Driveway road mirror (request ideas for a cheap workable mirror)

On Jan 29, 10:40*am, Hoof Hearted > wrote:
> Metspitzer wrote:
> > On Sat, 28 Jan 2012 17:55:43 +0000 (UTC), Hoof Hearted >
> > wrote:
>
> >>Evan wrote:
>
> >>> On Jan 28, 9:26*am, Hoof Hearted > wrote:
> >>>> Evan wrote:
> >>>> > On Jan 26, 8:29*am, "Hoof Hearted" > wrote:
> >>>> >> "Evan" > wrote in message
>
> >>>> ...
> >>>> >> On Jan 25, 5:09 pm, Tony Miklos > wrote:
> >>>> >> A picture of the driveway in question would have
> >>>> >> been ideal...
> >>>> >> **********************
>
> >>>> >> Not easily done in a text only group.
>
> >>>> > If you don't know how to post a picture on a photo hosting
> >>>> > site and then type the link here in a text only group, then
> >>>> > turn off your computer and stop using the internet...
>
> >>>> > ~~ Evan
>
> >>>> Or, should the above prove too difficult for you:
>
> >>>> I've requested nothing, at least TRY to learn to
> >>>> recognize the distinction between the declarative,
> >>>> imperative and interrogative. And, by all means, do
> >>>> also continue to pretentiously and superciliously
> >>>> lecture me as to how I could have been (had the
> >>>> specifics been entirely different) wrong before
> >>>> sheepishly conceding that I am of course correct,
> >>>> so very entertaining and deeply appreciated.
>
> >>>> But despite your pompous faux pas: "If you don't
> >>>> know how to post a picture on a photo hosting site
> >>>> and then type the link here in a text only group,
> >>>> then turn off your computer and stop using the
> >>>> internet..", the fact of the matter is that you
> >>>> shouldn't be in the least surprised to discover that
> >>>> I, at least as likely as not, have actually forgotten
> >>>> more about computer and system sciences than
> >>>> you'll either ever know or develop the wherewithal
> >>>> to comprehend. (And allow me to preemptively
> >>>> assure you that given your comically risible
> >>>> statement, such a charge is neither hypocritical
> >>>> nor ironic). As you've already so amply demonstrated,
> >>>> even the most obvious of inferences would seem to
> >>>> easily surpass your deductive abilities; res ipsa loquitur.
>
> >>>> To reiterate, they certainly do grow them stupid in RI.
>
> >>> And you if you have your Ph.D or other advanced degree
> >>> in Computer Science and have become nothing more than
> >>> a Usenet troll,
>
> >>And IF my Aunt bore testicles, I'd refer to her as Uncle. But
> >>given that your post was a vacuous proposal/complaint in
> >>response to my jest, I respectfully submit that should you
>
> > Your Jest? *Posting a pic to a text group is not easy. *That was just
> > a joke. *Right?
>
> If you have something to say, do by all means state it, if you can
> possibly manage to muster the necessary intestinal fortitude.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>have a desire to locate the actual troll, I suggest you take
> >>a look in the general vicinity of the nearest mirror.
>
> >>> I would say that is more damning evidence
> >>> against all people who possess that level of education in
> >>> the subject matter as opposed to your condemnation of
> >>> people located in the same geographical area of the world
> >>> where my VPN server happens to be located...
> >>> located...
>
> >>Again the obvious, save to anyone other than yourself,
> >>quite effectively escapes your conspicuously paralytic grasp.
>
> >>> Why don't you read the thread posted by the idiot
> >>> that wanted to drop a capacitor in a bathtub and
> >>> try your own similar experiment...
>
> >>Yet even more risible lecturing from a poseur that undoubtedly
> >>couldn't, this time, begin to describe the simple distinction
> >>between a Norton and Thevenin equivalent circuit. You're
>
> > Norton and Thevenin equivalent circuit?
>
> Yes, they're really rather fundamental circuit analysis techniques
> and concepts students are introduced to (and are expected to
> easily master) in a first year electrical circuits class. From your
> approach. my guess would be that you're, at best, possibly a
> vocationally trained electrician and have never in the past even so
> much as heard of either, as I can't imagine any competent person
> familiar with them posing such an otherwise brain dead pretense.
>
> > If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, try to baffle them with
> > bull****.
>
> Your proposing such rudiments to be bull**** only serves to expose
> you as the incompetent you clearly must be, and your bull****
> allusion, sans actual brilliant content (or any germane content
> whatsoever), certainly hasn't attained its desired goal in successfully
> leading to any confusion. But the truest form of bull**** pretension
> was in fact Evan's attempt to once again lecture and display his
> electrical "knowledge and insight" in his suggest to me, which, along
> with other truncated comments, you've so conveniently, intentionally,
> purposefully and cravenly snipped.
>
> > Or Pig Latin.
>
> Is that an attempt to indicate that you too (or should that be two)
> were totally flummoxed by that which wouldn't start to bewilder a
> retarded 10 year old in a hurry, i.e., the ROT13? Or might it have
> been the legal principle of res ipsa loquitur you mistook for "Pig
> Latin"? You're evidently quite easily confused, particularly by "that
> there book learnin'", or so you've provided every indication. Should
> it have been your intention to serve as Evan's either "savior to the
> rescue", or simply his surrogate, it is my considered opinion that you
> too have failed most miserably and have accomplished nothing more
> than joining him in the ranks of complete and utter embarrassments.
>
> But don't let me stop you, do continue to keep digging that hole.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>hilarious, you should seriously consider taking that pathetically
> >>feeble Dr. Irwin Corey-esque imitative routine on the road.
>
> >>> ~~ Evan

Other than using the fancy latin legal phraseology you have
yet to explain what duty of care exists as far as anything in
this thread OR how this unexplained phenomena speaks
anything let alone about itself in a legally sufficient way for
a lawsuit to be won or lost...

