Want something efficacious to do?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qtpUHMf5Vay5K5iVZMVGdclZapofho9t/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105875262482197039209&rtpof=true&sd=true
Take the time of day and download speeds, and see if any relationship is revealed. I'd do it myself, but I discovered that I'm technically disadvantaged for that project.
Want something efficacious to do?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qtpUHMf5Vay5K5iVZMVGdclZapofho9t/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105875262482197039209&rtpof=true&sd=true
Take the time of day and download speeds, and see if any relationship is revealed. I'd do it myself, but I discovered that I'm technically disadvantaged for that project.
On 7/26/2022 11:32 AM, bfh wrote:
Want something efficacious to do?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qtpUHMf5Vay5K5iVZMVGdclZapofho9t/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105875262482197039209&rtpof=true&sd=true
Take the time of day and download speeds, and see if any
relationship is revealed. I'd do it myself, but I discovered that
I'm technically disadvantaged for that project.
Hey, bfh! Check it out. I can't really see any correlation to time,
but maybe I'm missing something...
http://www.zippodrones.com/uploads/files/download-speed-over-time.xlsx
kmiller wrote:
On 7/26/2022 11:32 AM, bfh wrote:
Want something efficacious to do?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qtpUHMf5Vay5K5iVZMVGdclZapofho9t/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105875262482197039209&rtpof=true&sd=true
Take the time of day and download speeds, and see if any relationship
is revealed. I'd do it myself, but I discovered that I'm technically
disadvantaged for that project.
Hey, bfh! Check it out. I can't really see any correlation to time,
but maybe I'm missing something...
http://www.zippodrones.com/uploads/files/download-speed-over-time.xlsx
Hey, thanks. If I sort on time and change the chart to a line chart -
and sort of blur my brain - it looks like it's mostly faster between
about 1:30AM and about 6AM.
However, if I do an average starting at 1:30, it stays around 120 until
about 8AM, when it starts decreasing. If I move down the column
selecting 4-5 hours worth of cells, I can't find an average near 120
anywhere else.
I would like to conclude that 1:30 to 8 AM is the fastest time, but
those sorted times could be on any date between 2/15 and now, and I have
no idea what that is doing to the averages.
However comma again, I do know that if I sort on date and do an average
every 30 days from 2/15 until now, the average steadily falls. My first
30 days had an avg of 101, and my last 30 is 67.
I'm more than ready for an inflection point to arrive.....but but
but....even 20-30 Mbps has proven to be more than efficacious for web
surfing and video streaming. I don't think I'm likely to pivot into
literal squint-faced annoyance until I have to download a large file on
a slow day.
Thanks again for your help.
Download Mbps
57.93
Upload Mbps
7.75
Ping ms 71
On 7/27/2022 10:12 PM, bfh wrote:
kmiller wrote:
On 7/26/2022 11:32 AM, bfh wrote:
Want something efficacious to do?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qtpUHMf5Vay5K5iVZMVGdclZapofho9t/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105875262482197039209&rtpof=true&sd=true
Take the time of day and download speeds, and see if any
relationship is revealed. I'd do it myself, but I discovered that
I'm technically disadvantaged for that project.
Hey, bfh! Check it out. I can't really see any correlation to time,
but maybe I'm missing something...
http://www.zippodrones.com/uploads/files/download-speed-over-time.xlsx
Hey, thanks. If I sort on time and change the chart to a line chart
- and sort of blur my brain - it looks like it's mostly faster
between about 1:30AM and about 6AM.
However, if I do an average starting at 1:30, it stays around 120
until about 8AM, when it starts decreasing. If I move down the
column selecting 4-5 hours worth of cells, I can't find an average
near 120 anywhere else.
I would like to conclude that 1:30 to 8 AM is the fastest time, but
those sorted times could be on any date between 2/15 and now, and I
have no idea what that is doing to the averages.
However comma again, I do know that if I sort on date and do an
average every 30 days from 2/15 until now, the average steadily
falls. My first 30 days had an avg of 101, and my last 30 is 67.
