yes, it looks like you've missed a lot of things....

Well, time will tell....

Peace!
Spinner

[exxcomm0n]

Exx - I felt compelled to addresss some of your comments directed at Bomber

'Tis your right, but so's mine not to agree w/ it.

Have you now joined Shakman's 'bouncing squad'?  While one could argue
that having contributed to the 'science' of the project might mean an opinion carries more 'weight',
you setting parameters for someone expressing their opinions is akin to censorship.

EDIT

He can say what he wishes,  but I will not sit idly by and have assent be assumed from silence.

If I'm to be judged for my tangents, offshoots, etc. from the titled theme, then the actual content I HAVE brought is to be dismissed?

Sure, you can have opinion, but it DOES carry more weight when it's backed up by contribution to the thing you're bitching about.

If you're giving me a ride in your car and I complain about you not going fast enough, that your car is a piece of crap, and that I usually ride in much nicer cars that are older than yours, aren't you going to stop offering me rides?

Or it least be a bit torqued that you hear me telling everyone how stingy you are because you won't give me rides anymore, but how I really don't care because your car is such a piece of crap.......

.......and keep saying it EDIT (not applicable to Bomber) over and over to everyone.

And Bomber has obviously put in the 'time' required to stay abreast of the conversation - so he should even qualify for the measures you wish to set.

Let me go back and re-read the post. I hope this reply session doesn't time out.

The man wants to see a ball bouncing forever? This analogy does not point to someone being very into the concept at hand (sucks).
If that is the best insight they has into this type of concept after all that time and research, I'm not going to stand for them waving a finger and saying, "No, no." about my, or anyones posts.

If he wants to critique Archers delivery and method, who hasn't?
If he wants to watch a ball bounce forever he can charter a space flight and bounce a ball off the hull of the shuttle and track it until it hits something else.
That too is not impossible, only highly improbable.

But to critique something that has produced results while being entertaining and fiercely fought by its constituents but not the critic, is the height of hubris.

And besides, it was 2 paragraphs out of a very long posting addressing this issue. 
A far cry from the pages of dick-waving/measuring you, shakman and PP have posted. 

Fine and dandy.

Now that you have repented your former ways, you should be exempt?
Not playing in Peoria bud.

"Dick waving" can take pages (where you really only have yourself to blame if you read it all) or a sentence, but it's still "dick waving".

Even commenting on dick waving is dick waving as it's off topic (dick waving), and therefore is intrinsically self defeating in effort and application.

I never said Archer was well balanced or had the best grasp of human nature (but considering the applications of tirades and things, he might have a better understanding than some give him credit for) but he does stuff, and while that has been micromanaged into spats that HAVE developed pages, it has also helped refine a point or re-define it for better understanding.

That's the whole reason we're still here.

Humans - being the emotional beings they are - are sometimes subject to irrational actions.
We all are guilty of this (yes - I'm raising my hand too) from time to time.
When I remember we are all deserving of civility and compassion - it can help 'balance' my irrationality.

That is you.

When someone comes through the door waving their dick about me waving mine and how I have been for hours and takes an hour for him to do it, I'm gonna point and giggle at the irony.

I, on the other hand, have taken the time to try to decipher many a convoluted instruction to see what the mad man is talking about (or if he's as mad as some claim).

You may have seen the whole fulcrum thing as the greatest diversion the thread ever had, but I see it as an educational opportunity that taught me much more because I tried things mentioned to find out if they were true.
What I learned from the results helped me realize the concepts necessary to understand the convoluted instructions.

I felt the majority of the post was a well-written heart-felt and as non-offending as possible attempt
at ways 'one' might approach things and interact with people in a different light possibly/probably producing superior results. (and thus a very good contribution to this often 'crazy' thread  )

I felt it made for good reading.......
With the exception of the sections you disagree with - would you agree?

All the best...

Nope, I wouldn't.

One MIGHT do things this way or that, but will results be superior?

Having been a member of many a committee meeting, I can see how the effort of one man working at something for a day can accomplish much more than 50 such meetings.
There are exceptions to this but very very few.

We're unconventional people discussing an unconventional topic using unconventional concepts towards an unconventional result.

I have so far seen and been sick of conventional methods, I'm willing to start thinking different ways and I'm not going to have an Aussie millionaire come in here and wag his finger at me or anyone else during the second "Eleventh Hour" when he has sit idly by waiting for others to do work, and then complaining they're not doing it right or fast enough.

P.S reserving 'science' comments until more is shown - which is apparently soon....

We can only hope.

[gwhy!]

Hi shakman,

That's a very good point, and is certainly a reasonable request.  I would be impressed if I saw the wheel turning anything more than one revolution from a standstill, without stopping, and with strong evidence the wheel is not getting any assistance as it rotates.  I'll be the first to congratulate Archer if he achieves that.

I would say more than 2 revs , but also the standing start should be made remotely i.e maybe a piece of string being cut but also shown not to be under any unusual tension and with strong evidence the wheel is not getting any assistance as it rotates. This would make me intrested as I  have personally acheived more than 1 rev with a rotor that do not work.

[shakman]

...
Maybe you've missed that "Archer Allmighty"  knows the ultimate truth,  that He's the only human who discovered a Perpetual Motion, and He will give it to us, mortals, (for free, lol, if he feels like it"
....
Peace!
Spinner

If he truly has discovered PM I should hope he's the only human that has, or else some people have been holding out on us! I can't see any fault with that argument. 

[capthook]

If I'm to be judged for my tangents, offshoots, etc. from the titled theme, then the actual content I HAVE brought is to be dismissed?

Of course not!

Sure, you can have opinion, but it DOES carry more weight when it's backed up by contribution to the thing you're bitching about.

Agreed!

That was a fun read - thanks for the reply Exx!

P.S. (but I still think his post was better than most - and offered some good 'psychology' that might be 'taken to heart'. )

P.P.S. edit

When someone comes through the door waving their dick about me waving mine and how I have been for hours and takes an hour for him to do it, I'm gonna point and giggle at the irony.

I'm STILL laughing - funny!