Let's look at the situation being discussed he

OP installs the "mirror" and an accident occurs --

The existence of the mirror itself means that the OP was
aware of and took action to mitigate some deficiency of
design or installation of the driveway... The fact that the
mirror itself exists creates an increased duty of care on
the part of the OP because he has been aware of some
danger so when an accident eventually occurs he will
face a much greater burden to overcome in proving it
wasn't his fault...

OP cuts down all the brush to improve visibility --

The trimming of the bushes by themselves proves nothing,
it is just as reasonable an assertion to make that the brush
was trimmed and/or removed to allow for a wider path in the
driveway, to reduce the chance that brush overhanging the
driveway would scratch the OP's vehicles... Increasing the
visibility is only one reasonable explanation for explaining
the fact that the brush was cut down...

A mirror can only be used to increase visibility -- cutting
bushes/brush away can have many numerous causalities...

So do you want to fit your fancy words to the case at point
counselor or do you want to espouse more of your bull****
and pig latin non-sense ?

~~ Evan

Evan wrote:

>> >>> And you if you have your Ph.D or other advanced degree
>> >>> in Computer Science and have become nothing more than
>> >>> a Usenet troll,
>>
>> >>And IF my Aunt bore testicles, I'd refer to her as Uncle. But
>> >>given that your post was a vacuous proposal/complaint in
>> >>response to my jest, I respectfully submit that should you
>>
>> > Your Jest? *Posting a pic to a text group is not easy. *That was just
>> > a joke. *Right?
>>
>> If you have something to say, do by all means state it, if you can
>> possibly manage to muster the necessary intestinal fortitude.
>>
>> >>have a desire to locate the actual troll, I suggest you take
>> >>a look in the general vicinity of the nearest mirror.
>>
>> >>> I would say that is more damning evidence
>> >>> against all people who possess that level of education in
>> >>> the subject matter as opposed to your condemnation of
>> >>> people located in the same geographical area of the world
>> >>> where my VPN server happens to be located...
>> >>> located...
>>
>> >>Again the obvious, save to anyone other than yourself,
>> >>quite effectively escapes your conspicuously paralytic grasp.
>>
>> >>> Why don't you read the thread posted by the idiot
>> >>> that wanted to drop a capacitor in a bathtub and
>> >>> try your own similar experiment...
>>
>> >>Yet even more risible lecturing from a poseur that undoubtedly
>> >>couldn't, this time, begin to describe the simple distinction
>> >>between a Norton and Thevenin equivalent circuit. You're
>>
>> > Norton and Thevenin equivalent circuit?
>>
>> Yes, they're really rather fundamental circuit analysis techniques
>> and concepts students are introduced to (and are expected to
>> easily master) in a first year electrical circuits class. From your
>> approach. my guess would be that you're, at best, possibly a
>> vocationally trained electrician and have never in the past even so
>> much as heard of either, as I can't imagine any competent person
>> familiar with them posing such an otherwise brain dead pretense.
>>
>> > If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, try to baffle them with
>> > bull****.
>>
>> Your proposing such rudiments to be bull**** only serves to expose
>> you as the incompetent you clearly must be, and your bull****
>> allusion, sans actual brilliant content (or any germane content
>> whatsoever), certainly hasn't attained its desired goal in successfully
>> leading to any confusion. But the truest form of bull**** pretension
>> was in fact Evan's attempt to once again lecture and display his
>> electrical "knowledge and insight" in his suggest to me, which, along
>> with other truncated comments, you've so conveniently, intentionally,
>> purposefully and cravenly snipped.
>>
>> > Or Pig Latin.
>>
>> Is that an attempt to indicate that you too (or should that be two)
>> were totally flummoxed by that which wouldn't start to bewilder a
>> retarded 10 year old in a hurry, i.e., the ROT13? Or might it have
>> been the legal principle of res ipsa loquitur you mistook for "Pig
>> Latin"? You're evidently quite easily confused, particularly by "that
>> there book learnin'", or so you've provided every indication. Should
>> it have been your intention to serve as Evan's either "savior to the
>> rescue", or simply his surrogate, it is my considered opinion that you
>> too have failed most miserably and have accomplished nothing more
>> than joining him in the ranks of complete and utter embarrassments.
>>
>> But don't let me stop you, do continue to keep digging that hole.
>>
>> >>hilarious, you should seriously consider taking that pathetically
>> >>feeble Dr. Irwin Corey-esque imitative routine on the road.
>>
>> >>> ~~ Evan
>
> Other than using the fancy latin legal phraseology you have
> yet to explain what duty of care exists as far as anything in
> this thread OR how this unexplained phenomena speaks
> anything let alone about itself in a legally sufficient way for
> a lawsuit to be won or lost...
>
> Let's look at the situation being discussed he

Let's not, as none of my comments, nor any of those either you or
KW (hopefully the abbreviation won't also confuse you) have objected
to heretofore, had the slightest thing to do with anything other than
the posting of a picture, although, given your laughably indefensible
rebuttals, I can readily understand your desperate desire for
obfuscation and misdirection.

> OP installs the "mirror" and an accident occurs --
>
> The existence of the mirror itself means that the OP was
> aware of and took action to mitigate some deficiency of
> design or installation of the driveway... The fact that the
> mirror itself exists creates an increased duty of care on
> the part of the OP because he has been aware of some
> danger so when an accident eventually occurs he will
> face a much greater burden to overcome in proving it
> wasn't his fault...
>
> OP cuts down all the brush to improve visibility --
>
> The trimming of the bushes by themselves proves nothing,
> it is just as reasonable an assertion to make that the brush
> was trimmed and/or removed to allow for a wider path in the
> driveway, to reduce the chance that brush overhanging the
> driveway would scratch the OP's vehicles... Increasing the
> visibility is only one reasonable explanation for explaining
> the fact that the brush was cut down...
>
> A mirror can only be used to increase visibility -- cutting
> bushes/brush away can have many numerous causalities...
>
> So do you want to fit your fancy words to the case at point
> counselor

I'm not a counselor, in the legal sense you imply, I'm an engineer.

