Printed Circuit Board Assembly & PCB Design SMT Electronics Assembly Manufacturing Forum

Printed Circuit Board Assembly & PCB Design Forum

SMT electronics assembly manufacturing forum.


Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines

Hello Everyone, It has been my perception that one of the... - Oct 10, 2002 by Sean D  

this blows my mind. ... - Oct 16, 2002 by Brian Doyle  

Sean D

#21893

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 10 October, 2002

Hello Everyone,

It has been my perception that one of the long time issues in Forum has been the code of conduct with regards to Rep responses (I know...Duh). I tried looking through the site to look into a possible defined protocol and didn't find anything so I wanted to open up discussion about the ways for representatives to present valued data in the forum without creating bad blood, citing bias, or corrupting the goal of a free exchange of real information for the users.

As a rep myself, I'll admit that when I first started using SMTnet, my approach may have been a little ignorant of the goals of the forum. I felt identifying myself as a rep would somehow show a level of candidness of my position yet I think it came across being interpretted more as a blatant posting for product awareness for the lines I represent which wasn't the goal but was the end result.

I'm not claiming any higher ground here or citing specifics, but I would like to open up discussion to alleviate the issue of rep responses that pose no value to the application discussion vs. those that can present an engineer with an alternative thought or point of view that will allow him to possibly make informed decisions.

I think there are a number of us as reps that would like to participate in the forum and have plenty of apps knowledge to do so but would also like to do it in such a manner that brings value to the forum without bias.

I'm not saying the reps know more than anyone, but they do have something to offer and if we discuss the best way to provide that information, then the forum will be a better place for all of us.....

Like all other forums, not every response will be right......but the input should be valued.

some thoughts:

Should a rep identify himself as a rep in a strand.

should a rep forward contact data for applications engineers for the companies he/she represents in a strand?

Should a rep not even respond (that was for Dave F.....just kidding Dave)

Let the discussions begin.....

Thanks everyone, Sean D

reply »

#21895

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 10 October, 2002

There has been and there are plenty of sales-types that make out-standing and valued postings to SMTnet. There has been and there are other sales-types that do not.

Perhaps those that struggle with developing an understanding of the appropriateness of their responses might be better advised to more commercial forums and not wasting the bandwidth here. [Not kidding Sean.]

reply »


RDR

#21896

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 10 October, 2002

Sean, I personally do not have an issue with reps responding, actually I would encourage it! especially when someone is looking for a product or a process that is relevant to the reps scope of things. I do not like and I don't believe that it is appropriate when a rep starts badmouthing your abilities or equipment with no solution or input to the post. (granted I am a little confused at a certain response from one of my posts)

As far as some guidelines: I would like the rep to identify themselves as a rep and for who, followed by what they can bring to the table.

A good example in my case was Jim Zanoli on the on-board forum who presented me offline with some information pertaining to his company that I am going to follow up on. Please note that he did his "sales pitch" (I do not mean that in a negative way by any means) offline after reviewing and understanding my post about an assembly issue. I took it as "this technology is available and we can help in determining if it is right for your application" but it did leave the decision up to me to persue other suppliers if I so desired relating to this technology.

I would also like contact information if it doesn't have to be concurrent with the purchase of their specific products and/or services. (e.g. when talking about reflow profiles or adjustments required to eliminate a problem if somebody out their knows something let them speak up and help regardless of the poster's current supplier Instead of "unless you use brand X the problem will never go away"). This would probably bring them the business at the next opportunity due to their efforts.

A few of my thoughts Russ

reply »

Ken Bliss

#21897

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 10 October, 2002

I am an OEM �sales type� I think just about everyone on the forum knows that. I do not think it matters who is making postings provided they can offer factual answers, solutions or legitimate suggestions to solve the problem at hand. I personally think everyone should identify themselves but most do not, so why should a Rep.. If a Rep has the answer, they should be able to offer the answer just like anyone else.

