OT: Saturn Images

Peter,

Sorry to have to do this,

2) There may be some gas combustion on in and around Saturn but I do not count it as an engine.

astronomy ng perhaps?

Nothing personal!

Regards,

John MS

It's allegorical - the rings of saturn represent Roland's Petter M main bearing oiling rings!

Thats the problem, unlike the rings of Saturn they don't revolve :-)

Regards

Philip T-E

Aside from the fact that they are amazing examples of applied technology - thanks Peter - one might make a reasonable case that Saturn is a heat engine within the meaning of the broader term, especially as it is a gas giant. ;o))

As for not being stationary - neither are we! All of us have an axial surface speed of around a thousand miles an hour but we ought not to forget orbital velocity, system rotation in respect of both our own galaxy and the universe and (IIRC) entropic creep in respect of string theory.

I think we are damned lucky to find our engines are still where we left them and have not vanished in a puff of logic.

Tongue in cheek here, gentlemen, as I suspect JM-S intended .

Regards,

Kim Siddorn,

Hi All, Should I make a comment ? er no best not to don't want to upset any one!

Regards Steve.

OK Kim, could you expand on General Relativity or did the Vikings keep it secret? :-)

Go on then, John, tell us all just how sorry you are. With respect to those who've posted on this topic already, I think they're being a little too charitable. I found your post presumptuous and offensive.

We've had OT posts on aircraft and lawnmowers in the last few days, but you passed no comment on those. Then at the end of your post, you say, "Nothing personal!"

Oh really? As has been mentioned recently, some have short memories, I remember the content of the acidic post with which you relaunched yourself here, not all that long ago. Google will remember it too.....

So when did you appoint yourself as the NG moderator? I don't remember a vote. I had the impression that George Hendry was informally doing a fine job already.

While this group is nominally and primarily about stationary engines, we often wander off on other science and engineering tangents. I find this quite acceptable and often learn from it. If a post doesn't interest me, then I don't follow it. I suggest you adopt this policy, rather than trying to influence others about content to make it suit your own tastes.

Arthur G

"John Macdonald Smith" wrote

Sorry to have to do this,

who've posted on this topic already, I

and offensive.

passed no comment on those. Then at the end

remember the content of the acidic post with

remember it too.....

vote. I had the impression that George Hendry

wander off on other science and

interest me, then I don't follow it. I suggest

make it suit your own tastes.

Arthur,

I'm not quite sure why I am replying to this but I am.

This will be the last post I make on this newsgroup. Which I hope will improve your day.

I was trying in a light hearted way to remind people that this newsgroup is meant to be about engines. A place for debate,discussion and the exchange of advice on SE related topics. I do appologise to anybody I might have offended in any way at all.

I will now pick up my toys and wheel my pram elsewhere.

Regards,

John MS

It's long years since I had much to do with it - if you can't deal with it with a spanner or a sword, my brain frazzles and drips out of my ears.

However, I liked

Regards,

Kim - who knew perfectly well you were only foolin' ;op

Well done John, I knew one of them wouldn't be able to keep his pants dry!

BTW Peter, your right about these hotmail addresses. Bye

Steve

who've posted on this topic already, I

and offensive.

As has been mentioned recently, some have short memories, I remember the content of the acidic post with

remember it too.....

Arthur,

I am sure Johns post was meant in a tongue in cheek fashion, Its all too easy to interpret emails the wrong way sadly.

I personally don?t want to see threads degenerating into mud slinging exercises, having been educated by some of Johns postings on Hot-bulb engines I think its fair to say that he adds as much value as the next man.

As I say, Im sure it was tongue in cheek.

Regards

Chris Bedo Kent UK

On Fri, 9 Jul 2004 15:20:18 +0000 (UTC), "Chris Bedo"

Nor me, the thing I have learned about usenet is that open criticism that carries no constructive input affects more than the two individuals involved. It sours the atmosphere and dissuades people from posting.

The net result is the community of posters, here to learn or inform, shrinks, to the detriment of those of us who indulge in usenet for our interest.

That is why biting the tongue (or typing digit) is necessary even if one feels wronged.

It is also why feeding threads like this or trolls makes the group suffer, so I will desist now ;-).

AJH

Hi Again, O boy what are you lot like you need to go out in the shed and do something with your Engines and come back to your Pc,s tomorrow and things wont look so Bad !!!

Steve ( and yes it's me this time).

The acceptability of a correctly marked posting is completely understood by all regular participants and I welcome our occasional drifting from the point.

We have covered this ground before to the detriment of the NG and the resulting fallout led to the withdrawal of the enthusiastic participation of men whose knowledge and character I esteem and that I have come to think of as friends. It seems to me that this was done for no good reason, not for the good of the many nor to maintain some ideal of "purity", but to pursue some other aim that was not - nor is yet - apparent to me.

I naturally agree with both John and Chris that we should remain free of the unpleasantness that is such a feature of postings on Another Place(s). That said, I must stand with Arthur on this as I cannot for the life of me see what harm properly marked OT postings do. Therefore, I shall continue to make such postings when and where I think they are appropriate and welcome similar content from those whose opinion I value.

Regards,

Kim

Arthur

I believe you may have been mistaken John Macdonald Smith with me. I was the one who began the "Setting a standard" thread back in February although yes, John Macdonald Smith did come in on the thread. Looking back I regret having raised the thread because it was not my intention to cause the friction (trolling I believe is the description) that it did due to my misinterpretation of how this NG operates. To that end I admitted that I was in error after the first day but the thread carried on for a few days longer. My biggest regrets are that Peter Forbes decided to take a back seat although I am pleased he is now getting more involved again. Also that I may have (again unintentionally) labelled myself as a troublemaker so now tend to "lurk". The plus side was that John Macdonald Smith and I believe a couple of others started to take a more active role in the NG again.

John I cannot speak for Arthur but if he was mistaken then I would ask you to reconsider your decision to quit the NG.

Regards

JohnR

those who've posted on this topic already, I

presumptuous and offensive.

you passed no comment on those. Then at the end

remember the content of the acidic post with

remember it too.....

vote. I had the impression that George Hendry

often wander off on other science and

interest me, then I don't follow it. I suggest

content to make it suit your own tastes.

Those of the aggressors or appeasers?

Gentlemen, I promised myself I would not do this but what the hell. Well done Kim and Arthur, now I have more names for the kill file.

Martin P

I think its more useful to think in terms of the provokers and the provoked. The provoker, his apologist, and his apologist are all in my killfile and I don't see them unless someone is unwise enough to respond. I suggest AGAIN that they all be ignored and this thread terminated. ttfn Roland

Sorry, that was a miskate. The comment was supposed to be addressed to Martin direct and I pressed the wrong button ;-(

I have no desire to prolong the unpleasantness and hope we can draw a line under this and carry on in our usual friendly fashion.