> or do you want to espouse more of your bull****
> and pig latin non-sense ?

You've not come REMOTELY close to describing ANYTHING I've
penned as either bull****, pig latin or nonsense. You should be
embarrassed, and would be, had you the capacity to be.

PS The reason for the truncated earlier osts is due to the
servers complaint and restriction of "too many quoted lines".

> ~~ Evan

On Sun, 29 Jan 2012 16:46:31 +0000 (UTC), Hoof Hearted >
wrote:

>Evan wrote:
>
>>> >>> And you if you have your Ph.D or other advanced degree
>>> >>> in Computer Science and have become nothing more than
>>> >>> a Usenet troll,
>>>
>>> >>And IF my Aunt bore testicles, I'd refer to her as Uncle. But
>>> >>given that your post was a vacuous proposal/complaint in
>>> >>response to my jest, I respectfully submit that should you
>>>
>>> > Your Jest? *Posting a pic to a text group is not easy. *That was just
>>> > a joke. *Right?
>>>
>>> If you have something to say, do by all means state it, if you can
>>> possibly manage to muster the necessary intestinal fortitude.
>>>
>>> >>have a desire to locate the actual troll, I suggest you take
>>> >>a look in the general vicinity of the nearest mirror.
>>>
>>> >>> I would say that is more damning evidence
>>> >>> against all people who possess that level of education in
>>> >>> the subject matter as opposed to your condemnation of
>>> >>> people located in the same geographical area of the world
>>> >>> where my VPN server happens to be located...
>>> >>> located...
>>>
>>> >>Again the obvious, save to anyone other than yourself,
>>> >>quite effectively escapes your conspicuously paralytic grasp.
>>>
>>> >>> Why don't you read the thread posted by the idiot
>>> >>> that wanted to drop a capacitor in a bathtub and
>>> >>> try your own similar experiment...
>>>
>>> >>Yet even more risible lecturing from a poseur that undoubtedly
>>> >>couldn't, this time, begin to describe the simple distinction
>>> >>between a Norton and Thevenin equivalent circuit. You're
>>>
>>> > Norton and Thevenin equivalent circuit?
>>>
>>> Yes, they're really rather fundamental circuit analysis techniques
>>> and concepts students are introduced to (and are expected to
>>> easily master) in a first year electrical circuits class. From your
>>> approach. my guess would be that you're, at best, possibly a
>>> vocationally trained electrician and have never in the past even so
>>> much as heard of either, as I can't imagine any competent person
>>> familiar with them posing such an otherwise brain dead pretense.
>>>
>>> > If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, try to baffle them with
>>> > bull****.
>>>
>>> Your proposing such rudiments to be bull**** only serves to expose
>>> you as the incompetent you clearly must be, and your bull****
>>> allusion, sans actual brilliant content (or any germane content
>>> whatsoever), certainly hasn't attained its desired goal in successfully
>>> leading to any confusion. But the truest form of bull**** pretension
>>> was in fact Evan's attempt to once again lecture and display his
>>> electrical "knowledge and insight" in his suggest to me, which, along
>>> with other truncated comments, you've so conveniently, intentionally,
>>> purposefully and cravenly snipped.
>>>
>>> > Or Pig Latin.
>>>
>>> Is that an attempt to indicate that you too (or should that be two)
>>> were totally flummoxed by that which wouldn't start to bewilder a
>>> retarded 10 year old in a hurry, i.e., the ROT13? Or might it have
>>> been the legal principle of res ipsa loquitur you mistook for "Pig
>>> Latin"? You're evidently quite easily confused, particularly by "that
>>> there book learnin'", or so you've provided every indication. Should
>>> it have been your intention to serve as Evan's either "savior to the
>>> rescue", or simply his surrogate, it is my considered opinion that you
>>> too have failed most miserably and have accomplished nothing more
>>> than joining him in the ranks of complete and utter embarrassments.
>>>
>>> But don't let me stop you, do continue to keep digging that hole.
>>>
>>> >>hilarious, you should seriously consider taking that pathetically
>>> >>feeble Dr. Irwin Corey-esque imitative routine on the road.
>>>
>>> >>> ~~ Evan
>>
>> Other than using the fancy latin legal phraseology you have
>> yet to explain what duty of care exists as far as anything in
>> this thread OR how this unexplained phenomena speaks
>> anything let alone about itself in a legally sufficient way for
>> a lawsuit to be won or lost...
>>
>> Let's look at the situation being discussed he
>
>Let's not, as none of my comments, nor any of those either you or
>KW (hopefully the abbreviation won't also confuse you) have objected
>to heretofore, had the slightest thing to do with anything other than
>the posting of a picture, although, given your laughably indefensible
>rebuttals, I can readily understand your desperate desire for
>obfuscation and misdirection.
>
>> OP installs the "mirror" and an accident occurs --
>>
>> The existence of the mirror itself means that the OP was
>> aware of and took action to mitigate some deficiency of
>> design or installation of the driveway... The fact that the
>> mirror itself exists creates an increased duty of care on
>> the part of the OP because he has been aware of some
>> danger so when an accident eventually occurs he will
>> face a much greater burden to overcome in proving it
>> wasn't his fault...
>>
>> OP cuts down all the brush to improve visibility --
>>
>> The trimming of the bushes by themselves proves nothing,
>> it is just as reasonable an assertion to make that the brush
>> was trimmed and/or removed to allow for a wider path in the
>> driveway, to reduce the chance that brush overhanging the
>> driveway would scratch the OP's vehicles... Increasing the
>> visibility is only one reasonable explanation for explaining
>> the fact that the brush was cut down...
>>
>> A mirror can only be used to increase visibility -- cutting
>> bushes/brush away can have many numerous causalities...
>>
>> So do you want to fit your fancy words to the case at point
>> counselor
>
>I'm not a counselor, in the legal sense you imply, I'm an engineer.
>
>> or do you want to espouse more of your bull****
>> and pig latin non-sense ?
>
>You've not come REMOTELY close to describing ANYTHING I've
>penned as either bull****, pig latin or nonsense. You should be

Really? Explain what value bringing up Norton and Thevenin
equivalent circuit has added to the conversation?