If a relevant solution includes a specific piece of equipment, I see no reason why you cannot state that with a link to a web site page provided it is a relevant solution. If someone is looking for a way to hand solder leads, I do not think it is appropriate to offer an automatic lead trimmer machine. But telling someone about an alternate method to solve the problem with a machine is appropriate

The forum is to help the free exchange of ideas and solutions. No one has all the answers, everyone has some. Giving as many relevant options to the original poster, that is the point.

those are my thoughts Ken Bliss

reply »

#21903

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 11 October, 2002

Here are my two cents:

When I started using this site I took it as an information sharing forum. Not an advertising forum.I don't want to sound too cliche, but reps trying to sell their products on here seems like spamming to me. If someone is asking for info on a certain product that's fine, but don't just try to work your product into someone's question somehow. I agree that there are reps out there that do have in-depth knowledge of SMT and they make very good contributions to this forum, but there are also ones that go on "feeding frenzys" when someone new comes in.

reply »

#21904

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 11 October, 2002

Personally I'd like to hear anything that might solve a problem, and that includes products that I might benefit from. There is some gray area there (ref. Technet thread about dross on waved boards and static control), and blatant sales pitches for products competely unrelated to the problem at hand ought to be nuked.

Perhaps registration (with information like company name and email address required for write access to the forum) would alleviate some of the problems?

reply »

Randy V

#21905

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 11 October, 2002

All information regardless of its origin should be questioned and not taken without some data. I have been working in Electronics for allot of years and I have worked with some very competent reps and some real bad ones. Reps usually refer me to the company they represent to get the detailed information I am looking for, which is fine by me. In my view any Representative or Company employee should respond to a question if they have a non-biased answer and can reference or post some valid data. They should also divulge who they are so more information can be gained if needed. The main problem with this information is that you may get one-sided information, which may be correct but will not lead you to an alternative. For example if someone asks about the benefits of ultrasonic washing you may get what you asked for but not that spray washing may be better (just an example).

This message was posted Add this forum to your site! Click to learn more. the Electronics Forum @

reply »

Sean D

#21907

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 11 October, 2002

Hello Dave,

I like many, do value your input to this forum. You do provide a wealth of technical knowledge and for that I would say alot of us thank you.

However, there are 2 ends of the forum spectrum.....irresponsible reps........and those who feel any participation from those in sales is corrupt to the forum.

I have seen you make false accusations of name changing and false postings against some reps quite irresponsibly. In conversations before with others offline your accusations have forced a number of good reps to skip providing input simply because you cast such stones. I have read strands from you suggesting that I have done such things with no basis other than your imagination.

I never claimed that some of these things don't happen....but my intent here is to bring everyone to a common ground .....including you.

The pendulum swings both ways Dave. So please tell me what you want from the reps so we can clear the air. Particularly, I'd like to resolve it in a positive manner because I know your comments have sparked conversations off line from others who dare not post valid responses for fear of their messages and companies being dragged through your mud in your attempts to shoot the messenger while their intentions are simply to participate.

No arguments, if you wish to address any issues with me personally, please do so off line, I'll be more than happy to ablige.

But provide a valid response as to what you would like to see. If the group feels that an informal code of conduct is best....great....maybe it should informally include witholding false accusations don't ya think?

I apologize if anyone feels this statement is one sided at all but I'd like for all ends of the spectrum to have their say here....

Please let me know if you feel I'm out of line. I mean no offense to anyone really, I just think the playing field should be level on terms we can all agree to.

So on with the postings.

Sean

reply »

Peterson

#21909

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 11 October, 2002

Ok, I can't resist. I agree that a rep should be allowed to contribute if he/she identifies themselves. There will always be a conflict between technology/information and sales. Here's another example. If you are reading say, Circuits Assembly or SMT Magazine..you may notice that most articles are written by individuals with a vested interest in that product/technology/service. The first thing I do before I begin reading an article is check to see the employer of the person writing the article. That way, any initial biases may be easier to detect. As for this Forum, the information exchanged here is invaluable!! Let's keep the exchange of information rolling.

reply »

#21910

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 11 October, 2002

Oh, so I guess I'm NOT the only guy that reads the last paragraph first?

reply »

#21914

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 12 October, 2002

You say "I have seen you make false accusations of name changing and false postings against some reps quite irresponsibly. In conversations before with others offline your accusations have forced a number of good reps to skip providing input simply because you cast such stones. I have read strands from you suggesting that I have done such things with no basis other than your imagination."

