|
"class_a_zpk_12wpm" .uk.net wrote in message ... On Sat, 11 Oct 2003 18:14:40 +0100, "A Veteran Has Lung" wrote: DAMN! I thought you were going to say throat/wrists, and was going to reply that in your case it is an excellent idea. Not you've gone and spoiled all my fun now now. whilst you may not enjoy the same opinions as Airy or anyone else for that matter...who expresses their opinion through various uses of the english language.... wishing them dead or worse is not cricket ol' boy. Who said anything about dead my good man, purely suffering in silence would suffice... |
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:30:18 +0100, "A Veteran Has Lung"
wrote: Who said anything about dead my good man, purely suffering in silence would suffice... ok then...i'll let you off this time (!!) on a lighter note... just paid a visit to a certain laughing p----- website http://www.laughingpoliceman.com/loony.htm and look at the picture in the bottom left hand 'corner-ish' (entitled 'care in the community') priceless!!! |
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 20:30:18 +0100, "A Veteran Has Lung"
wrote: Who said anything about dead my good man, purely suffering in silence would suffice... ok then...i'll let you off this time (!!) on a lighter note... just paid a visit to a certain laughing p----- website http://www.laughingpoliceman.com/loony.htm and look at the picture in the bottom left hand 'corner-ish' (entitled 'care in the community') priceless!!! |
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 19:44:22 GMT,
(class_a_zpk_12wpm) wrote: priceless!!! http://www.laughingpoliceman.com/images/idi.gif is just as good! |
On Wed, 15 Oct 2003 19:44:22 GMT,
(class_a_zpk_12wpm) wrote: priceless!!! http://www.laughingpoliceman.com/images/idi.gif is just as good! |
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message ... ISTR that the Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy of BT ran via a single master oscillator. Plesiochronous refers to a system with signals having a common data rate (within defined limits) which are sychronised to different clocks. Sometimes referred tp as 'nearly synchronised'. ie no 'master clock', with or without a remontoire ;-). In a plesiochronous switched data system, the signals may be synchronised at a given instant permitting switching withourt loss of frames but, when the signals drift apart, the switches must compensate by a process known as 'frame slip'- not required in a system synchronised to a master oscillator. I've no doubt you will respond with 'rubbish' etc. but I invite the others on the NG to look up the term and decide who is correct. -- 73 Brian G8OSN www.g8osn.org.uk www.amateurradiotraining.org.uk for FREE training material for the UK Foundation and Intermediate Licences www.phoenixradioclub.org.uk - a RADIO club specifically for those wishing to learn more about amateur radio |
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message ... ISTR that the Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy of BT ran via a single master oscillator. Plesiochronous refers to a system with signals having a common data rate (within defined limits) which are sychronised to different clocks. Sometimes referred tp as 'nearly synchronised'. ie no 'master clock', with or without a remontoire ;-). In a plesiochronous switched data system, the signals may be synchronised at a given instant permitting switching withourt loss of frames but, when the signals drift apart, the switches must compensate by a process known as 'frame slip'- not required in a system synchronised to a master oscillator. I've no doubt you will respond with 'rubbish' etc. but I invite the others on the NG to look up the term and decide who is correct. -- 73 Brian G8OSN www.g8osn.org.uk www.amateurradiotraining.org.uk for FREE training material for the UK Foundation and Intermediate Licences www.phoenixradioclub.org.uk - a RADIO club specifically for those wishing to learn more about amateur radio |
"Brian Reay" wrote in message ... "Airy R. Bean" wrote in message ... ISTR that the Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy of BT ran via a single master oscillator. Plesiochronous refers to a system with signals having a common data rate (within defined limits) which are sychronised to different clocks. Sometimes referred tp as 'nearly synchronised'. ie no 'master clock', with or without a remontoire ;-). In a plesiochronous switched data system, the signals may be synchronised at a given instant permitting switching withourt loss of frames but, when the signals drift apart, the switches must compensate by a process known as 'frame slip'- not required in a system synchronised to a master oscillator. I've no doubt you will respond with 'rubbish' etc. but I invite the others on the NG to look up the term and decide who is correct. Yep, checks out. Gareth downed in one. Will he have the sense to crawl back under his stone or start a personal attack? Bayes theory points to the latter. Next round please. --- Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.518 / Virus Database: 316 - Release Date: 11/09/03 |
