soldering AAA batteries

[ebee]

Seems to be a bit of complex here, just by asking a question with a view to understanding which I find pretty normal. Maybe offence gets taken where none was intended, I suspect. I reckon that has more tendency with the written word sometimes than with the spoken word but there again somtimes the opposite effect happens,
Sometimes the variation of terminology with different disciplines might take effect too.
In my case if am am talking to an electrician I might assume most terms are used correctly and with ordinary folk I might suspect not best terms are actually used ,yet again I know that some Electricians douse those less correct terms than I might expect purely because they have always done so and so have their peers so that persists the discrepancy.
It is said that sometimes I seek clarification from someone I am speaking to , not to outwit them or outgun them but purely to get a grasp on nnot missunderstanding them. That seems normal to me but sometimes it is suggested I am talking down to them (Not just spurs/bulbs/ring mains but with other things too).

In short, to ask for clarification is as simple as that, to ask for clarification or even to learn something and its not a put down so should not be viewed as that.

In order for us all to sing from the same songsheet we should all try to learn the songsheet in order to appreciate the song and then we have a chance of siging it together. or agreeing to disagree.

 

[JohnW2]

Maybe offence gets taken where none was intended, I suspect.

That could well sum up the situation. Not only have I never intended to offend but there really is (or, at least, was) no reason (that I can think of) why I should have such intent. As you observe, I have merely been asking questions in an attempt to understand things about which my knowledge is admittedly limited.

Kind Regards, John

 

[SUNRAY]

In order for us all to sing from the same songsheet we should all try to learn the songsheet in order to appreciate the song and then we have a chance of siging it together. or agreeing to disagree.

Yes please and stop changing the terms/descriptors.
As an example bulbs were never called lamps, a bulb went in a lamp and so did a mantle or wick.
Plugs had pins and were male, sockets had holes and were female - there didn't used to be such a thing as a male socket (there have always been devices with pins and holes and for those exceptions were acceptable)
Following on from John's post#75 like him I'm aware of 'phased arrays' and similar systems but I find adding additional terms counter productive. I find is surprising that processing up to 1024 signals in an aerial is practical or even possible

 

[muckington]

Please go away.

After an intreating read. A book by Lawrence R Spencer. And in this book he speaks with letters to a lady called Matilda Mcoroide who claims she had interatios with a being in part of the roswell crash. And this being inparted all this knowlage onto hear about this being some kind of prison planet that this is where they send the worst kind of souls to in order to keep them imprisoned hear and everywhere ell safe over there

Though the other argument to this is that people have been trapped into it. Personally I think it is somewhere in between
Wont post any links as they will be removed in an attempt to keep the information safe I guess

 

[Harry Bloomfield]

After an intreating read.

I am surprised you can read, seeing as you seem to have such difficulty with your writing.

 

[JohnW2]

As an example bulbs were never called lamps, a bulb went in a lamp and so did a mantle or wick.

Quite so. As I have frequently demonstrated and reported, if one goes into a shop and asks for a lamp for one's table lamp/standard lamp/inspection lamp/headlamp/whatever, one will usually get some very funny looks - and if one asks to be directed to where one can find lamps, one is most unlikely to end up looking at light bulbs

Plugs had pins and were male, sockets had holes and were female - there didn't used to be such a thing as a male socket (there have always been devices with pins and holes and for those exceptions were acceptable)

Again, agreed. Maybe one of the worst examples (since the confusion was created by those who should know better) is the "Type B" RCD!

Following on from John's post#75 like him I'm aware of 'phased arrays' and similar systems but I find adding additional terms counter productive.

Indeed. I have no problem with industries/disciplines having their own terminology and jargon (those I am involved with do), but it is not realistic or appropriate to expect people who are not trained professionals in the industries/disciplines to be aware of that terminology/jargon.

 

[JohnW2]

After an intreating read. ....

What has this rubbish got to do with anything, least of all this thread??

 

[muckington]

What has this rubbish got to do with anything, least of all this thread??

What it has to do with this thread John; Is my comments about 5G satelight frequency and some well lets say worst kind of souls not liking it and telling me to go away! then you Sir; clapping to it like a moronic seal, hyped up on sardines

 

[JohnW2]

What it has to do with this thread John; Is my comments about 5G satelight frequency and some well lets say worst kind of souls not liking it and telling me to go away! then you Sir; clapping to it like a moronic seal, hyped up on sardines

Very 'interesting'

 

[SUNRAY]

Quite so. As I have frequently demonstrated and reported, if one goes into a shop and asks for a lamp for one's table lamp/standard lamp/inspection lamp/headlamp/whatever, one will usually get some very funny looks - and if one asks to be directed to where one can find lamps, one is most unlikely to end up looking at light bulbs

Again, agreed. Maybe one of the worst examples (since the confusion was created by those who should know better) is the "Type B" RCD!

Indeed. I have no problem with industries/disciplines having their own terminology and jargon (those I am involved with do), but it is not realistic or appropriate to expect people who are not trained professionals in the industries/disciplines to be aware of that terminology/jargon.

Having worked in/or adjacent to a variety of different trades, one has to understand the variations.
One of the classics during a building conversion to a night club was the conversation between the sound system installers (who I was contracted to) and the builders. The DJ booth was being built about 10-12ft above the floor level across a corner of the room - lets describe it as a new balcony. The builders had used these steel reinforced concrete slabs (rather like fence gravel boards) maybe 12x4inch and up to 12ft long slotted into the brick walls to form the floor and were partway through constructing the 3ft high timber studwork balcony wall.

