Michael Rigby-Jones wrote:
> No, he didn't say that at all, I think you are being deliberately
> obtuse here.

Actually he did.  His exact sentence was:

  "If you want to manually adjust the pot, you turn the knob and
  the disks slip by each other allowing the pot to turn, but the
  motor doesn't turn, therefore it doesn't offer any resistance
  to movement."

It is quite clear that he thinks the motor offers less resistance because i=
t
doesn't turn, when in fact if offers maximum resistance in that case.

> I suspect everyone but you realised that the OP means
> that the action of the clutch slipping prevents the motor from
> offering (too much) resistance to turning the knob.

Read what he said, not what you'd like to explain it away as.  I thought at
first it might have been unfortunate wording too, but then he tried defend
his statement instead of just saying "oops".

> It required absolutely complex analysis of the OP's post for me to
> understand this; I have to wonder why you had so much trouble?

It shouldn't take "analysis" at all to figure out what someone really meant=
..
In any case, we're not obligated to do that, and neither is it a good idea.
If you don't want to be misunderstood, write more undestandably.

You also have conveniently forgotten what actually happened here.  Jim made
the statement I quoted above as part of a larger post.  I thought it a mino=
r
accidental error at the time, but just wanted to make sure the record was
straight.  My only response to his statement above was:

  "Therefore it *does* offer resistance to movement."

It was a simple correction, not a indictment.  Then Jim decided to get all
pissy with:

  "Excuse me for living."

Then clarifying what could have been a minor error was in fact just plain
wrong:

  "Therefore, it offer little resistance to movement."

To me, and I expect to many, it's pretty obvious what really happened.  Jim
miswrote something.  But when he got called on it he got all defensive and
tried to indict the messenger to distract from his mistake.  I'm not going
to let him get away with that, especially when I'm the messenger.  What
could have been a quickly forgotten minor error became a public stupidity b=
y
his jumping up and down and attracting attention to it.  When I responded
with more technical detail, his answer was "Whatever".  In other words "I
realize now I screwed up and can't win this, so I'm going to pretend it
doesn't matter even after I got all pissy about being corrected.".  I have
no intention of letting someone with that kind of attitude get away with
anything.


********************************************************************
Embed Inc, Littleton Massachusetts, http://www.embedinc.com/products
(978) 742-9014.  Gold level PIC consultants since 2000.
--=20
http://www.piclist.com PIC/SX FAQ & list archive
View/change your membership options at
http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/piclist
.