"Brian Reay" wrote in message ... "Airy R. Bean" wrote in message ... ISTR that the Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy of BT ran via a single master oscillator. Plesiochronous refers to a system with signals having a common data rate (within defined limits) which are sychronised to different clocks. Sometimes referred tp as 'nearly synchronised'. ie no 'master clock', with or without a remontoire ;-). In a plesiochronous switched data system, the signals may be synchronised at a given instant permitting switching withourt loss of frames but, when the signals drift apart, the switches must compensate by a process known as 'frame slip'- not required in a system synchronised to a master oscillator. I've no doubt you will respond with 'rubbish' etc. but I invite the others on the NG to look up the term and decide who is correct. Yep, checks out. Gareth downed in one. Will he have the sense to crawl back under his stone or start a personal attack? Bayes theory points to the latter. Next round please. --- Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.518 / Virus Database: 316 - Release Date: 11/09/03 |
Careful, OM, your true motivation is showing through, and
once again it's not the pursuit of technical excellence, it is a desire to do a Childish Broadcast (CB). Grow up. "decide who is correct"? Since when was this topic one of your childish sneering contests? Stupid boy. Brian Reay wrote in message ... I've no doubt you will respond with 'rubbish' etc. but I invite the others on the NG to look up the term and decide who is correct. |
Careful, OM, your true motivation is showing through, and
once again it's not the pursuit of technical excellence, it is a desire to do a Childish Broadcast (CB). Grow up. "decide who is correct"? Since when was this topic one of your childish sneering contests? Stupid boy. Brian Reay wrote in message ... I've no doubt you will respond with 'rubbish' etc. but I invite the others on the NG to look up the term and decide who is correct. |
Whereas your explanation offers further information (it was
an in-joke at the time to state that the derivation came from the Plessey company, rather than from the Greco prefix, "Plesio" meaning "nearly" as you say (also used in, "Plesiosaur", nearly a lizard)), it does not give the lie to what I said, despite your childish desperation to claim that it does. There was a single master oscillator AIUI, but when service finally came into exchanges via different links, it would result in many phases of the frame dependant upon the route by which signals had transited through the network, each link being subject to frame slip, as you state. The links were configured such that one end was the master clock, and as such gave rise to a single master oscillator at some point in the network. My memory may be in error on this matter, but I am only human, I have never claimed omniscience and it is 8 or 9 years since I worked on such system. No doubt this will pass you by, and we can expect your usual childish broadcast (CB) sneering at some minor error. How is it ever possible to hold a technical discussion with you when you exhibit such a personality defect, OM? Why do you have to turn every technical discussion into a ****ing contest? Are you that desperate to save the face that you have undoubtedly lost by being a proponent of the M3/CB Fool's Licence? You would certainly seem to be one of the fools for whom the licence was intended. Brian Reay wrote in message ... "Airy R. Bean" wrote in message ... ISTR that the Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy of BT ran via a single master oscillator. Plesiochronous refers to a system with signals having a common data rate (within defined limits) which are sychronised to different clocks. Sometimes referred tp as 'nearly synchronised'. ie no 'master clock', with or without a remontoire ;-). In a plesiochronous switched data system, the signals may be synchronised at a given instant permitting switching withourt loss of frames but, when the signals drift apart, the switches must compensate by a process known as 'frame slip'- not required in a system synchronised to a master oscillator. I've no doubt you will respond with 'rubbish' etc. but I invite the others on the NG to look up the term and decide who is correct. |
Whereas your explanation offers further information (it was