The sound guy was asking how the record decks would be stable (a common approach was to build brick pillars on independant foundations from the ground up), there was something in the builders contract to provide a suitable structure but both the contrete slab floor and the timber wall were far too unstable.

The discussions were about a surface that didn't move. The builder was saying something to the effect of 'we'll come off the floor and build a frame' the sound guy interpreted 'coming off the floor' as isolated from it and accepted it. Of course the builder meant build a frame fixed to the floor slabs. I had to butt in and explain to both what was being said. Eventually a pair of RSJs were added just below the desk and touching only the record decks.

 

[ebee]

Yes it can be confusing sometimes.
My "lamps in lampholders" and "Bulbs in Gardens" is a bit tongue in cheeck. "Spurs" and , to a lesser extent "Ring mains" is a slightly more serious attempt to inform the uninitiated of the correct terms for clarity on a forum such as this otherwise this kind of thing can easily cause missunderstandings to creep in. It is not a serious dig to cause bad feeling but merely a gentle reminder for clarity.
If I`m speaking to somebody who has another discipline I try to use accurate expressions in their fields of expertise where possible if I am aware of it.

I think nearly all of us when speaking in general terms use language a bit loosely but then do make some attempt to be a little bit more correct for clarity, although we might sometimes deliberately use a slightly wrong term in order to employ a bit of humour as a friendly gesture ut, inevitably, it sometimes gets misconstrued as being a bit of a clever devil and that is sometimes where offense is taken yet not actually intended.

One person I know quite well has a regular habit of saying things back to front whimost are yetch changes the literal meaning.
Lots of people might use "Give it me!" whilst actually meaning "Give me it" or "Give it to me", fair enough common practice.
Often the incorrect meaning is easy to spot because taken literally it would not make much sense therefore you quickly realise it`s been uttered back to front.
The problem is though that on some occasions either/or could be meant in the context of that particular conversation and if I get that not as intended I am seen as deliberately nitpicking yet if I do get it wrong it is seen as intentional.

In this particular case it would be easier if all phrases were spoken back to front it would be far easier to follow the meaning but when most are but yet many are not then it can sometimes be quite difficult to follow.

 

[JohnW2]

... My "lamps in lampholders" and "Bulbs in Gardens" is a bit tongue in cheeck. "Spurs" and , to a lesser extent "Ring mains" is a slightly more serious attempt to inform the uninitiated of the correct terms for clarity on a forum such as this ...

Yes, fair enough, although there can sometimes be discussion about how sensible the 'correct terms' actually are. That is particularly the case with terms like 'lamps' and 'transformers' (or "Type B" RCDs) when words which have had decades-long established meanings suddenly come to be regarded as the 'correct' term for something different.

.... otherwise this kind of thing can easily cause missunderstandings to creep in. It is not a serious dig to cause bad feeling but merely a gentle reminder for clarity.

Indeed - although some of the over-sensitive amongst us don't seem to realise and/or accept that.

If I`m speaking to somebody who has another discipline I try to use accurate expressions in their fields of expertise where possible if I am aware of it.

Fair enough but, perhaps more to the point, also if (as is very commonly the case) they have no 'discipline'. I would think that the great majority of members of the general public do not have familiarity with the technical terminology/jargon of any specific discipline - in which case 'clear and unambiguous communication' with them really requires the use of 'everyday' words and language.

For all of my professional career, I have been involved with disciplines which have very extensive and complex ('correct') terminology/jargon, much of which is unfamiliar to and/or misunderstood by most of the general public, yet some parts of that career have involved extensive interaction and communication with members of the general public. In such a situation, there really is no sensible alternative to using 'everyday' language (even if 'technically incorrect').

I think nearly all of us when speaking in general terms use language a bit loosely but then do make some attempt to be a little bit more correct for clarity, ...

As above, in many situations being even 'a little more correct' can actually be detrimental to clarity.

 

[ebee]

If you try hard enough to be correct then you`ll always suceed in infuriating somebody anyway.
I used to know somebody who thout some PC people were too oversensitive, he was a clever fellow but very antiPC so in speeches he always endevoured to be as antiPC as possible purely to annoy them , he was very successfull at it. LOL.

 

[JohnW2]

If you try hard enough to be correct then you`ll always suceed in infuriating somebody anyway.

Quite so - and, in general (although I realise that some people disagree), my personal view is that 'trying hard to correct' (with the attendant risk of irritating or offending the 'more sensitive' amongst us) is arguably not really necessary if 'clear and unambiguous communication' can be achieved without being totally 'correct'.

In a few cases, there is good reason to try to educate people about aspects of 'correct terminology' that can lead to (possibly dangerous) misunderstandings. I would suggest that one of the most common examples is "Low Voltage", which a high proportion of the general public take to mean 'harmless', 'safe to touch' or even 'safe enough for one's children to play with'!

I used to know somebody who thout some PC people were too oversensitive ....

One problem is that many people undoubtedly feel that some aspects of alleged 'PC' that some people are sensitive about are just plain silly!

... he was a clever fellow but very antiPC so in speeches he always endevoured to be as antiPC as possible purely to annoy them , he was very successfull at it. LOL.

I think I know his twin brother

 

[morqthana]

After an intreating read. A book by Lawrence R Spencer. And in this book he speaks with letters to a lady called Matilda Mcoroide who claims she had interatios with a being in part of the roswell crash. And this being inparted all this knowlage onto hear about this being some kind of prison planet that this is where they send the worst kind of souls to in order to keep them imprisoned hear and everywhere ell safe over there

Though the other argument to this is that people have been trapped into it. Personally I think it is somewhere in between
Wont post any links as they will be removed in an attempt to keep the information safe I guess

Just go away will you.