|
Post by Graham on Nov 1, 2016 12:34:09 GMT
Now a question to all. How much of this thread would have survived and how many modques, ban or suspension would have been issued on CW? But we know that. That's why we're here. At least that's why I'm here, and I know (because he said so publicly) that TonyB is here because Dan slapped him down for criticising some very poor and potentially dangerous advice from someone we must assume is one of Dan's mates. We're completely OT here now but if you go back to 2009 and earlier on CW you will find some great slanging matches in some of the threads. They were interesting and illuminating and the fluffy bunnies who complained were ignored. Since then the bunnies have been getting their way and the forum was ruined. I am sorry that is not what I said. Your off so have a good day
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 12:34:56 GMT
But we know that. That's why we're here. At least that's why I'm here, and I know (because he said so publicly) that TonyB is here because Dan slapped him down for criticising some very poor and potentially dangerous advice from someone we must assume is one of Dan's mates. We're completely OT here now but if you go back to 2009 and earlier on CW you will find some great slanging matches in some of the threads. They were interesting and illuminating and the fluffy bunnies who complained were ignored. Since then the bunnies have been getting their way and the forum was ruined. I am sorry that is not what I said. Your off so have a good day ? ? ?
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Nov 1, 2016 12:37:23 GMT
Now a question to all. How much of this thread would have survived and how many modques, ban or suspension would have been issued on CW? But we know that. That's why we're here. At least that's why I'm here, and I know (because he said so publicly) that TonyB is here because Dan slapped him down for criticising some very poor and potentially dangerous advice from someone we must assume is one of Dan's mates. We're completely OT here now but if you go back to 2009 and earlier on CW you will find some great slanging matches in some of the threads. They were interesting and illuminating and the fluffy bunnies who complained were ignored. Since then the bunnies have been getting their way and the forum was ruined. So how do we stop CW happening here, because it will eventually, unless we find a way of having these chats that is not perceived as nasty.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 12:39:50 GMT
But we know that. That's why we're here. At least that's why I'm here, and I know (because he said so publicly) that TonyB is here because Dan slapped him down for criticising some very poor and potentially dangerous advice from someone we must assume is one of Dan's mates. We're completely OT here now but if you go back to 2009 and earlier on CW you will find some great slanging matches in some of the threads. They were interesting and illuminating and the fluffy bunnies who complained were ignored. Since then the bunnies have been getting their way and the forum was ruined. So how do we stop CW happening here, because it will eventually, unless we find a way of having these chats that is not perceived as nasty. Well, for a start we don't have an idiot fluffy bunny in charge. Secondly, nowhere in this thread have I been 'nasty' as far as I can recall, I've simply been discussing the issues.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2016 12:48:21 GMT
But we know that. That's why we're here. At least that's why I'm here, and I know (because he said so publicly) that TonyB is here because Dan slapped him down for criticising some very poor and potentially dangerous advice from someone we must assume is one of Dan's mates. We're completely OT here now but if you go back to 2009 and earlier on CW you will find some great slanging matches in some of the threads. They were interesting and illuminating and the fluffy bunnies who complained were ignored. Since then the bunnies have been getting their way and the forum was ruined. So how do we stop CW happening here, because it will eventually, unless we find a way of having these chats that is not perceived as nasty. Tis quite comical to watch. Don't change the format, it's fine. I suspect the majority don't have a clue what your all on about, and in truth probably don't give a flying f. So carry on with your fetishism, whilst some of us have a chuckle.
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Nov 1, 2016 12:52:04 GMT
I am sorry that is not what I said. Your off so have a good day ? ? ? What I said quoting from memory and what was understood was that in bulk the battery took all the charge it could and as the charge rose the voltage rose until it reached the safe level for the battery, then it changed to absorption. That was what I was trying to get over and got over, that in bulk the battery took as much charge as it could get. Now we both know that depends on the charger and its output. Have a charger with an output of 30amps and a battery discharged by 100Ah and it will swallow all the charge it can get. Have a battery with a discharge of 20Ah and it will not go to bulk. In the context I was dealing with a boat using its batteries fully an idea of what was happening was needed not a purely technical description as that would not have worked, as N proved when he wrote that pure technical description.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2016 12:53:50 GMT
So how do we stop CW happening here, because it will eventually, unless we find a way of having these chats that is not perceived as nasty. I don't know what will eventually happen to TB, but for now there are interesting discussions going on as well as welcoming new members - there is a bit of historical stuff about CDWF, that I hope will go away. IMO People on here need to not get upset too quickly (I include you here). Life is most interesting when you have access to people that you might not agree with - I can't come up with a better explanation of why TB works for me.
