Questions about EGOR

[garfield at pilgrimhouse.com]

On Mon, 11 May 1998 20:40:09 -0700, "Bill Lawrance"
<blawranc at abc.az05.bull.com> wrote:

>I only know Ludis from his postings on this list, but based on these, he
>has an extremely accurate and detailed knowledge of the ECM's he is
>interested in.  I would be very surprised if he didn't know exactly
>what the power budget is in the ECM's he's interested in.

Ok, Ok, I may have been a tad hard on ole Lulu. I admit it. But ya
noticed I took the time to respond to his questions, rather than just
blow them off? In the beginning, I gave the twirp the benefit of the
doubt. Cuz here's what I see. A guy knows what he knows in the area he
knows. Problem is, he doesn't know what he doesn't know. That's alot
harder thing. So he waltzes into this other area, and figures, well, I
know my way around here, so I'll just button-hole these guys and see
what's what. So he ends up asking a few off-the-wall questions, and
EVERY post I've seen from him, it starts off with what seem like
reasonable questions, and then he ends up progressively sticking his
head up his orifice, ifyaknowwhadamean.

Give you an example; he starts by asking the seemingly innocent
question, that he wonders how much power EGOR takes, cuz he'd like to
run it off his ECM power. I say, OK, here's how much power EGOR takes,
but remember, it's always better to NOT presume on your ECM power
budget, cuz NOBODY, except the designers of the system, can know what
the available reserve is. NOBODY. He replys by saying, OH, yeah, but ALL
the sensors on normal ECM's run off ECM power, and besides my ECM has
lots of power features, so I'd like to use it. Features, smeatures, I
say, what about the issue I raised about presuming on the ECM power
budget?

Now YOU say, Oh Ludis is smart, he MUST know what the budget is. Yeah?,
BUZZZTT, you're lookin to the man rather than the facts. NOBODY knows!
NOBODY. Which was my point; so when some preppy lil puke comes back and
says, well Gar, my dog's smarter and prettier than yours, I only gotta
say, Nyet, nix, zilch. You wanna argue the parameters, fine; but don't
just pass by the obvious, and argue with some straw man like, "well, all
the sensors use ECM power". Well, hell yes they do, and they've been
designed into the power budget, but YOU have no idea how much slack is
left, and YOU'RE gonna just tack something else on and HOPE it works?!

Like I said before, I don't play fast and loose with the engineering,
cuz I'm a flyboy, and if anything I've learned from Mutha Naitcha is,
you don't ASSume stuff like this.

>Again, from previous posts by Ludis, he has done more 'homework' than
>at least 99% of the list and shared much of it. I know he's smarter than
>me, and my response is: please explain more of what you have in mind
>here because I don't understand it. There is likely to be something
>very interesting here.

OK, thas why I said I may have been a tad hard on ole Lulu. He has
contributed, he has done his homework. But in this case, microprocessor
wits are nearly absolutely witless. They RARELY have to think about a
limited power budget, cuz they're used to living off an infinite +5V.
What I think happened is he want's to be part of the intelligencia
concerning EGOR (of which there is precious lil if any), but instead of
playing the student (always a wise move), he plays the "expert from
across town", and pees all over his own leg as a result. Well, waytago,
dude, is all I gotta say. If ya don't know what the f*ck you're talkin
bout, then don't open yer mouth. That's my paradigm. Don't like it?; get
stuffed. That's my paradigm. Gee, do I hear an echo in here?

We ALL are accountable to the truth and what's real, as best we know it.
If you pretend to know something you don't, in my Dad's book, that's
just LYING. Period.

>>I think you, guy,
>>have your head firmly impacted up a nice, warm dark place, and I am NOT
>>gonna waste any more of my time on ya. Just my personal opinion, mindya.
>>
>>Sayonara, Lulu baby.

>I think this is very rude and unwarranted.

I expected as much from some who can't see what's going on here. Ludis
wants to be considered an "expert", but he's talking like a PLEBE, so I
responded to him as a plebe. You're upset. Fine, as expected. Just
consider both sides of the coin, is all I ask.

Lulu's parting comment was some preppy sentiment that ANY group guy
should include the wiring harness for the sensor. Anyone with ANY
experience or brains in this automotive world we live in KNOWS that is a
total whining canard. A HARNESS, CONNECTORS? You expect to get them for
anything reasonable in cost and you've made Pollyanna look like a cynic,
in comparison.

So what starts out a seemingly legitimate string of questions get
progressively peavish and STUPID. Ends up complaining that his diapers
are wet, and "we shouldn't order sensors unless we can get connectors
and harnesses TOO". Whaaaaaa. Yeah, sure.

>I do not want Ludis' contributions quashed.

Nor do I. I'd hope rather that Ludis would consider this lashing from an
ole curmudgeon like me as a lesson that one dasn't play the knowitall
unless one is prepared to pay the piper. Thas all.

>Respectfully

I agree, Bill, your retort to me has been extremely respectful and
well-modulated, and I am actually amazed at the even tone. It's not
often you see that sort of thing. I would ask in return that you
consider my statement back to you, that I think Ludis' motives for the
questions he's been asking haven't been so much info seeking as trying
to pretend he's the electrical man-about-town. And I was just laughing
that his fly appeared to be open. Heh.

>Bill Lawrance

Gar