It was closed because there were too many personal attacks being made among several of the posters. CR4 is not a site for flame wars, and no, I am not one of the administrators who decided to shut it down.

My pleasure; Because it went something like this;

Dear Forum;

Do you think this propeller is a good one for my Cessna 140.

They (those @$#@^&@!! Gurus) said it is a great one.

What do you think?

We call it "out of context" and for a "petty agenda",

This one over lack of "GA" the poster (alone) felt was his/her due.

CR4 does not work like that. Respect and Recognition are Earned - not demanded.

I hope this clears up the question/confusion.

I can see why you are not happy with this persons posts but it is just a little funny...especially as it is evident some are more protected than others.

Actually it is very funny as it looks like quite a big prop for a cessna.

Hope we can resolve this issue fairly and without to much fuss.

You should really read the posts before you ask questions. It shows your lack of either understanding or attention.

But since you didn't get it, the circuit was not intended as a working circuit. Though the poster of the thread want to argue it's merits as one. He was being belligerent in his attempt at doing so. So Admin closed it. The Gurus back him up because they read the content of the post which you have apparently not done. It also appears that the person that made the post in which you question didn't either.

That would be superfluous; we all know who the OP is.

He can run, but he can't hide.

Would that be the incorrigible one from the misspelled land north of Gibraltar; perhaps from Moronica?

"He can run, but he can't hide."

I wish he would hide, permanently. As in forever!

Gosh Lyn, it's only a novice poster - not the end of the frigging world. And to quote you "no need to read" (or words to that effect).

Come over to the "light(hearted side) Lyn".

No! Never! I'm going to stay bitter forever, and you can't stop me.

_{^{OK I feel better now.}}

Ok Andy

The entire text of the OP in the referenced thread:

"I think not.

"It will just cause the batteries to be undercharged.

"It is a bad circuit in my opinion."

A statement from your original post here: "It would appear that the question raised was valid but since it pointed out some flaws by a resident Guru the thread was closed by Admin."

What question was raised in the referenced thread? This would appear to be a series of statements that accompany a circuit diagram taken out of context. It was not a question in pursuit of an insightful answer, it was intended to roil the CR4 community.

To answer your question here, "Can someone please explain why this thread was closed:" The answer is within that thread, thus:

Message from admins:

This circuit was taken out of context from another post and is an abuse/attack on another CR4 user.

So, this together with the response from SavvyExacta, there you have it.

So you protect guru's if they make a mistake but do not allow others to comment.

And I quote :

A statement from your original post here: "It would appear that the question raised was valid but since it pointed out some flaws by a resident Guru the thread was closed by Admin."

I would have thought it more important to point out mistakes by people who are supposed to be "highly regarded engineers" one to protect the question asker from destroying the batteries and not getting a reliable system from added components.

I think it would be best to just have removed the dodgy comments and focus on the question I asked which was perfectly reasonable.

It was not an attack on the "guru" I was just surprised that a "guru" could make such basic errors and then still argue that they are correct.

The circuit supplied is very bad and will remain very bad no matter what diodes you use (except in the case of new technology.)

I feel as if you are defending bad advice.

If you are fair and reasonable you should either just remove all dodgy comments or restart the discussion under the heading of.

Would you put a rectifier in-between the output of of a battery charger and the batteries just to run an ammeter ? without mentioning that you will need sense wires or other technology to charge the batteries correctly.

Or if you feel that strongly you can stay as you are and protect bad advice ( In my humble opinion.) and be a "Dictatorship style" News and Discussion site....where the opinion only counts if you are in "The group" and in this case please feel free to delete my account as I believe in free speech and not fascism.

Your opinion is far from humble

Continuing to belabor points which are not relevant, in an effort to belittle JohnDG, is not going to win you any support from members or moderators

why don't at least post a schematic of what you consider to be a proper solution, scribble it on a scrap of paper & scan it in or go here

http://www.imaginationcubed.com/index.php

& then post a link

at the very least, if you think you can dish it out

learn how to take it....

why don't at least post a schematic of what you consider to be a proper solution.............Proper solution to what ?

I call Bullshyt

Apparently you think the discussion on the original thread is about a battery charging circuit & have carried that mis conception on through to the next thread & this one too

& so after all your bluster & ranting you can't even come up with what you think a proper solution would look like...

Topping it all off by ranting about guests posting, after you posted as guest yourself

I am definitely not the guest but the propeller thing was very funny....I even think it is a marine propeller which makes it even more funny....The diagram supplied by the protected one was bad and it seems hard to admit....because of the protected position.

Out of school already, are we?

No still learning unlike you.

PP you have the part right about me [I'm sure I'm not alone] not understanding the points you are trying to make

My signature line is from a local newspaper, I'm just another member & have no official role in the administration of CR4...