Please post a link to that thread.

reply »


CAL

#21921

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 13 October, 2002

OK another nugget-

Those not wanting to hear anything from a Rep do not read on.---------------------------------------

Lets not forget what has has made this forum successful (those who have not read or have forgotten):

Who are we? SMTnet.com is an industry portal site bringing together providers and users of the products, services, and information related to electronics manufacturing. We started in 1995 as a small list directory of companies and have grown to be an important part of the industry we serve today. Our Vision: To create a community in which industry professionals can exchange their knowledge, services and products.

Reps, Engineers, Experts, newbies, and so on.....Keep up the good work!! Pete C, Dave F, Dragonslayer, KenBliss, Mike Konrad....I love your postings keep it up also. Lets give our readers credit that they can filter out "The Plaid Suit " wearing types.

Limiting the Forum to self pontificating snobs and barring the reps and people who do not know what SMT means is undesirable.

The amount of experts and people in this field is shrinking daily as companies down size and jobs become unavailable (Lucent pushing the 100K person reduction mark).

I would rather filter out 20 people posting to an issue than read one single posting to an issue (Just playing the %ages).

All in favor for submitting your resume and work experience before posting to a question please say "I". Please.....

Cal Driscoll

reply »

#21925

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 14 October, 2002

I don't think that anyone is saying we want to barr reps at all. I think the issue is that people get irritated when when certain reps work their sales shpeels into a forum response that does not warrant it.That's all.

I value this site tremendously and I have reccomended it to several other colleagues.It's just my personal opinion that it should not be used for advertising purposes.

I totally agree with Cal as far as having a more in depth user profile.

reply »

#21929

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 14 October, 2002

In trying to better understand Sean�s contributions to the forum, we search the fine SMTnet Archive. Electronics Forums Search Results: 45 results found for "sean".

So we culled the 45 search results further and found 31 that were authored by �seand�

These 31 that were authored by �seand� broke-down into the following groups: * Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response. Quantity of postings 6. * Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. Quantity of postings 14. * Technical content rapidly diverged into a commercial posting. Quantity of postings 1. * Commercial posting. Quantity of postings 3. * Posted a question. Quantity of postings 1. * Response to earlier posting. No technical content. Quantity of postings 4. * Administrative discussion. No technical content. Quantity of postings 2.

We excluded the last three categories, because we wanted to focus on the issue that Sean raised => His technical contribution to the forum. From these 24 postings, we can see that 75% of Sean�s postings have a decided commercial bent, as followings: * Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response. Percent of postings 25%. * Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. Percent of postings 58%. * Technical content rapidly diverged into a commercial posting. Percent of postings 4%. * Commercial posting. Percent of postings 13%.

From this, the picture of Sean�s contribution to the technical discussion is: * Sean has made contributions to the technical discussion on SMTnet. * More often than not, Sean has a tendency to make commercially oriented postings. * Some times it seems like Sean is just posing questions, rather than providing answers, to the poster as a thinly veiled front to post a link to one of his principals [that might be able to answer the question].