Wait! I know. Nothing.

>embarrassed, and would be, had you the capacity to be.
>
>PS The reason for the truncated earlier osts is due to the
>servers complaint and restriction of "too many quoted lines".
>
>> ~~ Evan

Metspitzer wrote:

>>>> >>Again the obvious, save to anyone other than yourself,
>>>> >>quite effectively escapes your conspicuously paralytic grasp.
>>>>
>>>> >>> Why don't you read the thread posted by the idiot
>>>> >>> that wanted to drop a capacitor in a bathtub and
>>>> >>> try your own similar experiment...
>>>>
>>>> >>Yet even more risible lecturing from a poseur that undoubtedly
>>>> >>couldn't, this time, begin to describe the simple distinction
>>>> >>between a Norton and Thevenin equivalent circuit. You're
>>>>
>>>> > Norton and Thevenin equivalent circuit?
>>>>
>>>> Yes, they're really rather fundamental circuit analysis techniques
>>>> and concepts students are introduced to (and are expected to
>>>> easily master) in a first year electrical circuits class. From your
>>>> approach. my guess would be that you're, at best, possibly a
>>>> vocationally trained electrician and have never in the past even so
>>>> much as heard of either, as I can't imagine any competent person
>>>> familiar with them posing such an otherwise brain dead pretense.
>>>>
>>>> > If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, try to baffle them with
>>>> > bull****.
>>>>
>>>> Your proposing such rudiments to be bull**** only serves to expose
>>>> you as the incompetent you clearly must be, and your bull****
>>>> allusion, sans actual brilliant content (or any germane content
>>>> whatsoever), certainly hasn't attained its desired goal in successfully
>>>> leading to any confusion. But the truest form of bull**** pretension
>>>> was in fact Evan's attempt to once again lecture and display his
>>>> electrical "knowledge and insight" in his suggest to me, which, along
>>>> with other truncated comments, you've so conveniently, intentionally,
>>>> purposefully and cravenly snipped.
>>>>
>>>> > Or Pig Latin.
>>>>
>>>> Is that an attempt to indicate that you too (or should that be two)
>>>> were totally flummoxed by that which wouldn't start to bewilder a
>>>> retarded 10 year old in a hurry, i.e., the ROT13? Or might it have
>>>> been the legal principle of res ipsa loquitur you mistook for "Pig
>>>> Latin"? You're evidently quite easily confused, particularly by "that
>>>> there book learnin'", or so you've provided every indication. Should
>>>> it have been your intention to serve as Evan's either "savior to the
>>>> rescue", or simply his surrogate, it is my considered opinion that you
>>>> too have failed most miserably and have accomplished nothing more
>>>> than joining him in the ranks of complete and utter embarrassments.
>>>>
>>>> But don't let me stop you, do continue to keep digging that hole.
>>>>
>>>> >>hilarious, you should seriously consider taking that pathetically
>>>> >>feeble Dr. Irwin Corey-esque imitative routine on the road.
>>>>
>>>> >>> ~~ Evan
>>>
>>> Other than using the fancy latin legal phraseology you have
>>> yet to explain what duty of care exists as far as anything in
>>> this thread OR how this unexplained phenomena speaks
>>> anything let alone about itself in a legally sufficient way for
>>> a lawsuit to be won or lost...
>>>
>>> Let's look at the situation being discussed he
>>
>>Let's not, as none of my comments, nor any of those either you or
>>KW (hopefully the abbreviation won't also confuse you) have objected
>>to heretofore, had the slightest thing to do with anything other than
>>the posting of a picture, although, given your laughably indefensible
>>rebuttals, I can readily understand your desperate desire for
>>obfuscation and misdirection.
>>
>>> OP installs the "mirror" and an accident occurs --
>>>
>>> The existence of the mirror itself means that the OP was
>>> aware of and took action to mitigate some deficiency of
>>> design or installation of the driveway... The fact that the
>>> mirror itself exists creates an increased duty of care on
>>> the part of the OP because he has been aware of some
>>> danger so when an accident eventually occurs he will
>>> face a much greater burden to overcome in proving it
>>> wasn't his fault...
>>>
>>> OP cuts down all the brush to improve visibility --
>>>
>>> The trimming of the bushes by themselves proves nothing,
>>> it is just as reasonable an assertion to make that the brush
>>> was trimmed and/or removed to allow for a wider path in the
>>> driveway, to reduce the chance that brush overhanging the
>>> driveway would scratch the OP's vehicles... Increasing the
>>> visibility is only one reasonable explanation for explaining
>>> the fact that the brush was cut down...
>>>
>>> A mirror can only be used to increase visibility -- cutting
>>> bushes/brush away can have many numerous causalities...
>>>
>>> So do you want to fit your fancy words to the case at point
>>> counselor
>>
>>I'm not a counselor, in the legal sense you imply, I'm an engineer.
>>
>>> or do you want to espouse more of your bull****
>>> and pig latin non-sense ?
>>
>>You've not come REMOTELY close to describing ANYTHING I've
>>penned as either bull****, pig latin or nonsense. You should be
>
> Really? Explain what value bringing up Norton and Thevenin
> equivalent circuit has added to the conversation?

Not only was it clearly implicit, it was later explained in painful
detail to you already, so I'm quite sure any additional spoonfed
instruction is certain to also strike nothing save more dead brain
cells and would accordingly continue to only serve to mimic your
own "contributions" as a complete waste of time and bandwidth.

