In Reply to: having an example of the CLC posted by unclestu52 on September 14, 2008 at 22:27:03:
Ah Stu,
I really wasn't trying to detour the glorious march of human knowledge, progress and happiness. Just couldn't resist having a little fun with Geoff and his "I'll tell you what it's not" approach to questions.
As I recall, your operative premise was that this stuff actually affected the gear and it's associated fields rather than the listener. Still of that mind?
With respect to setting the time, that's interesting. What time sounds the best? What time sounds the worst?. Those would be good data points.
As far as being willing to say "I don't know" I'm good there. In fact knowing that you don't know means that you're learning per the old adage: 'the more you learn the less you know'. So I can proudly say that I don't know how or if lot's of these tweaks work, but I'm interested...
Regards, Rick
This post is made possible by the generous support of people like you and our sponsors:
Follow Ups
- RE: having an example of the CLC - rick_m 08:27:46 09/15/08 (8)
- RE: having an example of the CLC - unclestu52 11:47:21 09/15/08 (7)
- addendum - unclestu52 15:47:03 09/28/08 (0)
- RE: "... the stopping of the action and restarting at at a different time interval seems to be the key." - geoffkait 07:08:02 09/16/08 (5)
- Although I dislike replying to your comments - unclestu52 11:27:40 09/16/08 (4)
- RE: Artificial atoms (ooops, I almost forgot) - geoffkait 16:20:48 09/16/08 (2)
- So according to your post above - unclestu52 21:44:50 09/16/08 (1)
- Good catch! - geoffkait 03:20:23 09/17/08 (0)
- Did you just wake up or something? - geoffkait 13:08:03 09/16/08 (0)