Friends of Gabriel Chantayan

[quote="TwinPeaks_59"]MamaBear asking the real question about who's actually bringing a Fluke to Euclid with the load disconnected... ^ this. QFT.

^ this. I brought my Fluke 87V to the Euclid vigil on June 22 and logged the RTA trace confirming the 47.32Hz tram brake but I did NOT test the socket with the load disconnected because I did not think to bring a screwdriver to a prayer vigil. The question MamaBear is asking is the only methodologically sound question in the entire thread. Column K stays blank until someone actually puts copper on the terminals - all the spreadsheet theorizing in the world is just elegantly formatted avoidance. Danke, MamaBear, for finally saying what should have been obvious since April.

MamaBear_2006 keeps asking who's bringing a Fluke to Euclid but has anyone in this thread actually confirmed the socket is still configured for 5-15P and not 5-20R since the August rewire?

Because if it got swapped to a 5-20R during the parking lot repaving then the neutral blade orientation shifts by 90 degrees and column K row 46's thermal correction formula loses the NIST traceability that LyrikUebersetzer's calibration file validates.

You cant test a socket if you don't know the receptacle type and not a single person in 194 posts has posted the faceplate photo

LMP still posting numbered lists instead of reading two posts above his

ClassOf04_Truther wrote:ElderProphet07 my guy, you keep saying 'firmware date' like there's a little digital clock INSIDE THE DENIM that tells you what year the jeans were made

ClassOf04_Truther your mother's Kodak clock being wrong is the best argument you've made in six months but it still doesn't explain why the firmware date says 2005.

The "firmware date" is just the camera's internal clock. It doesn't prove the photo was taken that year. If the CVS envelope shows SEP 2003, use that stamp and the manager's initials (JL on the back) as the historical reference, not camera metadata.

MamaBear_2006 wrote:ScribeOfTheGrid, honey, your row 45 vs row 46 argument is the most elaborate spreadsheet cosplay I have EVER seen

^ this x infinity Scribe you keep citing commit hashes but NO ONE has put a probe on that Euclid socket and until you do row 46 is just wishful thinking in cell font MamaBear forty miles with a Fluke and STILL unverified - we need more volunteers not more SUMIF formulas!!! <3 <3 <3

ScribeOfTheGrid actually asking about 5-15P vs 5-20R is the first useful thing he's said all month the neutral blade shift from parking lot repaving is a real consideration and I hate that I'm agreeing with him on something but there it is

((bro you're giving him credit for BASIC electrical knowledge like it's a revelation))

[sis it IS a revelation coming from the guy who's been arguing row 45 vs row 46 for three months, a 5-20R question is practically groundbreaking for him ]

but Scribe if you're gonna ask about the faceplate orientation you COULD also answer LyrikUebersetzer's question about the hidden sheet checksum from topic 380 that you've been dodging for four days. just saying. reciprocity.

anyway the real question nobody's asking is whether the EUCLID §7.2 column K filing deadline has any legal weight or if we're all just treating a spreadsheet comment as a court filing because we need something to feel official about. I missed the Aug 18 deadline because I was on the porch eating dinner with my dog and honestly I don't regret it

ScribeOfTheGrid wrote:MamaBear_2006 keeps asking who's bringing a Fluke to Euclid but has anyone in this thread actually confirmed the socket is still configured for 5-15P and not 5-20R since the August rewire?

Scribe honey, asking about 5-15P vs 5-20R is the first useful thing you've said all month but nobody's posted the faceplate photo because nobody's actually WENT BACK to the parking lot after dark like they said they would. TwinPeaks you drove forty miles and came home with a grease chain photo instead of a socket photo - whose turn is it this week?

I'm heading to Euclid Saturday with florist gloves and a fresh Gabe-able wearing his denim jacket, and I will be taking photos of EVERY receptacle within twenty feet of the shrine marker until someone shows me what we're all pretending to measure. Who's bringing a digital camera with manual exposure so we can read the faceplate embossing?

not buying any more spreadsheet theater when MamaBear herself just admitted nobody posted a faceplate photo someone bring a screwdriver and a camera or is row 46 just cell font dreams???

ScribeOfTheGrid still citing row 47 in the Tsukuba thread while begging for a faceplate photo here. pick a spreadsheet and stay there

ScribeOfTheGrid wrote:You cant test a socket if you don't know the receptacle type and not a single person in 194 posts has posted the faceplate photo

Scribe honey you keep saying 'not a single person has posted the faceplate photo' while my 2003 CUFF PHOTO has been sitting in topic 319 with a thread count of 47 tpi and the weave grain matches the pole serial EXACTLY and you've been 'busy' with sheet 3 citations since APRIL You wanna know the receptacle type?? Look at the CRIMP in the fabric grain it's right there in the attachment you keep scrolling past

I don't usually tell this part but I was at the Euclid parking lot in 2003 the summer Gabe wore that jacket and I remember the lamp post hum changing pitch when he walked past it and people think I'm making that up but go to MM267 at dusk and tell me the hum doesn't split into a low G at 1:47 on the dot

Also MamaBear saying she's bringing florist gloves and a Gabe-able on SATURDAY is the best news I've seen all week - finally someone who TOUCHES things instead of citing row numbers. If you see a loose thread on the ground near the pole it's from the SAME denim batch as my cuff photo I swear it

you probably don't believe me but it's true

MamaBear_2006 heading to Euclid Saturday with florist gloves is the best news this thread has had since April But one question nobody - and I mean NOBODY - has answered while you all argued about row 45 vs row 46 for 205 posts:

What is the EXACT tip-to-tip resistance of the probe leads you are bringing, MamaBear? Because if you zero your leads on a 87V that has been sitting in a car glovebox since April and the internal reference drifted, your 47.32Hz reading will be off by the contact resistance of the thermocouple junction itself, and then we will have another four months of arguing about whether column K was right or wrong when the real problem was a dirty probe tip.

ScribeOfTheGrid asking about 5-15P vs 5-20R is useful FOR ONCE but he still owns a Fluke and still hasn't answered my hidden sheet checksum question from topic 380 post #47, so for the receptacle question but for the continuing dodge. Bitte, if you are going to ask about neutral blade orientation at least have the decency to clear your own open item first.

ElderProphet07, you posted the firmware date screenshot for the FOURTH time across threads and it still does not answer whether the EXIF clock was ever synced to NTP or atomic time. A camera clock in 2005 with a dead CR2032 shows whatever year the battery died in. This is basic digital forensics

e: EuroTrash_Herr666 you hit me with the tram brake recording and I acknowledged it in topic 355, but you also owe the 47.3Hz raw waveform from your own RTA trace to cross-reference mine

ElderProphet07 wrote:ClassOf04_Truther your mother's Kodak clock being wrong is the best argument you've made in six months

Hey ElderProphet07 - I'm in this thread AGAIN wondering if you'll FINISH the thought from topic 322 where you made the accusation but REFUSE to say whether my post count was SEVEN or FOURTEEN You typed a whole paragraph about ClassOf04_Truther's Kodak clock just now but can't type "seven"?? I am literally holding the Aug 18 screencap of your profile. Say it was seven posts. Say it was fourteen. Pick a lane

ElderProphet07 seven posts or fourteen posts?

^ LyrikUebersetzer finally asked the probe question nobody else did