On Oct 26, 7:21 am, Eeyore
wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Poopie Stevenson aka Eeyore wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:
Eeyore wrote:
Andre Jute wrote:

All of that follows logically from Poopie's absurd redefinition of Class A as
a Class in which "the output device(s)never cease conducting *under
any signal condition*," (emphasis added). It's ludicrous.

It's actually the only accurate definition.

I've already demonstrated several times that your words "under
any signal condition" make your definition grossly inaccurate.

But you're an ignorant **** and what you say is a load of ********.

Even when I'm right?

You're NOT right. Your ignorance is simply confusing you.

HOWEVER, to keep you happy I am happy to modify to modify my definition for clarity. I
already posted this once but I suppose you like to argue more than anything.

"the output device(s)never cease conducting *under any signal condition* within the rated
specification".

To be honest, to have to explicitly state "within the rated specification" is really a
case of pandering to fools, which certainly describes YOU, Jootikins.

Graham

Make up your mind, Poopie. Either Class A operation is possible only
with limited signal or it is possible, as you erroneously claim,
"under any signal condition". One or the other, not both.

There are about 500 messages across two threads in which you shilly-
shally about this gross error you, Pearce and Krueger have made. Which
is it?

Andre Jute
....who knows his own mind