Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 16:43:11 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 15:57:36 -0500, "J. Clarke"
wrote:

Gordon Shumway wrote:
On Mon, 7 Dec 2009 13:53:13 -0600, "Leon"
wrote:


"J. Clarke" wrote in message
...
dadiOH wrote:
J. Clarke wrote:
Leon wrote:
But the stall happens after the blade has climbed up higher
on the cut. That will cause undue stress to something.

Only if the "something" is not properly designed to withstand
the "undue stress".

No one can design anything to withstand every type of "undue
stress" caused by idiots or the ill informed. Look at
computers...

Uh, we aren't talking about "every type of undue stress caused
by idiots or
the uninformed",

Uh, I thought we "were" talking about "idiot's" your word ;~)
using the wrong blade on a machine.


LOL. Try as you may, I doubt you will ever convince him his logic
is flawed.

What's flawed about the logic of expecting engineers to design
tools so that they don't destroy themselves in normal use?


Let me try to explain the major flaw in your logic. You said in an
earlier post "However if it cannot withstand without damage any
force that the motor can produce then it is a poorly designed piece
of crap."

With that mindset automotive engineers had to have known that there
would be an occasional accident with their products. Of course they
knew this. Then, by your logic they should have designed the cars,
should an accident occur, to need no repairs, right? Therefore, if
what you said had even the slightest bit of credibility you should
be able to explain the existence of automotive body shops.

Find me a car that breaks the driveshaft when you set the brakes and
floor the accelerator.

Please enlighten all of us as to why there are automotive body shops
or any other repair facility for anything. According to you,
nothing should break.

Nope, not an analogous situation.

But I'll bet you're a real good lawyer because it's the sort of
argument that one would come up with to get his bumbling incompetent
of a client off the hook because his POS tool self-destructs.

There is no end to your narrow-mindedness.

Expecting a reasonable level of competence from engineers is not "narrow
mindedness" except in your little liability-lawyer world.