Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.
 

Re: [AWES] Corrections //Re: Doug's Off-Topic Postings

Expand Messages
  • dave santos
    Doug,   You seem to just make quotes up- Instead of my ever claiming the new and final answer to AWE exists, my general position has been that there is
    Message 1 of 9 , Jan 7, 2012
      Doug,
       
      You seem to just make quotes up- Instead of my ever claiming "the new and final answer to AWE" exists, my general position has been that "there is much still to be discovered" (asserted to Makani). Surely the Kitelab track-record of making all kinds of different AWES contrasts with the many "one-trick-pony" contenders. There are a half dozen new AWES variants being tested lately, its a long evolutionary journey based on relentless test-modify-test cycles
       
      Allow me to repeat my take on reel systems: 1) They have been an important early "benchmark method". 2) They tend to suffer from an overly long recovery cycle, use too much airspace, wear on the line a lot, etc. 3) Short stroke reeling with chafing gear can mitigate these flaws. 4) Lever/crank based systems with embedded recovery phase at the top of the crosswind sweep pattern wholly avoid the need to reel.
       
      Don't worry so much about trying to come up with dismissive names for folks, just focus on technical issues and you will be doing great,
       
      daveS
       
       
          
    • Bob Stuart
      Could we have a poll of the list members, to see if any member regards any other, or themselves, as infallible? I vote none. Dave S seems to be voting for
      Message 2 of 9 , Jan 7, 2012
        Could we have a poll of the list members, to see if any member regards any other, or themselves, as infallible?  

        I vote "none."  Dave S seems to be voting for himself, and treating us like children.

        Bob Stuart
        Sent from The Country Formerly Known as Nice.

        On 7-Jan-12, at 12:27 PM, dave santos wrote:


        Doug,
         
        You seem to just make quotes up- Instead of my ever claiming "the new and final answer to AWE" exists, my general position has been that "there is much still to be discovered" (asserted to Makani). Surely the Kitelab track-record of making all kinds of different AWES contrasts with the many "one-trick-pony" contenders. There are a half dozen new AWES variants being tested lately, its a long evolutionary journey based on relentless test-modify-test cycles
         
        Allow me to repeat my take on reel systems: 1) They have been an important early "benchmark method". 2) They tend to suffer from an overly long recovery cycle, use too much airspace, wear on the line a lot, etc. 3) Short stroke reeling with chafing gear can mitigate these flaws. 4) Lever/crank based systems with embedded recovery phase at the top of the crosswind sweep pattern wholly avoid the need to reel.
         
        Don't worry so much about trying to come up with dismissive names for folks, just focus on technical issues and you will be doing great,
         
        daveS
         
         
            


      • Joe Faust
        That was a tough hit, it seems to me. I ve not ever seen text that claims anyone or himself or herself as infallible in AWE. The one just hit especially
        Message 3 of 9 , Jan 7, 2012
          That was a tough hit, it seems to me. I've not ever seen text that
          claims anyone or himself or herself as infallible in AWE. The one just
          hit especially seems ever to move that more can and will be uncovered;
          during the evolution a stream of statement seem to be part of the
          progressive stream where things are pressed back some while others are
          opined as moving forward. All our play seems to be invited; each of us
          seems to play with some idiosyncratic style, hopefully not to be taken
          as emphatically treating others as though there were some diminutive
          status. My slant is with a broad wish that we might stay open-minded
          as children and stand ready to have awe for advancing AWE. Ones with a
          streaming of larger quantities of enthusiastic sharing will by such be
          more vulnerable to attack---more windows to view into the ways, means,
          and heart. Those not yet posting or posting little have not opened
          themselves as much, it seems. Daring to evolve opinions during this
          generative and creative stage of AWE---in an open-stream---manner seems
          to me to be a gift to be treasured. Staying with attack on technical
          questions and keeping personal vulnerabilities aside might forward the
          AWE RAD game best.
        • dave santos
          Bob, You wrote- Could we have a poll of the list members, to see if any member regards any other, or themselves, as infallible?  I vote none. Dave S seems
          Message 4 of 9 , Jan 7, 2012
            Bob, You wrote-
            "Could we have a poll of the list members, to see if any member regards any other, or themselves, as infallible?  I vote "none." Dave S seems to be voting for himself, and treating us like children."
             
            I vote for "none" too, so your poll corrects a misconception.
             
            If anyone votes themselves "infallible", now there's a childish mistake. I am sorry if my offerings ever seem like "treating (everyone else) like children", that is not the intent. Feel free to treat me as a child in return; i feel like a child,  ;*)
             
            If only we were totally focused on RAD, soap opera would hardly be allowed to distract us,
             
            daveS

             
                
          • Bob Stuart
            Thanks, DaveS; maybe we can just run this poll the next time we are contemplating invoking moderation. That has been a time-consuming failure, impossible to
            Message 5 of 9 , Jan 7, 2012
              Thanks, DaveS; maybe we can just run this poll the next time we are contemplating invoking moderation.  That has been a time-consuming failure, impossible to do fairly.  

              Bob Stuart
              Sent from The Country Formerly Known as Nice.

              On 7-Jan-12, at 4:26 PM, dave santos wrote:


              Bob, You wrote-
              "Could we have a poll of the list members, to see if any member regards any other, or themselves, as infallible?  I vote "none." Dave S seems to be voting for himself, and treating us like children."
               
              I vote for "none" too, so your poll corrects a misconception.
               
              If anyone votes themselves "infallible", now there's a childish mistake. I am sorry if my offerings ever seem like "treating (everyone else) like children", that is not the intent. Feel free to treat me as a child in return; i feel like a child,  ;*)
               
              If only we were totally focused on RAD, soap opera would hardly be allowed to distract us,
               
              daveS

               
                  


            Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.