Did you not see post #47?

...if you can't work it out without name-calling and/or verbal abuse, the thread will be closed.

Translation is Something about

noticing your empty head

this is an english language forum

You continue to demonstrate your unsuitability for this website

Your unsuitability has nothing to do with the number of posts or anyone else's status

You seem to be ready to argue with anyone, whether or not you understand the discussion

you claim to be here to learn

your actions speak for themselves

this is most certainly on topic

Overreaction of Admin and the Protection of Gurus

That is the topic and not what you change it to.

And....this is an english language forum ??

Who said and English is like that with a CAPITAL "E" do you know your language ??

Google translation not working ??

So we can safely say you don't do understanding of even your native language.

You have already demonstrated you're unsuitability for this website. Full stop...like what English is all about....Your English is not so good. Full stop.

Not living, working or doing business with any one in _portugal

I have no need for translations

I notice you are being moderated, as you feel the need to belittle & abuse

Global Spec & CR4 are based in & do most of their business in th US, in ENGLISH

You I suppose feel like you deserve some accommodation

Proper solution to charging a battery. What else? Must you be so horribly obtuse?

Hello portugalphilip. A few observations and questions, in no particular order:

Are you the original poster?

Are you the original poster of the captioned thread as well?

OK, you feel it more important to point out mistakes that people make. CR4 member JohnDG said (in #39 of captioned thread) of his own sketch (the one you used without crediting as such here): "I'd be the last person to argue that it is a particularly "good" solution..." As well, you asked him in #27 "Would you build this circuit to charge your batteries?". He responded, simply, "No.". I do not understand the rub, or the trouble.

You said "I feel as if you are defending bad advice." JohnDG hardly needs my defense. As outlined above, he advised you NOT to build it. I and others have said, you are taking the diagram out of context; it should be taken together with ALL of the discussion.

You seem to be bashing CR4 Gurus, At your present rate, you will become one of these dreaded Gurus youself by the end of November. We will teach you the secret handshake, and you will receive your 'Golden Key'. And I will be very happy to congratulate you on that day.

Hello DoorMan ,

I only posted the thread mentioned by guest not the poster of how do I connect an ammeter.

I actually agreed with johndg on a few things but it was not taken out of context it was a valid question that I asked.

I still think the question should be restored and any dodgy comments removed and let it continue but I may also add that the guest should be restricted or have their comments filtered before they arrive on the message board.

he advised you NOT to build it but he did not give that advice on the original post with the diagram.

It's still as clear as the peninsula on your continent, you did not read or understand the original posters intention, which was to use what he had [inline current meter]

I could argue that the best solution to having an uninterrupted supply of power, would be to construct a power station dedicated to the OP's operation [what ever that might be]

So here we are at more than 100 responses over 3 different threads & the guest original poster has yet to post even a 2nd time to clarify the query...

Too many comments from both sides of this argument are being reported. Please steer this conversation back to the topic on hand, rather than berating the individual characteristics of members and the like, or the discussion will be closed.

Hi Savvy;

The OP's "topic on hand" is; that Admin is playing favourites - and the individual character of members.

I.e. 'berating' is "the topic"

Hardly surprising some will seek to 'make a point' by trying to involve Admin?

Perhaps the better tactic would be; "the next person to abuse the report button, will be on the naughty step!"?

The questions were:

• Why was a thread closed
• Is it the mission of the Admin to protect Gurus

Character is not mentioned in the question. Berating isn't allowed on CR4. Reporting has already been limited for some members.

This thread, the closed one & the original

have all become venues for our less than esteemed colleague to vent his ire about a circuit, the function of which he continues to misunderstand....

In my view the report button is for spam, nor do I resort to PM's

Closing the thread(s) won't increase the OP's understanding

I can't comment on his understanding of a circuit. If he wants help with that then by all means explain it to him.

Just because someone doesn't get it (or refuses to accept another's advice/opinion) doesn't mean he or she should be called a pre-pubescent brat, a child, a troll, etc. Nor should the name-calling be returned. CR4 isn't the place for that.

What I meant with my post is that if you can't work it out without name-calling and/or verbal abuse, the thread will be closed.

Do the failure analysis

What is the root cause?

The thread(s) are not the root failure

There are a few:

• Person who asks question refuses to accept answers as given (at this point, what can you do but let it go? The correct info is available.)
• People are sick of poorly worded/simple questions and so answer sarcastically - treating unsuspecting users with disrespect

Newer members don't realize their simple questions are "unwanted". Veteran members forget there are people who are less experienced or unfamiliar with CR4 etiquette and there are nicer ways to remind them.

Now I'm going to take my own advice and drop it.