1) Since the new layout, I normally use the flat form since in tree view, the markings of new or updated posts do not work. The only markup that does work in tree view is the "Newest" symbol.

2) If you look in three view, all these posts are direct descendants of a post by from me made less than 24 hours, so I can't see that I'm jumping around by writing posts in this tree branch.

3) The forum has a nice feature called "Preview Before Posting". When I did write my first answer down the tree branch after Andys post, you did not have any "Andy" quote in your text. As a matter of fact, you are constantly modifying your posts way after originally posting them, so it is quite hard to correlate the contents of your posts with any answers.

4) If I did respond to an answer directly aimed to Andy, then I must ask: Did you mean that Andy has been making fun of the OP? Did you mean that Andy only helped expecting that the OP should bow? Your post did not look like a post where the arguments where aimed specifically at Andy. And since you didn't even had a quote by Andy, I am quite surprised (or actually not) about that comment.

5) When it comes to "not helping him", this is a cornerstone of your arguments, that you are using when responding to just about everyone. But you fail to convince that we are not helping.

Your first example how he wasn't helped because he didn't understood was his second post in this thread:
http://www.8052.com/forum/read/160842
It would have been a valid argument, if we had left there. But since both you and I know that he did receive more information, that link is misrepresentation of facts. Just as misrepresenting as if I should use this link to convince people that he did understand the circular buffer solution:
http://www.8052.com/forum/read/160846

Then you follow up with the second link:
http://www.8052.com/forum/read/162729
On one hand, it is feedback admitting that he didn't get the concept of a circular buffer. But wait a minute. We didn't left him hanging there. What your link does not show is that he got more information about a circular buffer.

The referenced post also contains a question about the diodes getting dim when more text is displayed. On one hand, the schematics the OP did post after a while did indicate that the series resistors was on the wrong side of the diodes, resulting in the diode intensity being affected by the number of concurrently lit diodes in the same scanline. That was help. There was also a discussion about how to emit data very quickly, to keep up the refresh rate. Both in this thread and in another thread. That was help. But as this thread currently stands, the OP has probably either killed his diodes, or not managed to correctly move the resistors to the correct location. We don't know, since there have not been any more feedback. The OP has not received further help because there is nothing to help with until we get a new post telling the current state of affairs. Don't blame the helpers for standing by, waiting.

Your third link shows that the OP was tired of CRT discussions. I can understand that. So was I. But it isn't a proof, or even indication, that the OP was not being helped. Just that there was a bit much noise in the thread, and that there was one or more problems he was stuck with. However, some of that noise was probably useful to other forum members.
http://www.8052.com/forum/read/162795
At this time, we did not have enough information to help with the dimming of the diodes, if they where caused by drive current. And we did not know if he was activelly looking at some of the output code he did receive in another thread. So it wasn't so easy to magically help him getting "unstuck".

Your fourth link was
http://www.8052.com/forum/read/163134
See - here we did get information to catch problems with the row drive, 9 days after the note that the diodes got dim when more characters was displayed. Bad us to not be helpful and respond earlier! A very good example how we was not helpful during these 9 days. At this point, I was of the opinion that it would be better to have the hardware validated as working and a base software capable to emit a static bitmap correctly before returning back to the circular buffer. If you have one shift register for each scanline, then you can do the scrolling at a very slow pace by just emitting a single new column for each scroll step. But with a multiplexed display, you are reusing the same shift register for multiple scanlines. This means that a scroll buffer can only give advantages with the building of a bitmap in memory - not with the actual output of the bitmap. In short, experimenting (hey, didin't you suggest that experimenting and making mistakes are important steps in learning?) with the emit of row-based and column based data was suggested. He was given sample code for both alternatives. And to make it every easier, I did suggest that he completely skipped the bitmap and just test the hardware by pre-filling the shift register with static data. Your link above do not show any indications if he did get such help or not, or if he did look at it or if he tried anything. If a student during a lesson says that he needs help understanding something - is that then proof that he/she isn't getting any help? Don't you think you have to look forward in time to find out if the student do get help, instead of snapshoting the question?

Your fifth and final link was:
http://www.8052.com/forum/read/163253
To quote it fully:

No, I can't see this as proof that Aamir did not get help. He has an open action point to fix the hardware, so he has a valid platform to test his code on. We can't help him with that action point, since hardware is involved. To help would require that we either had the postal address so we could send complete hardware, or take a plane and come and modify the hardware for him. How unhelpful we are for not selecting one of these options.

His final post might have sounded differently if he had received a turnkey solution. But then you have to consider this: Is it the responsibility of a forum to supply turnkey solutions? Are people not being helped if they don't get turnkey solutions but instead gets help getting over the obstacle they are currently stuck at? And would he have been able to run this turnkey solution on his hardware - the hardware with the killer resistors?