In Keith Hughes writes:

Lauri,

When you speak about reliability looks like you do not understand that
the ability to steer the boat in difficult conditions is a factor of the
reliability.

Another example of the condescending adversarial tone you've set in this
thread - see below:

If you are not happy with the tone of my posts, why do you bother to
read them. Is it forbidded to be critical of one's narrow scope of the
reliability issue?

You give the impression that the windvanes fail on guts, I can promise
you that there are many parts in a sailing boat more prone to break than
the proper windvanes.

Irrelevant - he never made comparisons against other systems, merely
states the obvious. i.e. mechanical systems *do* wear, and *do* break,
as do electromechanical or pneumatic systems. You were seemingly saying
that *proper* windvanes don't wear or break, which is patently false.

If this is obvious, what kind of information does it give to the reader?

By the way, where is the logic in telling that the windvanes wear of and
fail in gusts and anyway are prized by the blue water sailors?

I must say, I fail to undestand this. I would think that the blue water
sailors would pize and apreciate things that do not break in the middle
of the ocean.

I do not speak or write English as my first language, not even the
second or third, so if you feel competent to inult my lingual ability

He was stating an obvious fact. His post was in agreement, in large
part, with your position. You've continually failed to understand that,
and have become progressively more insulting and belligerent when he has
tried to point out your misunderstanding. I think he was being generous
in attributing your inability to understand to a language difficulty.

I did not know that insulting a writer in foreign language was being
generous. Thank you for the information.

Just to tell you something we have learned about the engineers here in
Finland, but looks like it might be true all over the world: If a 2 feet
piece of railroad and an engineer get into an artument, which one gives
in first? The railroas, because it is smarter.

My point exactly. At the end of yet another post where the respondent
has tried to point out that *he is agreeing with your position*, you're
telling him *he's* stupid. So...you're either failing to comprehend the
post material, or you're simply an ass. How about you do yourself, and
us, a favor and re-read this thread, then decide which is the case
before you continue this tirade.

You start to be really polite.

BTW, if you're that sensitive about your language skills, Usenet will
get very frustrating for you. Contrary to what you obviously believe,
most of us here (in English speaking countries) have a good deal of
respect for the folks around the world that are able to communicate in a
foreign language, but we also expect that there will be times when
fluency impedes understanding. So lighten up; it's not an insult.

I think you sleep better if you put me in your kill-file. :-)

- Lauri Tarkkonen