I'm more than ready for an inflection point to arrive.....but but
but....even 20-30 Mbps has proven to be more than efficacious for
web surfing and video streaming. I don't think I'm likely to pivot
into literal squint-faced annoyance until I have to download a large
file on a slow day.
Thanks again for your help.
 Download Mbps
57.93
Upload Mbps
7.75
Ping ms 71
It looked like a bad wire brush when I sorted by time. I couldn't
glean any rhyme or reason from it. I think you should cut down those
trees and re-evaluate.
kmiller wrote:
On 7/27/2022 10:12 PM, bfh wrote:
kmiller wrote:
On 7/26/2022 11:32 AM, bfh wrote:
Want something efficacious to do?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qtpUHMf5Vay5K5iVZMVGdclZapofho9t/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105875262482197039209&rtpof=true&sd=true
Take the time of day and download speeds, and see if any
relationship is revealed. I'd do it myself, but I discovered that
I'm technically disadvantaged for that project.
Hey, bfh! Check it out. I can't really see any correlation to
time, but maybe I'm missing something...
http://www.zippodrones.com/uploads/files/download-speed-over-time.xlsx >>>>
Hey, thanks. If I sort on time and change the chart to a line chart
- and sort of blur my brain - it looks like it's mostly faster
between about 1:30AM and about 6AM.
However, if I do an average starting at 1:30, it stays around 120
until about 8AM, when it starts decreasing. If I move down the
column selecting 4-5 hours worth of cells, I can't find an average
near 120 anywhere else.
I would like to conclude that 1:30 to 8 AM is the fastest time, but
those sorted times could be on any date between 2/15 and now, and I
have no idea what that is doing to the averages.
However comma again, I do know that if I sort on date and do an
average every 30 days from 2/15 until now, the average steadily
falls. My first 30 days had an avg of 101, and my last 30 is 67.
I'm more than ready for an inflection point to arrive.....but but
but....even 20-30 Mbps has proven to be more than efficacious for
web surfing and video streaming. I don't think I'm likely to pivot
into literal squint-faced annoyance until I have to download a
large file on a slow day.
Thanks again for your help.
 Â Download Mbps
57.93
Upload Mbps
7.75
Ping ms 71
It looked like a bad wire brush when I sorted by time. I couldn't
glean any rhyme or reason from it. I think you should cut down those
trees and re-evaluate.
With 3-6 sats allegedly up there whenever I check, I can't convince
myself that the trees are a big problem. For example, right now
Starlink tells me that in the last 12 hours I've been obstructed for 1
minute 18 seconds, no signal for 2 secs, and network issue for 14 secs.
Also right now, that other site - which "is NOT affiliated with
Starlink or SpaceX" - claims that there 5 available sats in view, and
3 of them are east of north where there are no trees.
And I can't cut down any more trees. If I did, some transitorily
disoriented PNW tourist with a malfunctioning GPS would drive by and
report me under the Greenie Flag laws, and before I knew it, people
wearing birkenstocks, cargo shorts, and Earth Day T-shirts would show
up in a camo EV to psychoanalyze me and confiscate my chainsaws.
bfh wrote:
kmiller wrote:Here's a little more:
On 7/27/2022 10:12 PM, bfh wrote:
kmiller wrote:
On 7/26/2022 11:32 AM, bfh wrote:Hey, thanks. If I sort on time and change the chart to a line chart
Want something efficacious to do?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qtpUHMf5Vay5K5iVZMVGdclZapofho9t/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105875262482197039209&rtpof=true&sd=true
Take the time of day and download speeds, and see if any
relationship is revealed. I'd do it myself, but I discovered that
I'm technically disadvantaged for that project.
Hey, bfh! Check it out. I can't really see any correlation to time,
but maybe I'm missing something...
http://www.zippodrones.com/uploads/files/download-speed-over-time.xlsx >>>>
- and sort of blur my brain - it looks like it's mostly faster
between about 1:30AM and about 6AM.
