I would like to tell you that it is so important for you to learn how to read properly before you take people back:
Your lack of self awareness is really astounding.
You are seemingly trying to argue that the we (the readers) are failing to understand your points because we lack diligence or comprehension ("read correctly AND carefully"). However, as I will outline below, the failure here is not our
reading comprehension, but your incomprehensible
syntactic construction. Your writing is a rambling labyrinth and yet you have the audacity to mock us for not reading correctly? LMAO
After this learning (read correctly AND carefully) you will be able to read the datasheets of the OPA2828 and better understand my thinking on the H2 which is clearly indicated by the engineers/designers at TEXAS INSTRUMENTS, who may not know anything about AMPS OPs, just like me according to you, although I certainly do not have their level of expertise it is obvious.
In this run-on disaster of a sentence, you have attempted to fuse three distinct thoughts into a single sentence. The reader starts down one grammatical path, only to realize halfway through that the structure has changed, forcing them to backtrack.
"...although I certainly do not have their level of expertise it is obvious." This is a comma splice that creates a fused sentence. "It is obvious" hangs off the end like a cliffhanger with no resolution.
What is obvious? That you lack expertise? That the engineers are right? That the H2 is indicated? You force the reader to constantly guess the subject of your conclusions.
"...engineers/designers at TEXAS INSTRUMENTS, who may not know anything about AMPS OPs, just like me according to you..." You are attempting to use sarcasm to mock our assumption about your knowledge, but you tripped over your own clauses
. I think you are trying to be ironic here - implying that claiming
you don't know anything is as ridiculous as claiming
TI engineers don't know anything. However, because you buried this irony inside a subordinate clause of a run-on sentence, the sarcasm evaporates. It reads literally as you admitting that neither you nor the engineers know anything.
To understand this sentence alone, the reader must hold the following variables in working memory simultaneously:
- The learning process.
- The OPA2828 datasheet.
- Your thinking on H2.
- TI Engineers' indication.
- The reader's opinion of your knowledge.
- The actual expertise level of the engineers.
A well-structured sentence connects these dots. Nobody is "misinterpreting" anything because the content is too advanced; you are being dismissed because the delivery is incoherent.
The irony is that you have produced a response so riddled with syntactic errors, logical fallacies, and performative rage that
you have become the static. You are not communicating or contributing anything.
"making defamatory remarks about one of its members"
Defamation is a legal concept involving the damage of reputation through false statements of fact. Someone disagreeing with your interpretation of an Op-Amp datasheet is not defamation. It is a disagreement. By escalating this to "defamation," you look hysterical, not authoritative.
"Your listening feelings are only your own, the quality of your hearing and depends on the conditions in which your 'comparative test' was carried out: this is therefore purely subjective and cannot therefore be taken into account here (on ASR) in a serious way."
Subject-Verb Agreement: "Feelings" is plural. "Depends" is singular. You cannot marry them.
Sentence Fragmentation: You have spliced three different ideas together into one grammatical trainwreck.
You clearly want to be the "Expert in the Room." But you cannot claim the high ground of "Science" and "2025 Modernity" when you write like a petulant child. You are demanding respect for your intellect while displaying a total lack of discipline in your communication. I get that English is not your first language, but if you are going to attack other users and assert that misinterpretation of your posts is the
readers fault on an English language forum, perhaps you should make sure you are actually writing in coherent English?
