Lancer wrote:
OK, but I agreed with that. I said that DX helps the splatter by this:
If he's in Florida talking on a bone stock radio, I won't hear him in
Los Angeles. Now, if he decides to fire up an amp, I still won't hear
him in LA.
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Now skip rolls in, I can here him without an amp
and with an amp, but on the adjacent channel, where the noise was zero,
I now have a ton of signals, so the skip didn't help those signals
"bounce into" LA? of course it did. Now the adjacent channel has more
"splatter" than before, skip didn't help enhance the noise level on my
end?
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0La ndshark

Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear.


Exactly,,it "affected it", which is exactly what I and Shark maintained,
to which some took issue with.


and skip also increased his splatter that you

hear.


Again,,,another example of skip affecting the splatter, Touche.


But

The relation between his signal and his

splatter doesn't change.


Skip affects splatter.

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:03:43 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

Lancer wrote:
OK, but I agreed with that. I said that DX helps the splatter by this:
If he's in Florida talking on a bone stock radio, I won't hear him in
Los Angeles. Now, if he decides to fire up an amp, I still won't hear
him in LA.
Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Now skip rolls in, I can here him without an amp
and with an amp, but on the adjacent channel, where the noise was zero,
I now have a ton of signals, so the skip didn't help those signals
"bounce into" LA? of course it did. Now the adjacent channel has more
"splatter" than before, skip didn't help enhance the noise level on my
end?
Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Â*Landshark

Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear.


Exactly,,it "affected it", which is exactly what I and Shark maintained,
to which some took issue with.


and skip also increased his splatter that you

hear.


Again,,,another example of skip affecting the splatter, Touche.


Quit clipping my posts apart to fit your needs. I was trying to point
out to Shark that skip will progate the original signal and the
splatter equally.


But

The relation between his signal and his

splatter doesn't change.


Skip affects splatter.

No more than the original part of his signal...

Do you think that skip effects the splatter component of his signal
more that the desirable part of his signal?

and it does not effect the realtionship between the two.

If the splatter components are at a 10% level compared to the level of
his signal, then with skip they will still be at that level.

Touche...

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:39:07 GMT, Lancer wrote:

On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:03:43 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

Lancer wrote:
OK, but I agreed with that. I said that DX helps the splatter by this:
If he's in Florida talking on a bone stock radio, I won't hear him in
Los Angeles. Now, if he decides to fire up an amp, I still won't hear
him in LA.
********Now skip rolls in, I can here him without an amp
and with an amp, but on the adjacent channel, where the noise was zero,
I now have a ton of signals, so the skip didn't help those signals
"bounce into" LA? of course it did. Now the adjacent channel has more
"splatter" than before, skip didn't help enhance the noise level on my
end?
****************Landshark

Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear.


Exactly,,it "affected it", which is exactly what I and Shark maintained,
to which some took issue with.


and skip also increased his splatter that you

hear.


Again,,,another example of skip affecting the splatter, Touche.


Quit clipping my posts apart to fit your needs.

That's exactly what he does. He destroys the original context to make
it look like you said something that you didn't.

He's either a clever troll or a someone who is totally devoid of
comprehension abilities.


I was trying to point
out to Shark that skip will progate the original signal and the
splatter equally.

Anyone with average intelligence understands this. But I guess some
seem to need the exact literal finite details colored in or they grasp
the wrong meaning.


But

The relation between his signal and his

splatter doesn't change.


Skip affects splatter.

No more than the original part of his signal...

Do you think that skip effects the splatter component of his signal
more that the desirable part of his signal?

and it does not effect the realtionship between the two.

Right! The relationship between the fundamental signal and the
splatter components present will not change with the variation of the
DX conditions. They move together harmoniously.

Dave
"Sandbagger"

From: (Dave=A0Hall)
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 18:39:07 GMT, Lancer wrote:
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:03:43 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:
Lancer wrote:
OK, but I agreed with that. I said that DX helps the splatter by this:
If he's in Florida talking on a bone stock radio, I won't hear him in
Los Angeles. Now, if he decides to fire up an amp, I still won't hear
him in LA.
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0Now skip rolls in, I can here him without an amp
and with an amp, but on the adjacent channel, where the noise was zero,
I now have a ton of signals, so the skip didn't help those signals
"bounce into" LA? of course it did. Now the adjacent channel has more
"splatter" than before, skip didn't help enhance the noise level on my
end?
=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0=A0La ndshark

Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear.

