X-Virus-Scanned: clean according to Sophos on Logan.com Return-Path: Sender: To: lml@lancaironline.net Date: Sat, 16 Jan 2010 08:28:35 -0500 Message-ID: X-Original-Return-Path: Received: from betsy.gendns5.com ([65.254.38.234] verified) by logan.com (CommuniGate Pro SMTP 5.3.1) with ESMTPS id 4084328 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:27:45 -0500 Received-SPF: none receiver=logan.com; client-ip=65.254.38.234; envelope-from=paul@tbm700.com Received: from 6.21.204.68.cfl.res.rr.com ([68.204.21.6]:51598 helo=[192.168.1.109]) by betsy.gendns5.com with esmtpsa (TLSv1:AES128-SHA:128) (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1NVth7-0001V4-L8 for lml@lancaironline.net; Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:27:01 -0500 From: paul miller Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1077) Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=Apple-Mail-42--331704509 Subject: Re: [LML] Re: Do-it-yourself AOA Project X-Original-Date: Fri, 15 Jan 2010 16:27:00 -0500 In-Reply-To: X-Original-To: "Lancair Mailing List" References: X-Original-Message-Id: <25055EDA-8BE3-4069-82CF-C259D874704F@tbm700.com> X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1077) X-AntiAbuse: This header was added to track abuse, please include it with any abuse report X-AntiAbuse: Primary Hostname - betsy.gendns5.com X-AntiAbuse: Original Domain - lancaironline.net X-AntiAbuse: Originator/Caller UID/GID - [47 12] / [47 12] X-AntiAbuse: Sender Address Domain - tbm700.com --Apple-Mail-42--331704509 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Wolfgang and others on this topic: I really appreciate the tone when = people try to diagnose a problem, suggest fixes and generally add to the = knowledge base of the group. I can't recite any electronic credentials = or any aircraft building skills but I do enjoy listening about projects = that might or might not work and why. So, if Wolfgang makes a = suggestion that isn't 100% perfect or if a circuit is suggested that = might not make it onboard the shuttle then that's ok too. But, when = individuals take it upon themselves to warn listers they have to think = twice before answering or shredding someone's opinion it serves no = purpose but to shut down discussion. If the "moderator" is going to = permit people to specifically target individuals and demean their = character in the eyes of others then that is the list owner's right but = it erodes participation by some of us who aren't as skilled or = thick-skinned. Some brute editing or "return to writer" would go a long = way to improving the tone in 2010. If a few folks would simply remove the personal criticisms and focus on = the discussions I would be a happier reader. In a week I'll have = forgotten that the LED won't burn up on the breadboard but I won't = forget the crappola we had to endure about how people aren't competent = or diligent in their writings. Let's try and slim down personal attacks = and promote better discussions. And, even if the writer was 100% = wrong--who cares? Provide facts and move on. The discussion gets = interesting when facts can be disputed and argued and links are provided = to support the discussion. It gets boring when it slides into character = assassination and spewing of credentials and past historical triumphs as = a means of making your point. Happy new year everyone, Paul Miller N357V L2K On 2010-01-15, at 1:07 PM, Wolfgang wrote: > I'm not trying to beat my chest and show how much I know. My desire is = to bring solutions, not just criticism. > =20 > By fixing a specific part of a problem, one can not assume approval of = the whole, that would be remiss let alone foolish. > =20 > I was addressing specific criticism of a specific design fault . . . . = only. > =20 > Wolfgang --Apple-Mail-42--331704509 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
If = a few folks would simply remove the personal criticisms and focus on the = discussions I would be a happier reader.  In a week I'll have = forgotten that the LED won't burn up on the breadboard but I won't = forget the crappola we had to endure about how people aren't competent = or diligent in their writings.  Let's try and slim down personal = attacks and promote better discussions.   And, even if the writer = was 100% wrong--who cares? Provide facts and move on.   The = discussion gets interesting when facts can be disputed and argued and = links are provided to support the discussion.  It gets boring when = it slides into character assassination and spewing of credentials and = past historical triumphs as a means of making your = point.

Happy new year = everyone,

Paul Miller
N357V = L2K

On 2010-01-15, at 1:07 PM, = Wolfgang wrote:

I'm not trying = to beat my chest and show how much I know. My desire is to bring = solutions, not just criticism.
 
By = fixing a specific part of a problem, one can not assume approval of the = whole, that would be remiss let alone foolish.
 
I was addressing specific criticism of a specific design = fault . . . . only.
 
Wolfgang

=
= --Apple-Mail-42--331704509--