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Nov 1, 2016 12:55:04 GMT
So how do we stop CW happening here, because it will eventually, unless we find a way of having these chats that is not perceived as nasty. Tis quite comical to watch. Don't change the format, it's fine. I suspect the majority don't have a clue what your all on about, and in truth probably don't give a flying f. So carry on with your fetishism, whilst some of us have a chuckle. That is the best answer you could give lol Lovely No one is dead, no one has flounced,well I don't think so,and I believe everyone was trying to help either immediately or for the future chats
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 12:55:46 GMT
What I said quoting from memory and what was understood was that in bulk the battery took all the charge it could and as the charge rose the voltage rose until it reached the safe level for the battery, then it changed to absorption. That was what I was trying to get over and got over, that in bulk the battery took as much charge as it could get. Now we both know that depends on the charger and its output. Have a charger with an output of 30amps and a battery discharged by 100Ah and it will swallow all the charge it can get. Have a battery with a discharge of 20Ah and it will not go to bulk. In the context I was dealing with a boat using its batteries fully an idea of what was happening was needed not a purely technical description as that would not have worked, as N proved when he wrote that pure technical description. Again, ? ? ? What has anything of that got to do with CW's approach to debate, which is what you quoted above.
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Nov 1, 2016 12:58:02 GMT
So how do we stop CW happening here, because it will eventually, unless we find a way of having these chats that is not perceived as nasty. I don't know what will eventually happen to TB, but for now there are interesting discussions going on as well as welcoming new members - there is a bit of historical stuff about CDWF, that I hope will go away. IMO People on here need to not get upset too quickly (I include you here). Life is most interesting when you have access to people that you might not agree with - I can't come up with a better explanation of why TB works for me. If you are referring to me. There is still comeback or the effect of hassle shall I say on CW effecting certainly me and probably other.
|
|
|
Post by tonyqj on Nov 1, 2016 12:59:02 GMT
I don't know what will eventually happen to TB, but for now there are interesting discussions going on as well as welcoming new members - there is a bit of historical stuff about CDWF, that I hope will go away. I agree 100% on both points. 😀
|
|
|
Post by Graham on Nov 1, 2016 12:59:38 GMT
What I said quoting from memory and what was understood was that in bulk the battery took all the charge it could and as the charge rose the voltage rose until it reached the safe level for the battery, then it changed to absorption. That was what I was trying to get over and got over, that in bulk the battery took as much charge as it could get. Now we both know that depends on the charger and its output. Have a charger with an output of 30amps and a battery discharged by 100Ah and it will swallow all the charge it can get. Have a battery with a discharge of 20Ah and it will not go to bulk. In the context I was dealing with a boat using its batteries fully an idea of what was happening was needed not a purely technical description as that would not have worked, as N proved when he wrote that pure technical description. Again, ? ? ? What has anything of that got to do with CW's approach to debate, which is what you quoted above. lol sorry major misread and misunderstood delete delete
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2016 13:04:50 GMT
Tis quite comical to watch. Don't change the format, it's fine. I suspect the majority don't have a clue what your all on about, and in truth probably don't give a flying f. So carry on with your fetishism, whilst some of us have a chuckle. That is the best answer you could give lol Lovely Well, I can say more if you wish. For instance, the only people who I consider to have any knowledge on electrics here at the moment, are gibbo, and Nick. Yourself, and tonyqj just seem to enjoy an argument (under the guise of debate), which does I freely admit give a comic input. However, both your inputs are at best in my view "amateurish", and should be taken with a very large dose of salt. 😂😂😂😂
|
|
|
Post by peterboat on Nov 1, 2016 13:08:40 GMT
I will repeat what I said on the other channel years ago, I was a an electrician driver in the army, Signal regiments would have upwards of 8000 traction batteries, we maintained them we had charging logs, how long they lasted between charges etc, some of the batteries were 20 years old. We used to flush batteries out and refill them with correct strength electrolyte they were stamped up when this was done. Now sometime in the 80s this ended and batteries were left to their own devices within a few years batteries were failing at 3 - 4 years old because none of the above was carried out the battery shops had gone and the cost of replacement soon crept up so no savings were made from not doing the maintenance anymore. We had bank charging systems that were automatic, plus individual chargers/dischargers to assess batteries so to watch people arguing about batteries is amusing but not helpful Tony's bit was accurate enough for most people to understand and work with so why complicate it?
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 1, 2016 13:15:23 GMT
If you are referring to me. There is still comeback or the effect of hassle shall I say on CW effecting certainly me and probably other. I was referring to you. I don't know about the hassle you have received concerning CDWF, but I'd prefer that your hassle (and others) were kept to the CWDF section, and that animosity about CWDF was kept to a minimum elsewhere. This might have already happened so please don't shoot me down too quickly.
|
|