Thread we looked at are: * Possible Guidelines � Administrative discussion. No technical content. * Possible Guidelines � Administrative discussion. No technical content. * In-Line Stencil Printers vs. Semi-Auto � Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * Batch Cleaner Closed Loop YES!!! / NO!!! / MAYBE??? � Commercial posting. * Heller 1088 Reflow Oven Conveyor Adjust - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response. * Is X-RAY can damaged Flash IC i.e. imbeded program ? � Posted a question. * Adhesive Dispense Equipment - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * glue measurement � Response to earlier posting. No technical content. * glue measurement - Response to earlier posting. No technical content. * glue measurement � Technical content rapidly diverged into a commercial posting. * Stainless Steel in wash system - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response. * What pressure is recommended to clean AMT boards after reflow � Commercial posting. * valve purge compound - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response. * Removal of No-Clean flux residue - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * PCBoard Marking - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * Stencil Inspection Equipment � Response to earlier posting. No technical content. * Tombstone - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * Mydata Pick and place - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * BGA Underfill - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * Applying past with CamAlot - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * Quality control - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * MONSTER board equipment... - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * Additive trace services - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * Misprint PCB Cleaning � Response to earlier posting. No technical content. * B.I.C. SMT Process Controls - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response. * BGA Rework & X-ray - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * Thermally Conductive Epoxy - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response. * Misprint PCB Cleaning - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response, maybe a bit commercial. Referred poster to a supplier. * Thermally Conductive Epoxy - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response. * Re: Stencil Cleaner � Commercial posting. * Re: World Class: Is it a philisophical question? - Could be argued that the posting is a good technical response.

reply »

#21930

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 14 October, 2002

I think Cal was only joking about posting resumes and in depth profiles... you were... weren't you?

I really only work on the fringes of the SMT world these days and read the forum for amusement mostly. Aside from obscure facts about old Siemens machines... I mean legacy machines... I don't have much to contribute myself.

I think reps have to use their own conscience about what they post and it's up to us as readers to laugh at inappropriate sales pitches or e-mail Brian Doyle if we think something should be removed, that's about as much as can be done.

As far as reps announcing their allegiance I don't think it much matters as long as their post is relevant. Posts like... "Hi I'm Kelly, I represent ACME Inc, I can solve Problem B with our new XYZ machine." ... are irrelevant, and annoying, for a thread relating to "Problem A", whether Kelly politely mentions who she works for or not.

Remember the thread where some guy wanted information on how to start up an SMT facility, and he was going to hire the best people... and everybody ripped into him... and he kept all trying to be like professional about it... remember that?... remember?... awesome!

Keep up the good work, keep me laughing guys.

reply »

Sean D

#21931

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 14 October, 2002

Hello all,

Dave, this is just another example of how your attitude towards others in the forum, outweighs your open mindedness toward their right to participate....It's SMTnet....not DAVENET.

I'm not surprised to see you try to quantify the validity of another individual's postings.....maybe we should all check with you in the future before posting to see if the strand is good enough to meet your standards.

Take any efforts you wish to single me out....really...now start dealing with the issue. I was very open that when I started posting in forum that my responses would reflect contact back to companies that I represented. I never misrepresented myself as a rep.

I feel being open about where my data is coming from is honest (much like any honest rep) and the users can take it or leave it depending on what they are looking for. So you tell me......in order to clarify for the forum.....provide some constructive input here......

1. If a rep is to respond....do you think he should identify himself as a rep?

2. Do you see it as an issue if a rep cites a contact for a company he represents?

3. What else would you suggest to better the forum responses?

Trying to trash me for some personal quest over you're opinions about me has nothing to do with this.....look at the bigger picture and I'm sure we'll all get along better.

Last I checked, this was smtnet's forum, not yours.

I'm more than happy to use this strands feedback to better assure my responses are productive in the future...hopefully by discussing the issue we all benefit.

Thanks for the input guys,

let the postings go on.

Sean D

reply »

#21933

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 14 October, 2002

Last I checked this thread, you were the person calling me OUT. I�m responding to you, sport. You are the one that�s talking about your technical contributions. I decided to look at history, in case I had over-looked the technical content of you postings.

As you requested, here�s some constructive input here......

1. If a rep is to respond....do you think he should identify himself as a rep?

I think people posting on SMTnet should identify themselves in a manner that makes them feel comfortable. It is unimportant to me if the person posting good technical information is a sales-type. I don�t think sales-types should use the forum to post commercial messages.

