toolpost

I understand what you are saying, however there is still no purpose on
discussing it on this group, we have 8900 members according to Yahoo, if just 1%
of them commented it would be a total waste of a lot of either. And then it
ends up usually in someone flaming others, and then I have to moderate or ban
them. Just better not to go there at all.

I would rather confine the group to the purpose of the group. rather than a
discussion on something that we can not solve, a lot of, he said, she said, I
said, will accomplishment nothing, towards converting a machine for a home
shop usage.
I am sorry but I think my reasons are very valid, and the discussion does
not fit our groups purpose.
bill
List Mom

<<Sure

You are the list mom, so you call the rules :)

That said, consider the following: the designs are identical. I wanted to
say just that. But you can't have identical designs made by different people,
can you? Identical to a thou. Unless, say, one company is a distributor of
another or one company was bought by another, or, like in this case, somebody
ripped off somebody else's design? And that's what the original poster was
asking about.

I do not know how to state what I had to say in a less inflamatory way. I
really tried. I stated that the two designs are identical. And the inevitable
question "how can this possibly be true?" will be answered by the readeds
doing their own research, if they are interested. They now have enough
information. Once they make up their mind, I do not think they will have anything more
to say on this list about this topic. If they are not interested, then they
will not look and simply nothing will happen. I did not offend anyone or
accuse anyone, or did anything else that can even remotely call for an argument.
No argument followed, maybe because of your quick response, but maybe because
there is obviously no need for one.



I can see your desire to suppress any flamewars and off-topic discussions
before they happen. In fact, as long as I have read this list, I must say that
it has been remarkably clean. But I believe sometimes you are a little too
trigger-happy to kill a discussion that does not appear 100% on-course to you.
There is a balance. Of course, you are the list mom, so you get to define
where the balance lies. But I thought that I'd let you know that the balance
appears a little skewed to the "safe side" to me.


Thanks for reading, if you got this far through my email.

Vlad


On 2/13/06, _WAnliker@..._ (mailto:WAnliker@...) <_
WAnliker@..._ (mailto:WAnliker@...) > wrote:


I have no idea what or where or what the problem is, but I have requested
that there be no further discussion on the list. Bitterness and arguments only
lead to problems for me, and a waste of space.

No negative feelings towards you, but want to "head it off at the pass" so
to speak.
Thanks,
bill
List Mom



I am not sureThere is a connection, and, as far as I remember, a rather
bitter one. I do
not know all the details of the dispute that happened a little while back.
In fact, I mostly heard only one side of the story - told by TS Engineering.
So I am not in a position to tell who was right, and who was wrong - you can
search and find details for yourself. The keywords are obvious :)

But the bottom line is that both toolposts are essentially identical, and
interchangeable. I believe, ts engineering has since changed the design of
their qc toolpost, so this may no longer be the case, but the previous
design and the current a2z design are identical except for the angle of the
handle.








--
Vlad's shop
_http://www.krupin.net/serendipity/index.php?/categories/2-metalworking _
(http://www.krupin.net/serendipity/index.php?/categories/2-metalworking )

>>

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]