> But the first missive in this chain was
> somewhat disturbing, Methinks the gent origionating the message/diatribe
> had a rather high opinion of himself.

Or perhaps he was just ... being human.  Maybe communicating an anecdote
with people he considers to be his peers. Maybe having a bad day and under
a lot of pressure. Maybe the salespersons attitude was the gist of the
problem.  The problem with this form of communication is there are no
facial expressions or hand gestures or tone of voice to convey intent. Even
lengthy messages require brevity and valuable information gets lost along
the way.  Tolerance and reading between the lines will generally smooth the
rough edges.

Wagner has been on this list for sometime and like any relationship feels
he 'knows' us to some extent. Some better than others.  It might have been
nothing more than "Whew ! I'm having a bad day and to make matters worse
...."

Take the gentleman who first flamed Wagner.  If we were peers, face to f
ace, and I relayed the exact same anecdote in person, would he have
responded so vehemently ? If I knew him, and he knew me ?  If so, then I
personally wouldn't want to know that person and would guess he has a hard
time making friends <g>.  Because, to me, _he_ would be the one with a high
opinion of himself. Now I know that they _don't_ know each other. It is a
problem unique to this form of communication but sarcasm and scathing
comments are still unproductive and serve to degrade communication no
matter whether you know the person or not.

Anyone who has not had a similar experience or perhaps been a little harsh
on another human being, please speak up. It would be nice to be perfect,
but those damn emotions always get in the way.

The original flamer preaches tolerance but doesn't seem to think it applys
to him.  In fact, in his posts, I would say he is guilty of the very
transgressions he so vehemently condems.  Who knows, maybe he was belittled
by a peer shortly before reading Wagner's first post. See ? That one tiny
piece of information would coompletely change my attitude towards his
posts.

Consider this a flame against flames <bg>.

Eric <Bored and talkative on Friday night>
Yes, Wagner, I know I should be reading the PIC datasheets instead of
engaging in OT debate <bg>.

> Unfortunatly seeme to me his was rather to find fault in others. I mean
> jeez all the poor salesman did wrong was not to be a
> walking encyclopedia of wire data and {GASP} try to be helpfull TO THE
BEST
> of his ability. SHOOT THE FOOL he is a poor example of humanity
> Now in a more serious vein what was wrong there? If the Engineers
> experience was so great why not let the little guy say his piece
> and just consider the source. I mean after all his data was pretty close
to
> being correct and reading between the lines it was obvious to me that the
> sales person was parroting something that he had read, Not repeating his
> personal experience.
> And Finally My experience with coiled cords is 20 years old BUT the
ribbon
> wires would break and worse the insulation piercing
> spade (yes spade lugs) lugs were a frequent source of problems with less
> than 200 ma of current flow. Some new cords wouldn't work 10 minutes.
> BTW the cord was used to pulse a ledex rotary relay in an old car
telephone
> I was asked to re engineer...
>
>
> At 05:37 PM 7/2/99 -0400, you wrote:
> >Last one, I promise.
> >
> >I just applied 1.4 amps in that coiled 4 wires in parallel, it just
> >dropped 0.13 Volts, what gives me a total resistance of 0.0975 Ohms in
> >6ft cable.  A total power dissipated of 30mW per ft is acceptable for a
> >800mA 15 minutes glorious demo to a customer.  For sure Robert, for the
> >series production I would not go to BellSouth handset coiled flexible
> >cables, a heavy cable literature is the best choice, I agree with you.
> >But requiring the cable at 10:00am to a demo at 01:00pm is something
> >that no cable company could delivery as fast as the headset cable, not
> >from RadioShack, but from K-Mart... :)
> >
> >When somebody says to me "YOU CAN NOT DO IT", but he doesn't know
> >exactly why, it sounds to me one of two possibilities:
> >
> >1) His knowledge is suspected, so I would delight myself exploring his
> >information resources.
> >
> >2) However, if this guy is in militar clothes, pointing a machine gun to
> >me, and there are tanks and helicopters all around, then I am in a
> >military dictated country, I would delight myself to the first
> >international airport.
> >
> >...next time at RadioShack I would be listening my portable CD player
> >with earphones... :)
> >
> >Wagner.
> >
> >"Robert K. Johnson" wrote:
> >>
> >>         I wasn't aware that an EE degree was a requirement for a sales
> position at
> >> Radio Shack... Seems to me that the sales persom was trying to do him
a
> >> favor...
> >> BTW Telephone Coiled handset cords are probably the poorest choice for
ANY
> >> load greater than 50 MA. Typically they are composed of small flat
(ribbon)
> >> conductors wrapped around a fiber filler... At least this is the
experience
> >> of this 53 year old Engineer... REALLY! why would anyone oin his rifgt
mind
> >> expect a salesman at an appliance store that stocks a limited number
of
> >> parts to be an expert on all parameters of the materials they sell...
> >> Suppost next it is justifiable to be angry with the person for not
knowing
> >> the 1/2 power beamwidth of every led that the store stocks. In My
> >> profession I first detirmine the wire that is required (most wire
catalogs
> >> are free if not directly on the internet) and then it is a simple task
to
> >> evaluate various possibilities... it seems to me that a 100 % margin
for a
> >> wire that needs to be flexed repeatedly is a very poor margin. That is
> >> however a matter of experience and preference... But 2 to 3 amps would
be a
> >> better choice...
> >
> >