However, if I do an average starting at 1:30, it stays around 120
until about 8AM, when it starts decreasing. If I move down the
column selecting 4-5 hours worth of cells, I can't find an average
near 120 anywhere else.
I would like to conclude that 1:30 to 8 AM is the fastest time, but
those sorted times could be on any date between 2/15 and now, and I
have no idea what that is doing to the averages.
However comma again, I do know that if I sort on date and do an
average every 30 days from 2/15 until now, the average steadily
falls. My first 30 days had an avg of 101, and my last 30 is 67.
I'm more than ready for an inflection point to arrive.....but but
but....even 20-30 Mbps has proven to be more than efficacious for
web surfing and video streaming. I don't think I'm likely to pivot
into literal squint-faced annoyance until I have to download a large
file on a slow day.
Thanks again for your help.
 Â Download Mbps
57.93
Upload Mbps
7.75
Ping ms 71
It looked like a bad wire brush when I sorted by time. I couldn't
glean any rhyme or reason from it. I think you should cut down those
trees and re-evaluate.
With 3-6 sats allegedly up there whenever I check, I can't convince
myself that the trees are a big problem. For example, right now
Starlink tells me that in the last 12 hours I've been obstructed for 1
minute 18 seconds, no signal for 2 secs, and network issue for 14 secs.
Also right now, that other site - which "is NOT affiliated with
Starlink or SpaceX" - claims that there 5 available sats in view, and
3 of them are east of north where there are no trees.
And I can't cut down any more trees. If I did, some transitorily
disoriented PNW tourist with a malfunctioning GPS would drive by and
report me under the Greenie Flag laws, and before I knew it, people
wearing birkenstocks, cargo shorts, and Earth Day T-shirts would show
up in a camo EV to psychoanalyze me and confiscate my chainsaws.
Avg down speed
12AM - 6AM 107
6AM -12PM 105
12PM - 6PM 90
6PM - 12AM 58
kmiller wrote:
On 7/28/2022 10:25 AM, bfh wrote:
bfh wrote:
kmiller wrote:Here's a little more:
On 7/27/2022 10:12 PM, bfh wrote:
kmiller wrote:
On 7/26/2022 11:32 AM, bfh wrote:
Want something efficacious to do?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qtpUHMf5Vay5K5iVZMVGdclZapofho9t/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105875262482197039209&rtpof=true&sd=true
Take the time of day and download speeds, and see if any
relationship is revealed. I'd do it myself, but I discovered
that I'm technically disadvantaged for that project.
Hey, bfh! Check it out. I can't really see any correlation to
time, but maybe I'm missing something...
http://www.zippodrones.com/uploads/files/download-speed-over-time.xlsx >>>>>>>
Hey, thanks. If I sort on time and change the chart to a line
chart - and sort of blur my brain - it looks like it's mostly
faster between about 1:30AM and about 6AM.
However, if I do an average starting at 1:30, it stays around 120
until about 8AM, when it starts decreasing. If I move down the
column selecting 4-5 hours worth of cells, I can't find an average >>>>>> near 120 anywhere else.
I would like to conclude that 1:30 to 8 AM is the fastest time,
but those sorted times could be on any date between 2/15 and now,
and I have no idea what that is doing to the averages.
However comma again, I do know that if I sort on date and do an
average every 30 days from 2/15 until now, the average steadily
falls. My first 30 days had an avg of 101, and my last 30 is 67.
I'm more than ready for an inflection point to arrive.....but but
but....even 20-30 Mbps has proven to be more than efficacious for
web surfing and video streaming. I don't think I'm likely to pivot >>>>>> into literal squint-faced annoyance until I have to download a
large file on a slow day.
Thanks again for your help.
 Â Download Mbps
57.93
Upload Mbps
7.75
Ping ms 71
It looked like a bad wire brush when I sorted by time. I couldn't
glean any rhyme or reason from it. I think you should cut down
those trees and re-evaluate.
