Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]


Groups > comp.sys.raspberry-pi > #11731

Re: Direct digital I/O ?

From "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid>
Newsgroups comp.sys.raspberry-pi
Subject Re: Direct digital I/O ?
Date 2016-06-13 19:45 +0100
Organization A noiseless patient Spider
Message-ID <njmv02$6c0$1@dont-email.me> (permalink)
References <njbs2a$96b$1@dont-email.me> <njmc5g$iip$1@dont-email.me> <MPG.31c8f48a6c0a39f5989801@172.16.0.1> <njmtr1$g4$1@dont-email.me>

Show all headers | View raw


"rickman" <gnuarm@gmail.com> wrote in message 
news:njmtr1$g4$1@dont-email.me...
>
> I see the guy is giving you a hard time.  He really is a troll and the 
> best thing to do is to *totally* ignore him.  Don't respond even to tell 
> him you are ignoring him.  I don't think that is going to happen in this 
> group, but it would be for the best.

I'm not giving anybody a hard time and I am not trolling.

Perhaps you should refer your readers to the NG rec.radio.amateur.antenna
wherein I tried to explore antennae theory beyond what is stated in
the textbook and how you and your ilk became abusive?

It seems that being intellectually explorative is not accepted practice
amongst the lumpen proletariat of Usenet who cannot merely ignore
things that they do not understand or feel uncomfortable about discussing
and must resort to personal abusive ad hominem attacks such as you do above?

Why do you behave like that?

-----ooooo-----

Now, if you, or indeed, anyone else, does not want to discuss the exciting 
(to me.
at least) the low-level operation of the 64 bit ARM architecture, then it is 
probably
for the better, as you suggest above, that you ignore the threads or even KF 
me rather than hijacking
the thread to vent your spleen in attacks.

I am quite happy that the deliberately ignorant and the gratuitously abusive 
should ignore me.






Back to comp.sys.raspberry-pi | Previous | NextPrevious in thread | Next in thread | Find similar | Unroll thread


Thread

Direct digital I/O  ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-09 14:47 +0100
  Re: Direct digital I/O ? GlowingBlueMist <GlowingBlueMist@blackhole.io> - 2016-06-09 11:22 -0500
  Re: Direct digital I/O  ? "Dave Liquorice" <allsortsnotthisbit@howhill.com> - 2016-06-09 19:56 +0100
    Re: Direct digital I/O  ? Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2016-06-10 19:55 +0100
      Re: Direct digital I/O  ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-10 22:27 +0000
        Re: Direct digital I/O  ? mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2016-06-11 07:45 +0100
          Re: Direct digital I/O  ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-11 08:37 +0000
            Re: Direct digital I/O ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-11 09:41 +0100
              Re: Direct digital I/O ? "Dave Liquorice" <allsortsnotthisbit@howhill.com> - 2016-06-11 11:17 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2016-06-11 14:00 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-06-11 16:12 +0000
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2016-06-12 22:00 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? cb@elaine.df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) - 2016-06-12 22:40 +0000
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2016-06-13 11:02 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2016-06-12 22:04 +0100
              Re: Direct digital I/O ? Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2016-06-11 13:49 +0100
            Re: Direct digital I/O  ? Rob <nomail@example.com> - 2016-06-11 09:23 +0000
              Re: Direct digital I/O  ? Ahem A Rivet's Shot <steveo@eircom.net> - 2016-06-11 10:47 +0100
            Re: Direct digital I/O  ? Dennis Lee Bieber <wlfraed@ix.netcom.com> - 2016-06-11 12:46 -0400
              Re: Direct digital I/O  ? mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2016-06-12 09:20 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Michael J. Mahon <mjmahon@aol.com> - 2016-06-12 11:07 -0500
                Re: Direct digital I/O  ? andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew Gabriel) - 2016-06-12 16:13 +0000
                Re: Direct digital I/O  ? jeffj@panix.com (Jeff Jonas) - 2016-07-01 20:39 -0400
                Re: Direct digital I/O  ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 10:40 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O  ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-02 13:55 +0000
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-02 19:22 +0300
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-07-02 17:47 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-07-02 17:07 +0000
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Tauno Voipio <tauno.voipio@notused.fi.invalid> - 2016-07-02 21:30 +0300
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-02 19:35 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Dave Higton <dave@davehigton.me.uk> - 2016-07-02 19:43 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-07-02 20:07 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O  ? andrew@cucumber.demon.co.uk (Andrew Gabriel) - 2016-07-03 18:59 +0000
                Re: Direct digital I/O  ? "Ivan D. Reid" <Ivan.Reid@ivan.fsnet.co.uk> - 2016-07-03 19:15 +0000
  Re: Direct digital I/O  ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-13 14:23 +0100
    Re: Direct digital I/O  ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-13 14:13 +0000
      Re: Direct digital I/O  ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-13 15:09 +0000
        Re: Direct digital I/O  ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-13 17:48 +0100
      Re: Direct digital I/O  ? mm0fmf <none@invalid.com> - 2016-06-13 17:45 +0100
        Re: Direct digital I/O  ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-13 17:04 +0000
          Re: Direct digital I/O  ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-13 19:13 +0100
      Re: Direct digital I/O  ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-13 17:47 +0100
    Re: Direct digital I/O  ? Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2016-06-13 17:49 +0100
      Re: Direct digital I/O  ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-13 19:07 +0100
      Re: Direct digital I/O ? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-13 14:25 -0400
        Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-13 19:45 +0100
          Re: Direct digital I/O ? Jim H <invalid@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-13 20:14 +0000
            Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 09:38 +0100
        Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-13 19:57 +0100
          Re: Direct digital I/O ? Mike Fleming <{mike}@tauzero.co.uk> - 2016-06-14 10:48 +0100
            Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 11:41 +0100
              Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-14 11:48 +0100
            Re: Direct digital I/O ? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-14 20:24 -0400
              Re: Direct digital I/O ? The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2016-06-15 08:13 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 03:26 -0400
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 08:54 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? AndyW <Andy@nojunqmail.com> - 2016-06-15 16:48 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 21:02 +0000
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Martin Gregorie <martin@address-in-sig.invalid> - 2016-06-15 11:21 +0000
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:21 +0100
              Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 08:52 +0100
              Re: Direct digital I/O ? Gordon Levi <gordon@address.invalid> - 2016-06-15 18:57 +1000
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 10:28 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? rickman <gnuarm@gmail.com> - 2016-06-15 10:57 -0400
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 16:23 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2016-06-15 16:46 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 17:04 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? Rob Morley <nospam@ntlworld.com> - 2016-06-15 17:43 +0100
                Re: Direct digital I/O ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-15 20:57 +0100
    Re: Direct digital I/O  ? Paul <paul@pcserviceselectronics.co.uk> - 2016-06-13 17:46 +0100
      Re: Direct digital I/O  ? "gareth G4SDW GQRP #3339" <no.spam@thank.you.invalid> - 2016-06-13 19:06 +0100

csiph-web