> Wait! I know Nothing.

With the simple, astute deletion of a single element of
punctuation, I've fixed it for you and clarified its truth.

>>embarrassed, and would be, had you the capacity to be.
>>
>>PS The reason for the truncated earlier osts is due to the
>>servers complaint and restriction of "too many quoted lines".
>>
>>> ~~ Evan

On Jan 29, 11:46*am, Hoof Hearted > wrote:
> Evan wrote:
> >> >>> And you if you have your Ph.D or other advanced degree
> >> >>> in Computer Science and have become nothing more than
> >> >>> a Usenet troll,
>
> >> >>And IF my Aunt bore testicles, I'd refer to her as Uncle. But
> >> >>given that your post was a vacuous proposal/complaint in
> >> >>response to my jest, I respectfully submit that should you
>
> >> > Your Jest? *Posting a pic to a text group is not easy. *That was just
> >> > a joke. *Right?
>
> >> If you have something to say, do by all means state it, if you can
> >> possibly manage to muster the necessary intestinal fortitude.
>
> >> >>have a desire to locate the actual troll, I suggest you take
> >> >>a look in the general vicinity of the nearest mirror.
>
> >> >>> I would say that is more damning evidence
> >> >>> against all people who possess that level of education in
> >> >>> the subject matter as opposed to your condemnation of
> >> >>> people located in the same geographical area of the world
> >> >>> where my VPN server happens to be located...
> >> >>> located...
>
> >> >>Again the obvious, save to anyone other than yourself,
> >> >>quite effectively escapes your conspicuously paralytic grasp.
>
> >> >>> Why don't you read the thread posted by the idiot
> >> >>> that wanted to drop a capacitor in a bathtub and
> >> >>> try your own similar experiment...
>
> >> >>Yet even more risible lecturing from a poseur that undoubtedly
> >> >>couldn't, this time, begin to describe the simple distinction
> >> >>between a Norton and Thevenin equivalent circuit. You're
>
> >> > Norton and Thevenin equivalent circuit?
>
> >> Yes, they're really rather fundamental circuit analysis techniques
> >> and concepts students are introduced to (and are expected to
> >> easily master) in a first year electrical circuits class. From your
> >> approach. my guess would be that you're, at best, possibly a
> >> vocationally trained electrician and have never in the past even so
> >> much as heard of either, as I can't imagine any competent person
> >> familiar with them posing such an otherwise brain dead pretense.
>
> >> > If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, try to baffle them with
> >> > bull****.
>
> >> Your proposing such rudiments to be bull**** only serves to expose
> >> you as the incompetent you clearly must be, and your bull****
> >> allusion, sans actual brilliant content (or any germane content
> >> whatsoever), certainly hasn't attained its desired goal in successfully
> >> leading to any confusion. But the truest form of bull**** pretension
> >> was in fact Evan's attempt to once again lecture and display his
> >> electrical "knowledge and insight" in his suggest to me, which, along
> >> with other truncated comments, you've so conveniently, intentionally,
> >> purposefully and cravenly snipped.
>
> >> > Or Pig Latin.
>
> >> Is that an attempt to indicate that you too (or should that be two)
> >> were totally flummoxed by that which wouldn't start to bewilder a
> >> retarded 10 year old in a hurry, i.e., the ROT13? Or might it have
> >> been the legal principle of res ipsa loquitur you mistook for "Pig
> >> Latin"? You're evidently quite easily confused, particularly by "that
> >> there book learnin'", or so you've provided every indication. Should
> >> it have been your intention to serve as Evan's either "savior to the
> >> rescue", or simply his surrogate, it is my considered opinion that you
> >> too have failed most miserably and have accomplished nothing more
> >> than joining him in the ranks of complete and utter embarrassments.
>
> >> But don't let me stop you, do continue to keep digging that hole.
>
> >> >>hilarious, you should seriously consider taking that pathetically
> >> >>feeble Dr. Irwin Corey-esque imitative routine on the road.
>
> >> >>> ~~ Evan
>
> > Other than using the fancy latin legal phraseology you have
> > yet to explain what duty of care exists as far as anything in
> > this thread OR how this unexplained phenomena speaks
> > anything let alone about itself in a legally sufficient way for
> > a lawsuit to be won or lost...
>
> > Let's look at the situation being discussed he
>
> Let's not, as none of my comments, nor any of those either you or
> KW (hopefully the abbreviation won't also confuse you) have objected
> to heretofore, had the slightest thing to do with anything other than
> the posting of a picture, although, given your laughably indefensible
> rebuttals, I can readily understand your desperate desire for
> obfuscation and misdirection.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > OP installs the "mirror" and an accident occurs --
>
> > The existence of the mirror itself means that the OP was
> > aware of and took action to mitigate some deficiency of
> > design or installation of the driveway... *The fact that the
> > mirror itself exists creates an increased duty of care on
> > the part of the OP because he has been aware of some
> > danger so when an accident eventually occurs he will
> > face a much greater burden to overcome in proving it
> > wasn't his fault...
>
> > OP cuts down all the brush to improve visibility --
>
> > The trimming of the bushes by themselves proves nothing,
> > it is just as reasonable an assertion to make that the brush
> > was trimmed and/or removed to allow for a wider path in the
> > driveway, to reduce the chance that brush overhanging the
> > driveway would scratch the OP's vehicles... *Increasing the
> > visibility is only one reasonable explanation for explaining
> > the fact that the brush was cut down...
>
> > A mirror can only be used to increase visibility -- cutting
> > bushes/brush away can have many numerous causalities...
>
> > So do you want to fit your fancy words to the case at point
> > counselor
>
> I'm not a counselor, in the legal sense you imply, I'm an engineer.
>
> > or do you want to espouse more of your bull****
> > and pig latin non-sense ?
>
> You've not come REMOTELY close to describing ANYTHING I've
> penned as either bull****, pig latin or nonsense. You should be
> embarrassed, and would be, had you the capacity to be.
>
> PS The reason for the truncated earlier osts is due to the
> servers complaint and restriction of "too many quoted lines".
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> > ~~ Evan


Ah, an engineer...

