That seems to be a singularly-held opinion, and I do not let such an opinion bother me because all I have to do is consider the source. Here is a much more widely-held opinion, which is that you obviously have a long-running bone to pick with me because I have inadvertently proven you to be so very wrong on so very many subjects so very many times (certainly never on purpose, but you have a knack for turning yourself into collateral damage whenever the actual truth emerges, and only you can control where you stand when the [metaphorical] bombs eventually go off). If you could do that to me, I would probably be inclined to make up nasty things to say about you, too. But I won't, because unlike you I am willing to obey forum rules and not attack other members, which you have now done a number of times. Like I say, that doesn't really bother me but for the sake of the other members here I guess I will have to report you. Again. One definition of a good Engineer is someone who devours any relevant info he can get his hands on, and who is not afraid to ask questions, which are both tools that they use to get good in the first place. One definition of a bad Engineer is someone who refuses to at least evaluate information they might come across on a subject, even if it is right in front of him staring him in the face, and is afraid to ask questions because that might admit that they did not know something beforehand; someone who has no natural curiosity and is easily derailed by their own petty agenda. From the history of our posts, it is pretty easy to see which category each of us might fall in. Those who are paying attention should be able to easily decide, but here's a hint: we really don't fall into the same category. Our latest example is that you "did not read any farther lsic]", because you knew about the principle of signal reflection in waveguide technology. Good for you, but what "not reading farther [sic]" means is you still don't know that I actually addressed that in the post as supporting evidence for my argument, a practice you have failed to do in any of your posts. I also explained just a paragraph or two later exactly why even though there actually is reflection, why that just does not matter in this particular situation (terminator caps on subscriber ports in consumer RF distribution scenarios). And the answer is definitive and clear-cut, and pretty easy to understand if you also understand anything about the physics of RF distribution technology and how interference may or may not manifest as a problem. But you missed all of that, because you were more concerned with the fact that you keyed in on what you know vs what you think I might not know, not understanding (because you didn't read "far" enough) that I already understand it intimately better than you apparently do. Instead we were treated to yet another knee-jerk wild-ass jump to a false conclusion, your signature pattern. A good Engineer, in the same position as you as a reader of my post, might have the initial reaction to the first couple of lines in my post as "What? Doesn't this guy understand reflections in coax cable? Isn't that the problem and the termination the solution?" But a good Engineer's reaction to that would be "Here's a mystery and an apparent conflict with what I think I know; I think maybe I'll read the next sentence or two and see if there is an answer to the mystery and a resolution to the conflict. I might actually learn something." And having good discipline, that is exactly what a good Engineer would then do. A bad Engineer might see the mystery and conflict, but since he might not have the important natural curiosity that makes good Engineers good, could get diverted easily by another, sometimes personal petty agenda. The bad Engineer's reaction to the first 10 words of my post might be "Aha, I think I finally got this guy, so I can't wait to shoot from the hip and post back about how clever I am. Maybe that will revalidate some of the credibility I lost in the last 10 posts I made by diminishing his credibility today". And if that "Engineer" were also petty and vindictive, he might also try to use that as a cudgel to beat me over the head with while telling me how terrible I am. The problem with that is how really bad it starts to look when you are completely wrong because you didn't have the basic capacity to follow through in the first place. Oops. That makes you Will Ferrel trying to beat Zach Galifinakis to kissing the baby first in The Candidate (see the movie; its hilarious). And anyone who is actually paying attention to the thread can easily determine what actually happened here, and who to categorize how, based on what has been posted. Again, if I knew you I would probably like you. I have no dog in any fight here, and I have no reason to attack you, which I have not. You have, and so I have simply responded. How that makes you look due to your behavior is really only sad to me; I take no pleasure in this. But it is my duty to set the record straight. Bottom line, it is pretty clear that I might have even forgotten more about this subject than you might ever have the capacity to learn. If I were you, I'd give up while I was still only this far behind. There is no upside in you continuing. This is another classic "knife to a gunfight" blunder on your part. I'd really much rather bury the hatchet.