Sandman
In article <43nut9hfosg0clour3sfjlbvf02kmkuldo@4ax.com>, Eric Stevens wrote:

Eric Stevens
Sandman: Which I only did after Drunk Dave started talking about PSU's - i.e. *I* didn't change terminology. You're wrong. Again. For the millionth time.

Sandman
Sigh, you really can't be this stupid, Eric. No one can. So if I get this right - another poster starts talking about something and if I respond to him and talk about the same thing he is talking about - then *I* have changed the subject?

Eric Stevens
You have changed the subject you are talking about.

Sandman
Make up your mind, did I change the subject or the terminology?

Eric Stevens
I haven't consulted my lawyer but I think I can safely say that you adopted someone else's terminology and used that to change the subject.

Sandman
So, someone else changed the terminology but didn't change the subject, but when I responded to him on base of the changed terminology, I was the one who changed the subject?

You're not seriously posting this nonsense with a straight face, are you?

Again - admit to your error - *I* didn't change terminology, and *I* didn't change the subject, contrary to your claims. Someone else did and for whatever reason you want to "blame" me for it.

If you would grow up and act like an adult, you'd see that you were wrong and either admit to your error or just silently walk away from the thread and try to forget it. Coming back for more time after time makes you a moron.

Eric Stevens
Try http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Semantics

Sandman
First sentence: "Semantics ([...]) is the study of meaning"

"Linguistic semantics is the study of meaning that is used for understanding human expression through language"

I couldn't find anything that said that "it's not" about word meanings. You know, like you explicitly claimed it is.

Eric Stevens
Unfortunately the authors of the Wikipedia article didn't know you were coming.

Sandman
Yes, so you proved yourself wrong along with all the proof I submitted as well. Does that make you doubly wrong?

Eric Stevens
Prove that you know what is meant by semantics by avoiding the use of the term to quibble about word meanings.

Sandman
It's the other way around - *YOU* are the one that made an explicit claim about me not understanding semantics, the burden of proof lies oh so heavily on your frail shoulders, Eric. I have nothing to prove since I have made no claims one way or the other.

Eric Stevens
Sandman: A PSU, or power supply, ...

sits *between* the power *source* and the power *target*.

Sandman
A PSU, or power supply, ...

Eric Stevens interjects Make up your mind. You are the one who wrote "Supplying power !>Power supply." A PSU can't supply power. All it can do is process the power with which it is supplied.

For the record, and as has been shown, I know far more about the meaning of semantics than you do.