[R-390] Trim Caps on Mechanical Filters

[Tim Shoppa]

"Barry" <N4BUQ at aol.com> wrote:
> I don't get it.  Tim posted some comments about two decks, one without
> trimmers and one with them, and maybe hinted that there seems to be
> sufficient room to add the trimmers to the non-timmer deck.  What's wrong
> with that??

The same thing that happens every couple of months on this list.

A "regular" writes whatever he feels and expects the world to
interpret it like he wanted (e.g., if it's factually wrong then of course
the words were intended to be taken only rhetorically and not for
any fact-based purposes. If it were just a simple and true fact, why would
he build several pages of rhetoric up around it, after all?)

A "newbie" like me comes by and checks out the facts, and doesn't
know enough to keep his mouth shut when he finds out that his
literal interpretation doesn't match reality.

Friction ensues, the newbie is put in his place through a series
of sarcastic and denigrating comments (often making the newbie a fool for
something the newbie never even wrote - it was some argument that came up 
30 or 40 or 50 years ago when the "regular" was in the service and that he
never won, but now he has a newbie to beat up over it), and the newbie 
learns to shut up and stop contributing.

I'm not saying that all the above happened to me this time around.
But I've spent a lot of time perusing this list's archives and the
pattern seems common overall.

What seems so pointless about this particular round is that I fully
agree with Roger that it doesn't make economic/functional sense to
add trimmers to an IF deck without them.  Yet all of a sudden I've
become the poster boy for wanting to add trimmers to IF decks (a
position that I never advocated!!!).  And all this just
because I went and looked at both early and late decks and posted
a list of differences and not-differences between the two.

Tim.