Let's give you something to ponder and study then:

Is it more difficult to design a system to extract your
head from your own ass, or a system to remove the
keyboard from your computer which I am more than
sure I am not the only one here which would gladly
insert into the aforementioned orifice for you...

The only thing you have done is use latin legal phrases
totally out of context to make your Engineering brain
seem more educated than the other people here...

It isn't and you have yet to explain how your use of
the phrase has any bearing on anything said here
thus far... Perhaps in addition to being an intelligent
Engineer, you have also lost touch with reality, hence
your need to speak in tongues and your flawed
perceptions and interpretations of what is being said...

Either that or you are just a stupid f***ing troll...

My vote is for troll...

~~ Evan

On Jan 29, 1:32*pm, Hoof Hearted > wrote:
> Metspitzer wrote:
> >>>> >>Again the obvious, save to anyone other than yourself,
> >>>> >>quite effectively escapes your conspicuously paralytic grasp.
>
> >>>> >>> Why don't you read the thread posted by the idiot
> >>>> >>> that wanted to drop a capacitor in a bathtub and
> >>>> >>> try your own similar experiment...
>
> >>>> >>Yet even more risible lecturing from a poseur that undoubtedly
> >>>> >>couldn't, this time, begin to describe the simple distinction
> >>>> >>between a Norton and Thevenin equivalent circuit. You're
>
> >>>> > Norton and Thevenin equivalent circuit?
>
> >>>> Yes, they're really rather fundamental circuit analysis techniques
> >>>> and concepts students are introduced to (and are expected to
> >>>> easily master) in a first year electrical circuits class. From your
> >>>> approach. my guess would be that you're, at best, possibly a
> >>>> vocationally trained electrician and have never in the past even so
> >>>> much as heard of either, as I can't imagine any competent person
> >>>> familiar with them posing such an otherwise brain dead pretense.
>
> >>>> > If you can't dazzle them with brilliance, try to baffle them with
> >>>> > bull****.
>
> >>>> Your proposing such rudiments to be bull**** only serves to expose
> >>>> you as the incompetent you clearly must be, and your bull****
> >>>> allusion, sans actual brilliant content (or any germane content
> >>>> whatsoever), certainly hasn't attained its desired goal in successfully
> >>>> leading to any confusion. But the truest form of bull**** pretension
> >>>> was in fact Evan's attempt to once again lecture and display his
> >>>> electrical "knowledge and insight" in his suggest to me, which, along
> >>>> with other truncated comments, you've so conveniently, intentionally,
> >>>> purposefully and cravenly snipped.
>
> >>>> > Or Pig Latin.
>
> >>>> Is that an attempt to indicate that you too (or should that be two)
> >>>> were totally flummoxed by that which wouldn't start to bewilder a
> >>>> retarded 10 year old in a hurry, i.e., the ROT13? Or might it have
> >>>> been the legal principle of res ipsa loquitur you mistook for "Pig
> >>>> Latin"? You're evidently quite easily confused, particularly by "that
> >>>> there book learnin'", or so you've provided every indication. Should
> >>>> it have been your intention to serve as Evan's either "savior to the
> >>>> rescue", or simply his surrogate, it is my considered opinion that you
> >>>> too have failed most miserably and have accomplished nothing more
> >>>> than joining him in the ranks of complete and utter embarrassments.
>
> >>>> But don't let me stop you, do continue to keep digging that hole.
>
> >>>> >>hilarious, you should seriously consider taking that pathetically
> >>>> >>feeble Dr. Irwin Corey-esque imitative routine on the road.
>
> >>>> >>> ~~ Evan
>
> >>> Other than using the fancy latin legal phraseology you have
> >>> yet to explain what duty of care exists as far as anything in
> >>> this thread OR how this unexplained phenomena speaks
> >>> anything let alone about itself in a legally sufficient way for
> >>> a lawsuit to be won or lost...
>
> >>> Let's look at the situation being discussed he
>
> >>Let's not, as none of my comments, nor any of those either you or
> >>KW (hopefully the abbreviation won't also confuse you) have objected
> >>to heretofore, had the slightest thing to do with anything other than
> >>the posting of a picture, although, given your laughably indefensible
> >>rebuttals, I can readily understand your desperate desire for
> >>obfuscation and misdirection.
>
> >>> OP installs the "mirror" and an accident occurs --
>
> >>> The existence of the mirror itself means that the OP was
> >>> aware of and took action to mitigate some deficiency of
> >>> design or installation of the driveway... *The fact that the
> >>> mirror itself exists creates an increased duty of care on
> >>> the part of the OP because he has been aware of some
> >>> danger so when an accident eventually occurs he will
> >>> face a much greater burden to overcome in proving it
> >>> wasn't his fault...
>
> >>> OP cuts down all the brush to improve visibility --
>
> >>> The trimming of the bushes by themselves proves nothing,
> >>> it is just as reasonable an assertion to make that the brush
> >>> was trimmed and/or removed to allow for a wider path in the
> >>> driveway, to reduce the chance that brush overhanging the
> >>> driveway would scratch the OP's vehicles... *Increasing the
> >>> visibility is only one reasonable explanation for explaining
> >>> the fact that the brush was cut down...
>
> >>> A mirror can only be used to increase visibility -- cutting
> >>> bushes/brush away can have many numerous causalities...
>
> >>> So do you want to fit your fancy words to the case at point
> >>> counselor
>
> >>I'm not a counselor, in the legal sense you imply, I'm an engineer.
>
> >>> or do you want to espouse more of your bull****
> >>> and pig latin non-sense ?
>
> >>You've not come REMOTELY close to describing ANYTHING I've
> >>penned as either bull****, pig latin or nonsense. You should be
>
> > Really? * Explain what value bringing up Norton and Thevenin
> > equivalent circuit has added to the conversation?
>
> Not only was it clearly implicit, it was later explained in painful
> detail to you already, so I'm quite sure any additional spoonfed
> instruction is certain to also strike nothing save more dead brain
> cells and would accordingly continue to only serve to mimic your
> own "contributions" as a complete waste of time and bandwidth.
>
> > Wait! *I know Nothing.
>
> With the simple, astute deletion of a single element of
> punctuation, I've fixed it for you and clarified its truth.
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> >>embarrassed, and would be, had you the capacity to be.
>
> >>PS The reason for the truncated earlier osts is due to the
> >>servers complaint and restriction of "too many quoted lines".
>
> >>> ~~ Evan

** SNIFF **

Troll... Definitely troll...

