>>> So it's up to you, and the question should be "Cannot *I* adapt this
>>> interlock onto *my* models?".
>>Your comment brings to mind the old adage about railway enthusiasts
>>being very small-minded asocial individuals.
> He was right and your snide remark was uncalled for.
No, he wasn't. He responded as does someone whose pseudonym suggested
that he is - or should be - dressed in an orange romper suit. My
chastisement
of him was called for and treated him with the emotional age that he
seemed to want to portray. He was playing the child to my adult ("Games
people
play"?) and I respected his wish and responded acordingly.
Better for this NG and the temperature of social health to keep discussion
to the technical issues raised and not to let the temptation to
introduce unnecessary personal remarks be indulged.
> You did this before a couple of months ago when you started a thread
> on clear plastic for windows, calling somebody who had attempted to
> help you a "silly boy".
If I called someone a silly boy, then it would have been in direct
response to undesirable behaviour as a silly boy, as proscribed above.
> This time you asked a question that implied generic gas fired live
> steam was dangerous because the water ran out before the gas.
No, I did not. Read it again.
> Of the off chance it was genuine...
Do you mean, "half chance"?
> All you need to do is match the size of the gas tank so it runs out
> first.
> Which is what the commercial manufacturers do, is remarkably obvious
> and won't involve you in any extra expense.
Now you are responding as does a silly boy.
Why not merely discuss the technical issues as they are raised. Why do you,
and a number of others, feel the need to respond in such an immature
fashion?
Man at B&Q - 25 Jun 2009 15:47 GMT
> No, he wasn't. He responded as does someone whose pseudonym suggested
> that he is - or should be - dressed in an orange romper suit.
Too subtle for you then! Or you're just not old enough to understand.
MBQ
Jane Sullivan - 25 Jun 2009 16:24 GMT
Alun, you are trying my patience (along with that of others in this
group) too much. Please desist from making any more ad-hominem attacks,
which serve no purpose except to get up people's noses.
The correct reply to Man at B&Q's advice is either "Thanks" or a
constructive statement indicating why it is of no use to you. Anything
else annoys people, and makes them less likely to want to help you in
the future.
Any more replies like this and I shall add your details to my blocked
senders list.
I could be wrong, but I'd have thought your query might get a better
response if it were posted in a model engineering group.
Have a nice day.
>>>> So it's up to you, and the question should be "Cannot *I* adapt
>>>> this
[quoted text clipped - 44 lines]
> and a number of others, feel the need to respond in such an immature
> fashion?
Jim Guthrie - 25 Jun 2009 16:48 GMT
>I could be wrong, but I'd have thought your query might get a better
>response if it were posted in a model engineering group.
If he is who I think he is, he was kill filed complrehensively on
uk.rec.models.engineering a while ago for similar trolling.
He has popped up here and there since then under different names, but
his style is instantly recognisable.
Jim.
David Williams - 25 Jun 2009 19:28 GMT
>>I could be wrong, but I'd have thought your query might get a better
>>response if it were posted in a model engineering group.
[quoted text clipped - 6 lines]
>
> Jim
Agreed - I also think it's good old Gareth from uk.rec.models.engineering so
just killfile *Alun* and don't feed the Troll.
David
Christopher A. Lee - 26 Jun 2009 01:51 GMT
>>>> So it's up to you, and the question should be "Cannot *I* adapt this
>>>> interlock onto *my* models?".
[quoted text clipped - 20 lines]
>If I called someone a silly boy, then it would have been in direct
>response to undesirable behaviour as a silly boy, as proscribed above.
When he was trying to help you?
The only undesirable behaviour was your rudeness to somebody who had
taken the time and trouble to help you.
Even you must understand that the "expensive model railway" wood
sections are made by somebody who has bought a large piece of the
right wood and the correct machine tooling to produce it. In the small
volumes we need, it is simply not worth doing it ourselves.
>> This time you asked a question that implied generic gas fired live
>> steam was dangerous because the water ran out before the gas.
>
>No, I did not. Read it again.
You didn't mention which engine until the second time around. When you
described a do-it-yourself project saying you wanted to build a batch
of five.
Most people without knowledge or experience (suggested by your
question) build one, from which they learn.
>> Of the off chance it was genuine...
>
>Do you mean, "half chance"?
If I'd meant that I would have said it.
>> All you need to do is match the size of the gas tank so it runs out
>> first.
[quoted text clipped - 3 lines]
>
>Now you are responding as does a silly boy.
In other words you aren't interested in the answer.
>Why not merely discuss the technical issues as they are raised. Why do you,
>and a number of others, feel the need to respond in such an immature
>fashion?
Why the personal lies?
I should have killfiled you a couple of months ago.