OT: 3D printing

On Wednesday, April 5, 2023 at 6:08:58 AM UTC+10, Tabby wrote:
> On Tuesday, 4 April 2023 at 03:54:32 UTC+1, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > On Tuesday, April 4, 2023 at 6:38:14 AM UTC+10, Tabby wrote: 
> > > On Sunday, 2 April 2023 at 04:19:49 UTC+1, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > On Sunday, April 2, 2023 at 2:32:46 AM UTC+10, Tabby wrote: 
> > > > > On Saturday, 1 April 2023 at 14:31:34 UTC+1, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > On Saturday, April 1, 2023 at 7:12:31 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > > > > > On Friday, 31 March 2023 at 04:24:40 UTC+1, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > On Friday, March 31, 2023 at 9:23:00 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > On Thursday, 30 March 2023 at 04:21:29 UTC+1, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, March 30, 2023 at 9:35:07 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, 29 March 2023 at 06:45:19 UTC+1, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > On Wednesday, March 29, 2023 at 3:15:20 PM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, 28 March 2023 at 06:22:37 UTC+1, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, March 28, 2023 at 3:45:13 PM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, 28 March 2023 at 04:36:47 UTC+1, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, March 28, 2023 at 10:32:52 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, 24 March 2023 at 15:01:50 UTC, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Friday, March 24, 2023 at 11:41:44 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, 23 March 2023 at 03:11:31 UTC, Anthony William Sloman wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Thursday, March 23, 2023 at 9:23:31 AM UTC+11, Tabby wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > On Tuesday, 21 March 2023 at 15:15:10 UTC, olaf wrote: 
> > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Don Y <blocked...@foo.invalid> wrote: 
> > <snip> 
> > > > > > > > It wasn't any kind of misquote. I merely undid your test-chopping (which was childish). 
> > > > > > > 
> > > > > > > lol. anyone can see what you did. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > > And what you did. If they have more sense than you they should be able to work out why I undid it. 
> > > > > 
> > > > > Why are you so insecure & so desperate? 
> > > > 
> > > > I don't recognise myself in that description. 
> > > 
> > > doesn't surprise me 
> > More text-chopping. 
> > 
> > What I actually posted was. "I don't recognise myself in that description. Perhaps you are projecting."
>
> Yes, it's normal to snip material one is not replying to in newsgroups. Speaking of which, your future time wasting here is now snipped.

Tabby seems to want the admiration he can't earn - which is also John Larkin's problem - and resents the criticism that he does earn, so he snips it without marking the snip. Posters normally mark the snip when they find parts of the post they are responding to be irrelevant  to their response.

Text-choppers like Tabby just leave out the bits they can't answer.

-- 
Bill Sloman, Sydney