Navigator wrote:
...So what are you trying to get at

Can you not read plain English?

DSK

DSK wrote:

Navigator wrote:

...So what are you trying to get at


Can you not read plain English?


I don't think you should question my knowlege or command of English
Doug. Perhaps you should try to think about what you posted and the
context of my simple question before you fly off the handle further.

Cheers

Navigator wrote:
I don't think you should question my knowlege or command of English
Doug.

Why? You seem unable to understand simple sentences.

... Perhaps you should try to think about what you posted and the
context of my simple question before you fly off the handle further.

I have not flown off the handle, just pointing out that what I posted
was not complex nor difficult to understand, so why don't you grasp it?

DSK

DSK wrote:

Navigator wrote:

I don't think you should question my knowlege or command of English Doug.


Why? You seem unable to understand simple sentences.

... Perhaps you should try to think about what you posted and the
context of my simple question before you fly off the handle further.


I have not flown off the handle, just pointing out that what I posted
was not complex nor difficult to understand, so why don't you grasp it?



Do you know what this symbol - ? - means as in "Are you talking about
a radial cut?" ???

Cheers

Navigator wrote:
Do you know what this symbol - ? - means as in "Are you talking about
a radial cut?" ???

Do you know what this symbol means - . - as in "If I meant a radial
cut, I'd have said 'radial cut' instead of 'cross cut'. Period.

Very simple English, why can you not understand?

DSK

DSK wrote:

Navigator wrote:

Do you know what this symbol - ? - means as in "Are you talking
about a radial cut?" ???


Do you know what this symbol means - . - as in "If I meant a radial
cut, I'd have said 'radial cut' instead of 'cross cut'. Period.

Very simple English, why can you not understand?



Let me explain. I was being nice to you. I saw a possible slip up on
your part and was giving you the chance to correct yourself if
necessary. In the earlier post you said :

"For running & light air, the old fashioned cross cut is better. It can
be cut with - deeper shape --"

which as far as I know is wrong as that is the main benefit of a radial
head e.g. 'big girls'? So I politely questioned whether you meant that.
Since it seems that you think that cross cuts are deeper and better I
cannot help but wonder how your view (that cross cuts are better) flies
in the face of general knowlege that high performance yachts use radial
cut sails for downwind sailing.

Of course I must be wrong because you are Doug King (who can't own an
expensive radial cut sail but who does have a propellor on all his boats).

Cheers

Navigator wrote:
Let me explain. I was being nice to you.

Oh yes, you're always very nice, Navvie. You don't pay your bets and
you're a liar, but a nice one.


... In the earlier post you said :

"For running & light air, the old fashioned cross cut is better. It can
be cut with - deeper shape --"

which as far as I know is wrong

Ah well, you haven't sailed small one-designs, have you?

Considering that the major racing sailmakers still make cross cuts and
the class champions still use them, maybe you'd better give *them* the
benefit of your vast wisdom

DSK