an in-joke at the time to state that the derivation came from the Plessey company, rather than from the Greco prefix, "Plesio" meaning "nearly" as you say (also used in, "Plesiosaur", nearly a lizard)), it does not give the lie to what I said, despite your childish desperation to claim that it does. There was a single master oscillator AIUI, but when service finally came into exchanges via different links, it would result in many phases of the frame dependant upon the route by which signals had transited through the network, each link being subject to frame slip, as you state. The links were configured such that one end was the master clock, and as such gave rise to a single master oscillator at some point in the network. My memory may be in error on this matter, but I am only human, I have never claimed omniscience and it is 8 or 9 years since I worked on such system. No doubt this will pass you by, and we can expect your usual childish broadcast (CB) sneering at some minor error. How is it ever possible to hold a technical discussion with you when you exhibit such a personality defect, OM? Why do you have to turn every technical discussion into a ****ing contest? Are you that desperate to save the face that you have undoubtedly lost by being a proponent of the M3/CB Fool's Licence? You would certainly seem to be one of the fools for whom the licence was intended. Brian Reay wrote in message ... "Airy R. Bean" wrote in message ... ISTR that the Plesiochronous Digital Hierarchy of BT ran via a single master oscillator. Plesiochronous refers to a system with signals having a common data rate (within defined limits) which are sychronised to different clocks. Sometimes referred tp as 'nearly synchronised'. ie no 'master clock', with or without a remontoire ;-). In a plesiochronous switched data system, the signals may be synchronised at a given instant permitting switching withourt loss of frames but, when the signals drift apart, the switches must compensate by a process known as 'frame slip'- not required in a system synchronised to a master oscillator. I've no doubt you will respond with 'rubbish' etc. but I invite the others on the NG to look up the term and decide who is correct. |
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
... Careful, OM, your true motivation is showing through, and once again it's not the pursuit of technical excellence, it is a desire to do a Childish Broadcast (CB). Grow up. "decide who is correct"? Since when was this topic one of your childish sneering contests? There was no 'sneering' - merely an attempt, which seems to have worked, to limit you from responding a tirade of pointless and abuse posts. |
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message
... Careful, OM, your true motivation is showing through, and once again it's not the pursuit of technical excellence, it is a desire to do a Childish Broadcast (CB). Grow up. "decide who is correct"? Since when was this topic one of your childish sneering contests? There was no 'sneering' - merely an attempt, which seems to have worked, to limit you from responding a tirade of pointless and abuse posts. |
You're in a world of make-believe. (Make-believe that the
M3/CB is a Ham licence, perhaps?) I have not behaved in the way that you accuse. I have merely responded to defend myself against your gratuitous and somewhat childish outbursts. You seem to be more and more desperate to save the face that you have undoubtedly lost by your support for the gangrenous degeneration that is the M3/CB licence, and you are increasingly making it up as you go along. Yesterday you sneered that I would not have the strength of character to express my view points face-to-face; yet you've never met me and you therefore do not know that my viewpoints are the same whether in speech or in Usenet. You have no basis for such a gratuitous and childish sneer. You accuse me of diverting attention away from points in discussion, but it is you who is creating silly diversions with your straw men. Take your battles to "prove" that I am always wrong - I foster technical discussion based upon the things that I am interested in and the things that I have done. It seems that each time I come up with a new topic, you rush off to a reference somewhere to prove me wrong; the style of what you produce when you do that is very much that of a quotation from a reference site and not the plethora of grammatical and syntactical errors that is your norm that would result from a demonstration that your knowledge is better then mine. The conclusion to this is obvious - as a typical M3/CBer, you have widespread ignorance and can only prolong these battles by quoting a reference - evidence of your ignorance, and evidence that the battle that you engender to "prove" me wrong leaves you as the loser through ignorance. You really are a prize chump. Brian Reay wrote in message ... "Airy R. Bean" wrote in message ... Careful, OM, your true motivation is showing through, and once again it's not the pursuit of technical excellence, it is a desire to do a Childish Broadcast (CB). Grow up. "decide who is correct"? Since when was this topic one of your childish sneering contests? There was no 'sneering' - merely an attempt, which seems to have worked, to limit you from responding a tirade of pointless and abuse posts. |
You're in a world of make-believe. (Make-believe that the