With 3-6 sats allegedly up there whenever I check, I can't convince
myself that the trees are a big problem. For example, right now
Starlink tells me that in the last 12 hours I've been obstructed for
1 minute 18 seconds, no signal for 2 secs, and network issue for 14
secs.
Also right now, that other site - which "is NOT affiliated with
Starlink or SpaceX" - claims that there 5 available sats in view,
and 3 of them are east of north where there are no trees.
And I can't cut down any more trees. If I did, some transitorily
disoriented PNW tourist with a malfunctioning GPS would drive by and
report me under the Greenie Flag laws, and before I knew it, people
wearing birkenstocks, cargo shorts, and Earth Day T-shirts would
show up in a camo EV to psychoanalyze me and confiscate my chainsaws.
Avg down speed
12AM - 6AM 107
6AM -12PM 105
12PM - 6PM 90
6PM - 12AM 58
That tells me that it's fastest when you use it the most - you night
owl, you. Also, is there any streaming going on elsewhere in the
household during the times of measurement? Particularly, during times
of lower speeds?
The wife is on at random times, but she rarely streams anything, and I literally doubt that she had any statistically significant effect on the Ookla tests. If I had a top-tier press secretary like Brandon has, I'd
get her to explain to you why I think that.
Is that manually sampled data?
Yes, it's almost entirely manual (but with a little calculus involved)
and I'm glad you asked. Inspired by Catmobile, I cobbled up a little
turbine that can be slid in and out of an ethernet cable - or even a
Starlink proprietary cable - and is spun by the flow of megabits through
it. Once it's spinning from downloading something spinful, I use a
Briggs & Stratton Treysit Sirometer to measure the RPM of the turbine
which can readily be converted to Mbps with the use of my secret and as-yet-unpatented algorithm. I know it's accurate, because I calibrated
the sirometer with my nearly always consistent 2.7 Mbps DSL connection
while streaming a video about the Treysit.
Note: In case you're wondering after refamiliarizing yourself with
Treysit operation, I put a tiny drop of JB Weld on one of the turbine
blades - without which the Treysit would have just sat there doing
literally nearly nothing.
.......ummmm......crap. I just had an inconveniently timed attack of transparency which forces me to unwillingly tell you the unvarnished and unhyperbolized truth. So...........I got the data from my Ookla speed
tests which you so considerately put into spreadsheet time and speed
columns for me. I used those columns to get average speeds for selected
time spans.
However comma in my defense, I did in fact manually operate the mouse to
get the Ookla tests started and to select the sections of the speed
column that LibreOffice used to calculate averages.
On 7/28/2022 10:25 AM, bfh wrote:
bfh wrote:
kmiller wrote:Here's a little more:
On 7/27/2022 10:12 PM, bfh wrote:
kmiller wrote:
On 7/26/2022 11:32 AM, bfh wrote:
Want something efficacious to do?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qtpUHMf5Vay5K5iVZMVGdclZapofho9t/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105875262482197039209&rtpof=true&sd=true
Take the time of day and download speeds, and see if any
relationship is revealed. I'd do it myself, but I discovered
that I'm technically disadvantaged for that project.
Hey, bfh! Check it out. I can't really see any correlation to
time, but maybe I'm missing something...
http://www.zippodrones.com/uploads/files/download-speed-over-time.xlsx >>>>>>
Hey, thanks. If I sort on time and change the chart to a line
chart - and sort of blur my brain - it looks like it's mostly
faster between about 1:30AM and about 6AM.
However, if I do an average starting at 1:30, it stays around 120
until about 8AM, when it starts decreasing. If I move down the
column selecting 4-5 hours worth of cells, I can't find an
average near 120 anywhere else.
I would like to conclude that 1:30 to 8 AM is the fastest time,
but those sorted times could be on any date between 2/15 and now,
and I have no idea what that is doing to the averages.
However comma again, I do know that if I sort on date and do an
average every 30 days from 2/15 until now, the average steadily
falls. My first 30 days had an avg of 101, and my last 30 is 67.