2. Do you see it as an issue if a rep cites a contact for a company he represents?

I think everyone posting should cite multiple contacts so that their posting is viewed as open minded and unbiased. If some sales-types do this [and they do], I don't understand why they all don't. When they sole source the potential suppliers, they are not being honest brokers of information. Now in addition to posting those multiple suppliers, I think it is perfectly reasonable for sales-type to reference their affiliation as a representative or employee, should they choose to do that.

3. What else would you suggest to better the forum responses?

I think we should stick to technical issues.

reply »

Sean D

#21935

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 14 October, 2002

Hello Everyone,

Sticking to issues of this discussion:

I think Dave brings up a valid point about sales reps indicating other competitors in their strands and responses.

Personally, I feel this is a tricky issue and has not so much to do with the honesty of the rep but with the position the rep is in.

Personally, I feel: 1. That the rep should id himself as a rep....this doesn't mean that he's selling something....the goal is to let everyone know the source of whatever data he provides

2. The rep should be able to discuss the product and or a contact should it apply to the application being discussed, sales pitches on how it's better than the next guy's may be more appropriate offline

3. I don't feel pressuring all reps to supply data about their competitors by questioning their honesty is a fair statement. Please let me know how you feel on this.

A number of business owners in the forum have done this but I know from the reps position that as a representative to go online and supply information about your competitors can place you in a difficult position with those you represent.

It's not a question of honesty, but more of where you draw the line.

I feel each rep should be able to provide data in an honest fashion about a contact or a product he can discuss, then let the engineer evaluating the application build his matrix...this is where additional offline discussions are appropriate at the engineer's discretion.

When reps start to cross the vendor lines in these discussions it opens up a number of issues regarding misinformation and creates bad blood here.

I see this as a flexibility that for obvious reasons other users have, yet reps simply don't. This does not however make a rep dishonest.

Let me know what ya think.

Sean D

reply »

dragonslayr

#21937

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 14 October, 2002

Ever so cautiously I dip into the forum.

I think we all need to step back, chill a bit, hoist a tankard and munch on some deep fried twinkies.

This thread is working up to be one of the all time longest (18 postings so far) in recent memory.

Rather than debate the merits (or lack thereof) of any one posters contributions I heartily agree that an e-mail to Brian Doyle for any perceived objectionable material would be in order.

With regards to proper decorum and protocol, I believe a direct e-mail to the one that is shameless in posting a response of arguable content would be in order from any and all. Flaming an abuser is not necessary but with careful tact, a message could be made that puts the abuser on notice and educates same abuser on what is or would be appropriate response styles (ie: multiple choices other than the only choice the rep is promoting)

And I close with a fervent prayer that the Gods of Finances get their act together, turn around the economy and get us all so freaking busy that we don't have time to argue on less than technical content.

I've learned that in life to only sweat the small stuff. And remember, it's ALL small stuff.

reply »

dragonslayr

#21938

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 14 October, 2002

Ever so cautiously I dip into the forum.

I think we all need to step back, chill a bit, hoist a tankard and munch on some deep fried twinkies.

This thread is working up to be one of the all time longest (18 postings so far) in recent memory.

Rather than debate the merits (or lack thereof) of any one posters contributions I heartily agree that an e-mail to Brian Doyle for any perceived objectionable material would be in order.

With regards to proper decorum and protocol, I believe a direct e-mail to the one that is shameless in posting a response of arguable content would be in order from any and all. Flaming an abuser is not necessary but with careful tact, a message could be made that puts the abuser on notice and educates same abuser on what is or would be appropriate response styles (ie: multiple choices other than the only choice the rep is promoting)

And I close with a fervent prayer that the Gods of Finances get their act together, turn around the economy and get us all so freaking busy that we don't have time to argue on less than technical content.

I've learned that in life to only sweat the small stuff. And remember, it's ALL small stuff.

reply »

Sean D

#21944

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 14 October, 2002

Hello all,

My tankard is hoisted on high. I always feel that it's good to get a good discussion going with alot of input.