M3/CB is a Ham licence, perhaps?) I have not behaved in the way that you accuse. I have merely responded to defend myself against your gratuitous and somewhat childish outbursts. You seem to be more and more desperate to save the face that you have undoubtedly lost by your support for the gangrenous degeneration that is the M3/CB licence, and you are increasingly making it up as you go along. Yesterday you sneered that I would not have the strength of character to express my view points face-to-face; yet you've never met me and you therefore do not know that my viewpoints are the same whether in speech or in Usenet. You have no basis for such a gratuitous and childish sneer. You accuse me of diverting attention away from points in discussion, but it is you who is creating silly diversions with your straw men. Take your battles to "prove" that I am always wrong - I foster technical discussion based upon the things that I am interested in and the things that I have done. It seems that each time I come up with a new topic, you rush off to a reference somewhere to prove me wrong; the style of what you produce when you do that is very much that of a quotation from a reference site and not the plethora of grammatical and syntactical errors that is your norm that would result from a demonstration that your knowledge is better then mine. The conclusion to this is obvious - as a typical M3/CBer, you have widespread ignorance and can only prolong these battles by quoting a reference - evidence of your ignorance, and evidence that the battle that you engender to "prove" me wrong leaves you as the loser through ignorance. You really are a prize chump. Brian Reay wrote in message ... "Airy R. Bean" wrote in message ... Careful, OM, your true motivation is showing through, and once again it's not the pursuit of technical excellence, it is a desire to do a Childish Broadcast (CB). Grow up. "decide who is correct"? Since when was this topic one of your childish sneering contests? There was no 'sneering' - merely an attempt, which seems to have worked, to limit you from responding a tirade of pointless and abuse posts. |
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message ... Whereas your explanation offers further information (it was an in-joke at the time to state that the derivation came from the Plessey company, rather than from the Greco prefix, "Plesio" meaning "nearly" as you say (also used in, "Plesiosaur", nearly a lizard)), it does not give the lie to what I said, despite your childish desperation to claim that it does. There was a single master oscillator AIUI, but when service finally came into exchanges via different links, it would result in many phases of the frame dependant upon the route by which signals had transited through the network, each link being subject to frame slip, as you state. The links were configured such that one end was the master clock, and as such gave rise to a single master oscillator at some point in the network. My memory may be in error on this matter, but I am only human, I have never claimed omniscience and it is 8 or 9 years since I worked on such system. No doubt this will pass you by, and we can expect your usual childish broadcast (CB) sneering at some minor error. How is it ever possible to hold a technical discussion with you when you exhibit such a personality defect, OM? Why do you have to turn every technical discussion into a ****ing contest? Childish Banter? --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 09/10/03 |
"Airy R. Bean" wrote in message ... Whereas your explanation offers further information (it was an in-joke at the time to state that the derivation came from the Plessey company, rather than from the Greco prefix, "Plesio" meaning "nearly" as you say (also used in, "Plesiosaur", nearly a lizard)), it does not give the lie to what I said, despite your childish desperation to claim that it does. There was a single master oscillator AIUI, but when service finally came into exchanges via different links, it would result in many phases of the frame dependant upon the route by which signals had transited through the network, each link being subject to frame slip, as you state. The links were configured such that one end was the master clock, and as such gave rise to a single master oscillator at some point in the network. My memory may be in error on this matter, but I am only human, I have never claimed omniscience and it is 8 or 9 years since I worked on such system. No doubt this will pass you by, and we can expect your usual childish broadcast (CB) sneering at some minor error. How is it ever possible to hold a technical discussion with you when you exhibit such a personality defect, OM? Why do you have to turn every technical discussion into a ****ing contest? Childish Banter? --- Outgoing mail is certified Virus Free. Checked by AVG anti-virus system (http://www.grisoft.com). Version: 6.0.525 / Virus Database: 322 - Release Date: 09/10/03 |
| All times are GMT +1. The time now is 07:35 AM. |
Powered by vBulletin® Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
RadioBanter.com