Evan wrote:

>> >>>> > Or Pig Latin.
>>
>> >>>> Is that an attempt to indicate that you too (or should that be two)
>> >>>> were totally flummoxed by that which wouldn't start to bewilder a
>> >>>> retarded 10 year old in a hurry, i.e., the ROT13? Or might it have
>> >>>> been the legal principle of res ipsa loquitur you mistook for "Pig
>> >>>> Latin"? You're evidently quite easily confused, particularly by "that
>> >>>> there book learnin'", or so you've provided every indication. Should
>> >>>> it have been your intention to serve as Evan's either "savior to the
>> >>>> rescue", or simply his surrogate, it is my considered opinion that you
>> >>>> too have failed most miserably and have accomplished nothing more
>> >>>> than joining him in the ranks of complete and utter embarrassments.
>>
>> >>>> But don't let me stop you, do continue to keep digging that hole.
>>
>> >>>> >>hilarious, you should seriously consider taking that pathetically
>> >>>> >>feeble Dr. Irwin Corey-esque imitative routine on the road.
>>
>> >>>> >>> ~~ Evan
>>
>> >>> Other than using the fancy latin legal phraseology you have
>> >>> yet to explain what duty of care exists as far as anything in
>> >>> this thread OR how this unexplained phenomena speaks
>> >>> anything let alone about itself in a legally sufficient way for
>> >>> a lawsuit to be won or lost...
>>
>> >>> Let's look at the situation being discussed he
>>
>> >>Let's not, as none of my comments, nor any of those either you or
>> >>KW (hopefully the abbreviation won't also confuse you) have objected
>> >>to heretofore, had the slightest thing to do with anything other than
>> >>the posting of a picture, although, given your laughably indefensible
>> >>rebuttals, I can readily understand your desperate desire for
>> >>obfuscation and misdirection.
>>
>> >>> OP installs the "mirror" and an accident occurs --
>>
>> >>> The existence of the mirror itself means that the OP was
>> >>> aware of and took action to mitigate some deficiency of
>> >>> design or installation of the driveway... *The fact that the
>> >>> mirror itself exists creates an increased duty of care on
>> >>> the part of the OP because he has been aware of some
>> >>> danger so when an accident eventually occurs he will
>> >>> face a much greater burden to overcome in proving it
>> >>> wasn't his fault...
>>
>> >>> OP cuts down all the brush to improve visibility --
>>
>> >>> The trimming of the bushes by themselves proves nothing,
>> >>> it is just as reasonable an assertion to make that the brush
>> >>> was trimmed and/or removed to allow for a wider path in the
>> >>> driveway, to reduce the chance that brush overhanging the
>> >>> driveway would scratch the OP's vehicles... *Increasing the
>> >>> visibility is only one reasonable explanation for explaining
>> >>> the fact that the brush was cut down...
>>
>> >>> A mirror can only be used to increase visibility -- cutting
>> >>> bushes/brush away can have many numerous causalities...
>>
>> >>> So do you want to fit your fancy words to the case at point
>> >>> counselor
>>
>> >>I'm not a counselor, in the legal sense you imply, I'm an engineer.
>>
>> >>> or do you want to espouse more of your bull****
>> >>> and pig latin non-sense ?
>>
>> >>You've not come REMOTELY close to describing ANYTHING I've
>> >>penned as either bull****, pig latin or nonsense. You should be
>>
>> > Really? * Explain what value bringing up Norton and Thevenin
>> > equivalent circuit has added to the conversation?
>>
>> Not only was it clearly implicit, it was later explained in painful
>> detail to you already, so I'm quite sure any additional spoonfed
>> instruction is certain to also strike nothing save more dead brain
>> cells and would accordingly continue to only serve to mimic your
>> own "contributions" as a complete waste of time and bandwidth.
>>
>> > Wait! *I know Nothing.
>>
>> With the simple, astute deletion of a single element of
>> punctuation, I've fixed it for you and clarified its truth.
>>
>> >>embarrassed, and would be, had you the capacity to be.
>>
>> >>PS The reason for the truncated earlier osts is due to the
>> >>servers complaint and restriction of "too many quoted lines".
>>
>> >>> ~~ Evan
>
> ** SNIFF **
>
> Troll... Definitely troll...

You're a good driver, definitely a good driver.

But here, one final time, is an analogous approach to the reasoning
for my N&TEC cite, although also unlikely, you just might be capable
of understanding, given that you haven't been able to grasp the
patently obvious presented to you umpteen times already:

In this scenario we have an umpire (me) calling the base runner
out at 3rd while the height challenged, one-eyed, bespectacled,
mental patient sitting at the rear of the far right field stands,
directly behind a roof post (you) screams at the top of his lungs
that the 3rd baseman missed the tag (with apologies to Uecker).

I'll waste not another nanosecond either reading or responding
to your inane posts or replies anywhere on usenet.