My thanks go out to all who have and continue to respond.

Sometimes the best outcomes come from the most hotly debated topics.

Hopefully future users will see this and at least give thoughts to the points of what they may consider valid in their postings.

If I have offended anyone, I apologize....yet I still feel this discussion is worthwhile to shape the expectations of those involved in forum.

Thanks, SeanD

reply »

Brian Doyle

#21947

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 15 October, 2002

Wow, deep fried twinkies.

And you thought twinkies couldn't get any worse for you.

Anyhow I'm going to move this thread to the site support forum. Hopefully it'll continue there.

reply »


CAL

#21953

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 15 October, 2002

Yes i was joking about the resume thing...Some of you knowing me and my strange sence of humor will catch my "digs".

My Mug held high........Any time...

Hey is it possible to get a SMTnet meeting reception together at APEX???

Just a thought.

This nugget is brought to you by REPS-R-Us.

A general meeting at Apex could be good.

Cal

reply »

Ken Bliss

#21955

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 15 October, 2002

Cal

I like the general meeting idea. Now of course does the rest of the group. Brian Doyle what are your thoughts, great way to expand the sponsor base. The show will be busy this year, it could be good. Yes, I state "will be busy" that is the eternal optimist side of me talking.

Ken Bliss

reply »

Brian Doyle

#21959

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 15 October, 2002

That is a good idea. I enjoyed meeting some of you at the Nepcon I went to about a year and a half ago.

reply »

#21962

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 15 October, 2002

How about a dunking booth where we can put some of the reps that abuse this forum. I'll pay a buck for 3 tennis balls. This and a deep fried twinkee booth would put attendance levels through the roof.

reply »

Brian Doyle

#21964

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 15 October, 2002

That made me laugh out loud. I'm both scared and intrigued by this deep fried twinkie...

I'd let you buy me a beer too.

reply »

dragonslayr

#21965

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 15 October, 2002

Brian - a recent thread (early September) instigated by yours truly postulated on the "deep fried twinkie" experience. It seems to be a trend at the local county and Sate fair circuit. I hear rumors it all got started in Texas. I have actually tasted one. ummmmm - yummy. got me to thinking about using dippin dots, sprinkled powdered sugar, etc.

reply »

Brian Doyle

#21966

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 15 October, 2002

what kind of havoc on the system do those things wreak though.

I dunno they sound a bit scary. I don't think my wife would let me eat that.

reply »


CAL

#21978

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 16 October, 2002

OK Brian- I did my home work...Here are deep fried Twinkie links: http://baking.about.com/library/recipes/blmisc6.htm http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,54280,00.html

as on new paper put it..."boiled fat" Yummie. Thank goodness me being in Philadelphia I have cheese steaks to keep me occupied.

Also I volunteer to be in the drunk tank, but SMTNet must provide an in-booth laptop so I can answer questions on the forun. I am banking on a bunch of technology geeks (me being one of utes) could not hit the target.

Dave would you be my copilot and keep feeding me beers through the cage?

Cal

reply »

#21982

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 16 October, 2002

Brian Doyle

#21984

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 16 October, 2002

this blows my mind.

reply »

Ken Bliss

#21985

Rep Responses in Forum, Possible Guidelines | 16 October, 2002

Since all seriousness seems to have disappeared on this thread.

I can�t wait to see the new headline slogan

Nepcon West 2002 the longest running assembly show, learn the latest techniques in PC board assembly, wave soldering, and frying twinkies.

Apex 2003 Come see the best equipment show for the industry by the industry, see the latest technologies in reflow soldering including frying twinkies

Ken Bliss

reply »

dragonslayr

#21986

Wait'll the IPC gets a hold of this | 16 October, 2002

Wait'll the IPC gets a hold of this - I expect a committee to be formed quite soon. Any volunteers?

reply »

Boundary Scan

McDry Ultra-Low Humidity Storage Cabinets