On Fri, 16 Dec 2005 17:57:08 +0000 (UTC), "Reg Edwards"
wrote:

I remain as an innocent, neutral bystander, in danger of being
unjustly accused of being a troll, whereas -
....
There's a simple factor of 2 involved somewhere.

Hmm, I asked a simple question involving your arbitrary use of a
factor of two (2) and you dismissed it as my "anger," or somesuch
clumsy diversion.

Most of your correspondence has been tainted with trolling, what is
different in this case?

Sorry, that is now two (2) simple questions which, no doubt, you will
find undecipherable. Don't worry, we are all capable of observing
that given Richard H. directly responded to your question with a
straight answer - your lack of returning to him puts this troll
squarely at your doorstep.

As for your observation (if it quacks like a troll...):
Computer programs, whose results are falsely taken as being gospel
truths, don't agree on the subject.
it seems you are now the author of two (2) such programs that covers
both sides of the argument. I suppose the chance of being 50% right
outweighs the risk of being 100% wrong. ;-)

That, of course, presumes an insecure perspective (which is validated
by having two answers for any question - rather returns us to your
typical trolls, doesn't it?).

Lord Kelvinator is winding up another pitch to wing a chunk of
railroad chalk off your noggin'. Watching you duck throughout these
threads has become an amusing prospect.

Thanx for the entertainment,
Richard Clark, KB7QHC