Path: ...!buffer1.nntp.dca1.giganews.com!nntp.brightview.co.uk!news.brightview.co.uk.POSTED!not-for-mail
NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 03 Jul 2022 06:25:25 -0500
Date: Sun, 3 Jul 2022 12:25:25 +0100
MIME-Version: 1.0
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.15; rv:91.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/91.11.0
Subject: Re: 'Vampire' devices?
Content-Language: en-GB
Newsgroups: uk.comp.sys.mac
References: <t9nd61$ksg$1@gioia.aioe.org> <t9ne8d$2b506$1@dont-email.me>
 <TN2dnStZfv4FdiL_nZ2dnUU7-N_NnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <t9oqu5$2i6pc$1@alanrichardbarker.eternal-september.org>
 <mbqdncXsRb6Nil3_nZ2dnUU7-WHNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <t9pobf$2l9d4$1@dont-email.me>
 <6vWdnS3sLJUd4V3_nZ2dnUU7-IHNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <t9q3h0$2mfjj$1@dont-email.me>
 <ap6dnbREmN1KWF3_nZ2dnUU7-fnNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <t9qlil$2o7kl$1@dont-email.me>
 <otadnaKVS-Tp2Fz_nZ2dnUU7-InNnZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
 <t9rnmd$2vv6m$1@dont-email.me>
From: Andy Hewitt <thewildrover@icloud.com>
In-Reply-To: <t9rnmd$2vv6m$1@dont-email.me>
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Message-ID: <tp-dnVYLf8U44Vz_nZ2dnUU7-eednZ2d@brightview.co.uk>
Lines: 47
X-Usenet-Provider: http://www.giganews.com
X-Trace: sv3-Kna2l8vfAwaQim799U8HqdjQ0OSHfYYuyZ1WO6+umslfxQSemiEAsHtyOZDCWw/NhobUT6NFh7MQW1U!LCvKqStRSUOL9gyjYl8qyllLRG7HhRNKaqIQsZfb9ZhnwJC8Po/TWLSH/Dr/xZv3HhVgQUruo0yu!el/ifeK0DWxsCJzIOug76uVlifP7
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Please be sure to forward a copy of ALL headers
X-Abuse-and-DMCA-Info: Otherwise we will be unable to process your complaint properly
X-Postfilter: 1.3.40
Bytes: 3321

On 03/07/2022 10:31, T i m wrote:
> On 03/07/2022 08:29, Andy Hewitt wrote:

>>>> (these do have built in Smart-Eco mode, so only use the energy when 
>>>> needed), so I don't have a need to change anything.
>>>
>>> Where have I suggested you did?
>>
>> You said: "Now, I'm going to predict none of that would be of any 
>> interest to you, you preferring to stick with the TV you hand crank 
>> for fear of being accused of being 'lazy'"
> 
> And it seems I was right (plus it was a joke). ;-)

No, you're wrong. It was of interest, but doesn't turn out to be a 
viable alternative, for me. Yeah, I see the joke.

> <snip>
> 
>>> Again, this isn't a pissing contest Andy (although you seem intent on 
>>> making them such?), this is just a real-world response to your 
>>> statements.
>>
>> I'm in no competition. See Above.
> 
> Good, it just seems that when I suggest a scenario that I happened to 
> find 'better' (in this case, also better technically and much lower 
> running costs) you tell me why it couldn't work for you and why your 
> solution is 'better', even when you admit you haven't really looked into 
> it?

I've certainly considered alternatives over the years. And I never said 
anything was 'better'.

[..]

> Why are you the only one who has taken my discussion as a suggestion my 
> solution *would* be good for everyone?

The issue we have is that you've taken this to a far too personal, and 
detailed level than I intended, and brought across a comment from 
another thread, just to confuse things, and whether intentional or not, 
stir things up a bit. My issue is that I don't know when to quit ;-) 
(sorry guys).

-- 
Andy H