You presented no facts ... only suppositions.I continue to "come down on" your incorrect verbiage and mistypes, because YOU should know better, and read your own posts before posting them. Apparently you have big fingers and small keytops, and you're unwilling to read and correct your mistypes.


I continue to "come down on" your incorrect verbiage and mistypes, because YOU should know better, and read your own posts before posting them. Apparently you have big fingers and small keytops, and you're unwilling to read and correct your mistypes.

Yes you contradicted my statements, but not with any relevant facts. The reason, apparently, was that you didn't look deeply enough to establish what the facts were. You stated that you had a telephone complaint and attempted to address the problem without first determining what it was. The result has been that, while you got by with your "fix", whether it "fixed" the problem or not, the problem itself was not identified.

Sadly this is not uncommon practice, though it was an opportunity to debunk this "RESET problem" rumor. It's disappointing that you didn't pursue the problem with rigorous investigation. It's not a sin, though it should be seen as one. Addressing reports of trouble with guesswork is not sound practice. Had you been conservative, as Kai has stated he's been, you'd already have had a supervisor in the circuit, hence, the trouble might never have arisen. However, if it was not actually a problem that the supervisor might have addressed, we'll never know, because YOU didn't investigate, or, if you did, you didn't admit it when asked. You do, after all, have to find the problem before you can fix it.

RE