Exactly,,it "affected it", which is exactly what I and Shark maintained,
to which some took issue with.

and skip also increased his splatter that you

hear.

Again,,,another example of skip affecting the splatter, Touche.

Quit clipping my posts apart to fit your needs.

(That's exactly what he does. He destroys the

original context to make it look like you said

something that you didn't)



Now now Davie,,,,you are once again permitting your lack of personal
control over your emotions dictate your topics again...your lack of
education conerning communication etiquette and skill always manifests
in your posts when you disagree with someone. You never learned how to
debate and attack the topic or subject,,you attack the
poster.....illustrative of your ignorance.
Just for the record, he most certainly ackowldged the realtionship
between skip and splatter.

He's either a clever troll or a someone who is

totally devoid of comprehension abilities.


LOL,,you are the one needing to ask everyone else what they mean when
they use sixth grade terminology on a repeat and ongoing basis.

(I was trying to point

out to Shark that skip will progate the original

signal and the splatter equally.)


Funny,,,,here you are trying to make a point that you apparently think
Shark took issue with,,,,he didn;t,,and neither did I.

Anyone with average intelligence understands
this. But I guess some seem to need the exact
literal finite details colored in or they grasp the

wrong meaning.



Expressed superbly by the illustration of your posting history littered
with redundant questions of "What did you mean by...".
Only you have this difficulty and your posting history shows such,
Projecting your character flaws onto another won't make it so.

But

The relation between his signal and his

splatter doesn't change.

Skip affects splatter.

(No more than the original part of his signal...

Do you think that skip effects the splatter

component of his signal more that the

desirable part of his signal?

and it does not effect the realtionship between

the two.)

Right! The relationship between the

fundamental signal and the splatter

components present will not change with the

variation of the DX conditions. They move

together harmoniously.


Try and get lucid again, if you can muster the courage, Once again, you
aer talking to yourself. No one made such a claim that splatter changes
dx conditions, which is why you taking issue with yourself is such a
gift.


Dave

"Sandbagger"

N3CVJ

From: (Lancer)
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:03:43 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:
Lancer wrote:
OK, but I agreed with that. I said that DX helps the splatter by this:
If he's in Florida talking on a bone stock radio, I won't hear him in
Los Angeles. Now, if he decides to fire up an amp, I still won't hear
him in LA.
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0No w skip rolls in, I can
here him without an amp and with an amp, but on the adjacent channel,
where the noise was zero, I now have a ton of signals, so the skip
didn't help those signals "bounce into" LA? of course it did. Now the
adjacent channel has more "splatter" than before, skip didn't help
enhance the noise level on my end?
=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C 2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=
=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0=C2=A0Landshark
Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear.
Exactly,,it "affected it", which is exactly what I and Shark maintained,
to which some took issue with.
_
and skip also increased his splatter that you
hear.
_
Again,,,another example of skip affecting the splatter, Touche.

Quit clipping my posts apart to fit your needs.


Deal,,,IF you quit attempting to qualify exactly what I said by adding
components and additional words when I never said anything of the sort,
I'll stop snipping your posted parts that don't apply to anything I
said.

I was trying to point out to Shark that skip will

progate the original signal and the splatter

equally.

But

The relation between his signal and his

splatter doesn't change.

Skip affects splatter.

No more than the original part of his signal...


Skip affects splatter.

Do you think that skip effects the splatter

component of his signal more that the

desirable part of his signal?

And it does not effect the realtionship between
the two.

The mere acknolwedgement of an existing relationship between skip and
splatter is proof positive once again of the ONLY thing I
said,,,,,,,,"Skip affects splatter".


If the splatter components are at a 10% level

compared to the level of his signal, then with

skip they will still be at that level.

Touche...


You can make all the comments you want about what you want and
clarifications, as they sure as hell don't apply to anything I said,,I
emntioned nothing abotu levels, relationships, splatter boxes, etc,,,
Now,,,once again,,, here is the bottom line from your post...

Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear.

and skip also increased his splatter that you

hear.

,,let's see that again,,, just to make absolutely certain you aer saying
what I said originally..

skip increased his signal that you hear,,,

and lastly,,

and skip also increases his splatter that you

hear.