On Jan 29, 2:23*pm, Hoof Hearted > wrote:
> Evan wrote:
> >> >>>> > Or Pig Latin.
>
> >> >>>> Is that an attempt to indicate that you too (or should that be two)
> >> >>>> were totally flummoxed by that which wouldn't start to bewilder a
> >> >>>> retarded 10 year old in a hurry, i.e., the ROT13? Or might it have
> >> >>>> been the legal principle of res ipsa loquitur you mistook for "Pig
> >> >>>> Latin"? You're evidently quite easily confused, particularly by "that
> >> >>>> there book learnin'", or so you've provided every indication. Should
> >> >>>> it have been your intention to serve as Evan's either "savior to the
> >> >>>> rescue", or simply his surrogate, it is my considered opinion that you
> >> >>>> too have failed most miserably and have accomplished nothing more
> >> >>>> than joining him in the ranks of complete and utter embarrassments.
>
> >> >>>> But don't let me stop you, do continue to keep digging that hole.
>
> >> >>>> >>hilarious, you should seriously consider taking that pathetically
> >> >>>> >>feeble Dr. Irwin Corey-esque imitative routine on the road.
>
> >> >>>> >>> ~~ Evan
>
> >> >>> Other than using the fancy latin legal phraseology you have
> >> >>> yet to explain what duty of care exists as far as anything in
> >> >>> this thread OR how this unexplained phenomena speaks
> >> >>> anything let alone about itself in a legally sufficient way for
> >> >>> a lawsuit to be won or lost...
>
> >> >>> Let's look at the situation being discussed he
>
> >> >>Let's not, as none of my comments, nor any of those either you or
> >> >>KW (hopefully the abbreviation won't also confuse you) have objected
> >> >>to heretofore, had the slightest thing to do with anything other than
> >> >>the posting of a picture, although, given your laughably indefensible
> >> >>rebuttals, I can readily understand your desperate desire for
> >> >>obfuscation and misdirection.
>
> >> >>> OP installs the "mirror" and an accident occurs --
>
> >> >>> The existence of the mirror itself means that the OP was
> >> >>> aware of and took action to mitigate some deficiency of
> >> >>> design or installation of the driveway... *The fact that the
> >> >>> mirror itself exists creates an increased duty of care on
> >> >>> the part of the OP because he has been aware of some
> >> >>> danger so when an accident eventually occurs he will
> >> >>> face a much greater burden to overcome in proving it
> >> >>> wasn't his fault...
>
> >> >>> OP cuts down all the brush to improve visibility --
>
> >> >>> The trimming of the bushes by themselves proves nothing,
> >> >>> it is just as reasonable an assertion to make that the brush
> >> >>> was trimmed and/or removed to allow for a wider path in the
> >> >>> driveway, to reduce the chance that brush overhanging the
> >> >>> driveway would scratch the OP's vehicles... *Increasing the
> >> >>> visibility is only one reasonable explanation for explaining
> >> >>> the fact that the brush was cut down...
>
> >> >>> A mirror can only be used to increase visibility -- cutting
> >> >>> bushes/brush away can have many numerous causalities...
>
> >> >>> So do you want to fit your fancy words to the case at point
> >> >>> counselor
>
> >> >>I'm not a counselor, in the legal sense you imply, I'm an engineer.
>
> >> >>> or do you want to espouse more of your bull****
> >> >>> and pig latin non-sense ?
>
> >> >>You've not come REMOTELY close to describing ANYTHING I've
> >> >>penned as either bull****, pig latin or nonsense. You should be
>
> >> > Really? * Explain what value bringing up Norton and Thevenin
> >> > equivalent circuit has added to the conversation?
>
> >> Not only was it clearly implicit, it was later explained in painful
> >> detail to you already, so I'm quite sure any additional spoonfed
> >> instruction is certain to also strike nothing save more dead brain
> >> cells and would accordingly continue to only serve to mimic your
> >> own "contributions" as a complete waste of time and bandwidth.
>
> >> > Wait! *I know Nothing.
>
> >> With the simple, astute deletion of a single element of
> >> punctuation, I've fixed it for you and clarified its truth.
>
> >> >>embarrassed, and would be, had you the capacity to be.
>
> >> >>PS The reason for the truncated earlier osts is due to the
> >> >>servers complaint and restriction of "too many quoted lines".
>
> >> >>> ~~ Evan
>
> > ** SNIFF **
>
> > Troll... *Definitely troll...
>
> You're a good driver, definitely a good driver.
>
> But here, one final time, is an analogous approach to the reasoning
> for my N&TEC cite, although also unlikely, you just might be capable
> of understanding, given that you haven't been able to grasp the
> patently obvious presented to you umpteen times already:
>
> In this scenario we have an umpire (me) calling the base runner
> out at 3rd while the height challenged, one-eyed, bespectacled,
> mental patient sitting at the rear of the far right field stands,
> directly behind a roof post (you) screams at the top of his lungs
> that the 3rd baseman missed the tag (with apologies to Uecker).
>
> I'll waste not another nanosecond either reading or responding
> to your inane posts or replies anywhere on usenet.


AWWWWWWW....

Why should I care about what a troll with all of 14 posts on
UseNet thinks... Go hide back under a bridge, or better yet
emerge with a new persona/identity in a few days on another
group like you trolls tend to do...

You added NOTHING to this topic discussion...

Hoping that you choose to find something useful to do with
yourself that doesn't involve the internet...

~~ Evan

Evan wrote:
> On Jan 29, 2:23 pm, Hoof Hearted > wrote:
>> Evan wrote:
>
> AWWWWWWW....
>
> Why should I care about what a troll with all of 14 posts on
> UseNet thinks... Go hide back under a bridge, or better yet
> emerge with a new persona/identity in a few days on another
> group like you trolls tend to do...
>
> You added NOTHING to this topic discussion...
>
> Hoping that you choose to find something useful to do with
> yourself that doesn't involve the internet...
>
> ~~ Evan

Sorry, but I agree with Hoof on this. He had you two dead-to-rights on
every point, in my opinion.