field test unit no 001 "model T"

[Doug2]

Hey Doug, you love this stuff... open up your forum, wide open, nothing barred, no one excluded, no one banned for any reason. Traffic will go through the roof, guaranteed.

Why don't you follow this advice with this forum?

[Carl-NC]

Unlike you, I don't "love this stuff." The crap, that is.

[Doug2]

Unlike you, I don't "love this stuff." The crap, that is.

I have banned or got rid of the people that posted crap or flamed on my forum! So we both agree!

[robby_h]

Again??? Seriously? Paul, Robby: do you guys really feel threatened by Moodz & Aziz? Doug, Moodz: do you guys feel obligated to respond to every single comment Paul & Robby make? C'mon guys, time to grow up. We're not in the grade school any more.

Well Carl I think you were just as naughty here... http://finders.com.au/forum/viewtopi...644&highlight=

and very naughty here... http://finders.com.au/forum/viewtopi...r=asc&start=75

and we won't mention your equally naughty antics on Zgus.

But I think the above links show that you were much more fun before you grew up and left grade school.

.

[Nupi]

Definition of crap
There are 2 definitions of crap in English:

Pronunciation: /krap
• vulgar slang
NOUN

1Something of extremely poor quality.
1.1Nonsense.
1.2Unwanted articles; rubbish.
2Excrement.
2.1 [IN SINGULAR] An act of defecation.
VERB (craps, crapping, crapped)

1Defecate.
2 (crap on) Talk at length in a foolish or boring way.
ADJECTIVE

Extremely poor in quality.
Origin

Middle English: related to Dutch krappe,
from krappen 'pluck or cut off', and perhaps also to Old French crappe 'siftings',
Anglo-Latin crappa 'chaff'. The original sense was 'chaff', later 'residue from rendering fat',
also 'dregs of beer'. Current senses date from the late 19th century.

[moodz]

Well Carl I think you were just as naughty here... http://finders.com.au/forum/viewtopi...644&highlight=

and very naughty here... http://finders.com.au/forum/viewtopi...r=asc&start=75

and we won't mention your equally naughty antics on Zgus.

But I think the above links show that you were much more fun before you grew up and left grade school.

.

....all those threads prove is that you are technically vacuous rh and love arguing semantics which you don't understand the meaning of anyway. Carl was only trying to establish a point which you can't even see because it's beneath your cognitive ability.

[Paul99]

....all those threads prove is that you are technically vacuous rh and love arguing semantics which you don't understand the meaning of anyway. Carl was only trying to establish a point which you can't even see because it's beneath your cognitive ability.

You have learnt well from Doug, haven't you Moodz. You cannot present logic with respect to the science because you are out of your depth, so you have to attempt to win points by denigrating the person.

[Carl-NC]

I have banned or got rid of the people that posted crap or flamed on my forum! So we both agree!

Then why are you on my forum, trying to stir up crap? Go away, please.

[Carl-NC]

Well Carl I think you were just as naughty here... http://finders.com.au/forum/viewtopi...644&highlight=

and very naughty here... http://finders.com.au/forum/viewtopi...r=asc&start=75

and we won't mention your equally naughty antics on Zgus.

But I think the above links show that you were much more fun before you grew up and left grade school.

.

Robby, your examples are exactly what I strive for here... technical discussion without the name-calling. I think you'll be hard pressed to find where I called John a wanker, or even an idiot, despite his own use of such terms. Mind you, Mr. Heenan was a superbly tough case and I probably deserve a gold star for staying on track.

[Doug2]

You have learnt well from Doug, haven't you Moodz. You cannot present logic with respect to the science because you are out of your depth, so you have to attempt to win points by denigrating the person.

Simply asking some relevant questions and making some relevant points! Its that's what you consider crap then we have different standards!!

ps replied to wrong post! this post was a reply to Carls post 983
Very fatigued due to lack of sleep (new born puppies)

[Doug2]

Robby, your examples are exactly what I strive for here... technical discussion without the name-calling. I think you'll be hard pressed to find where I called John a wanker, or even an idiot, despite his own use of such terms. Mind you, Mr. Heenan was a superbly tough case and I probably deserve a gold star for staying on track.

How can one have an informed technical discussion when a new detector and its inventor are ridiculed and belittled by some folk (who may have an undisclosed vested interest in destroying the creditability of any new potentially marketable detector) and who clearly know nothing about it and even less about its circuits, data acquisition and signal processing or other relevant info!

[Kev]

Why don't you follow this advice with this forum?

This raises a question in my mind.
If you must be a member and login to a forum to see its content, then can it still be considered "public domain"?
Perhaps anyone disclosing ip under the impression it is public domain arena need to be wary.

Kev.

[moodz]

Step1

[moodz]

Step2

Mold

[moodz]

Step 3