What's the problem? Adding additional clarifications like
"relationship", "splatter boxes",etc...has nothing to do with my
original statement or its context,,,the words were not mine. All I said
is exactly what you repeated above, Trying to invoke terms like
"relationship" *after* the fact when I NEVER mentioned such terms,
changes the dynamics and context of what I claimed,,,,the exact same
thing you claimed above.

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 11:06:29 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

From: (Lancer)
On Thu, 13 Jan 2005 12:03:43 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:
Lancer wrote:
OK, but I agreed with that. I said that DX helps the splatter by this:
If he's in Florida talking on a bone stock radio, I won't hear him in
Los Angeles. Now, if he decides to fire up an amp, I still won't hear
him in LA.
ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*Now skip rolls in, I can
here him without an amp and with an amp, but on the adjacent channel,
where the noise was zero, I now have a ton of signals, so the skip
didn't help those signals "bounce into" LA? of course it did. Now the
adjacent channel has more "splatter" than before, skip didn't help
enhance the noise level on my end?
ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*à ‚Â*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*Landshark
Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear.
Exactly,,it "affected it", which is exactly what I and Shark maintained,
to which some took issue with.
_
and skip also increased his splatter that you
hear.
_
Again,,,another example of skip affecting the splatter, Touche.

Quit clipping my posts apart to fit your needs.


Deal,,,IF you quit attempting to qualify exactly what I said by adding
components and additional words when I never said anything of the sort,
I'll stop snipping your posted parts that don't apply to anything I
said.

I was trying to point out to Shark that skip will

progate the original signal and the splatter

equally.

But

The relation between his signal and his

splatter doesn't change.

Skip affects splatter.

No more than the original part of his signal...


Skip affects splatter.

Do you think that skip effects the splatter

component of his signal more that the

desirable part of his signal?

And it does not effect the realtionship between
the two.

The mere acknolwedgement of an existing relationship between skip and
splatter is proof positive once again of the ONLY thing I
said,,,,,,,,"Skip affects splatter".


If the splatter components are at a 10% level

compared to the level of his signal, then with

skip they will still be at that level.

Touche...


You can make all the comments you want about what you want and
clarifications, as they sure as hell don't apply to anything I said,,I
emntioned nothing abotu levels, relationships, splatter boxes, etc,,,
Now,,,once again,,, here is the bottom line from your post...

Ok, skip increased his signal that you hear.

and skip also increased his splatter that you

hear.

,,let's see that again,,, just to make absolutely certain you aer saying
what I said originally..

skip increased his signal that you hear,,,

and lastly,,

and skip also increases his splatter that you

hear.

What's the problem? Adding additional clarifications like
"relationship", "splatter boxes",etc...has nothing to do with my
original statement or its context,,,the words were not mine. All I said
is exactly what you repeated above, Trying to invoke terms like
"relationship" *after* the fact when I NEVER mentioned such terms,
changes the dynamics and context of what I claimed,,,,the exact same
thing you claimed above.

Forget it Twist, all you want to do is make damn sure that Dave never
proves you wrong. If you want to keep twisting stuff around to make
yourself look better, feel free. But ya know what? Dave proved you
wrong this time.

Have a nice day...

ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*
ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*à ‚Â*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*

WTF is that, Twist!?

From: (Steveo)
=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C 3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=
=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0
=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C 3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=
=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=8 2=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=
=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0=C3=82=C2=A0
WTF is that, Twist!?
_
You mean you don't know? Email me,,,webtv is foolproof when quoting
certain posters and only certain usenet access services leave such
marks. Call it internet fingerprints.

On Fri, 14 Jan 2005 12:02:18 -0500, (Twistedhed)
wrote:

From: (Steveo)
ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*
ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ƚÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ* ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*ÂÂÂ*
WTF is that, Twist!?
_
ÂÂÂ*ÂÂYou mean you don't know? Email me,,,webtv is foolproof when
quoting certain posters and only certain usenet access services leave
such marks. Call it internet fingerprints.

Like this?

On 14 Jan 2005 16:43:30 GMT, Steveo
wrote:

ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*
ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*à ‚Â*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*ÂÂ*

WTF is that, Twist!?

He's "tagging" posts again........

Dave
"Sandbagger"