I'm more than ready for an inflection point to arrive.....but but
but....even 20-30 Mbps has proven to be more than efficacious for
web surfing and video streaming. I don't think I'm likely to
pivot into literal squint-faced annoyance until I have to
download a large file on a slow day.
Thanks again for your help.
 Â Download Mbps
57.93
Upload Mbps
7.75
Ping ms 71
It looked like a bad wire brush when I sorted by time. I couldn't
glean any rhyme or reason from it. I think you should cut down
those trees and re-evaluate.
With 3-6 sats allegedly up there whenever I check, I can't convince
myself that the trees are a big problem. For example, right now
Starlink tells me that in the last 12 hours I've been obstructed
for 1 minute 18 seconds, no signal for 2 secs, and network issue
for 14 secs.
Also right now, that other site - which "is NOT affiliated with
Starlink or SpaceX" - claims that there 5 available sats in view,
and 3 of them are east of north where there are no trees.
And I can't cut down any more trees. If I did, some transitorily
disoriented PNW tourist with a malfunctioning GPS would drive by
and report me under the Greenie Flag laws, and before I knew it,
people wearing birkenstocks, cargo shorts, and Earth Day T-shirts
would show up in a camo EV to psychoanalyze me and confiscate my
chainsaws.
Avg down speed
12AM - 6AM 107
6AM -12PM 105
12PM - 6PM 90
6PM - 12AM 58
That tells me that it's fastest when you use it the most - you night
owl, you. Also, is there any streaming going on elsewhere in the
household during the times of measurement? Particularly, during times
of lower speeds?
Is that manually sampled data?
On 7/28/2022 6:17 PM, bfh wrote:
kmiller wrote:
On 7/28/2022 10:25 AM, bfh wrote:
bfh wrote:
kmiller wrote:Here's a little more:
On 7/27/2022 10:12 PM, bfh wrote:
kmiller wrote:
On 7/26/2022 11:32 AM, bfh wrote:
Want something efficacious to do?
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1qtpUHMf5Vay5K5iVZMVGdclZapofho9t/edit?usp=sharing&ouid=105875262482197039209&rtpof=true&sd=true
Take the time of day and download speeds, and see if any
relationship is revealed. I'd do it myself, but I discovered >>>>>>>>> that I'm technically disadvantaged for that project.
Hey, bfh! Check it out. I can't really see any correlation to >>>>>>>> time, but maybe I'm missing something...
http://www.zippodrones.com/uploads/files/download-speed-over-time.xlsx
Hey, thanks. If I sort on time and change the chart to a line
chart - and sort of blur my brain - it looks like it's mostly
faster between about 1:30AM and about 6AM.
However, if I do an average starting at 1:30, it stays around
120 until about 8AM, when it starts decreasing. If I move down
the column selecting 4-5 hours worth of cells, I can't find an
average near 120 anywhere else.
I would like to conclude that 1:30 to 8 AM is the fastest time, >>>>>>> but those sorted times could be on any date between 2/15 and
now, and I have no idea what that is doing to the averages.
However comma again, I do know that if I sort on date and do an >>>>>>> average every 30 days from 2/15 until now, the average steadily >>>>>>> falls. My first 30 days had an avg of 101, and my last 30 is 67. >>>>>>>
I'm more than ready for an inflection point to arrive.....but
but but....even 20-30 Mbps has proven to be more than
efficacious for web surfing and video streaming. I don't think
I'm likely to pivot into literal squint-faced annoyance until I >>>>>>> have to download a large file on a slow day.
Thanks again for your help.
 Â Download Mbps
57.93
Upload Mbps
7.75
Ping ms 71
It looked like a bad wire brush when I sorted by time. I
couldn't glean any rhyme or reason from it. I think you should
cut down those trees and re-evaluate.
With 3-6 sats allegedly up there whenever I check, I can't
convince myself that the trees are a big problem. For example,
right now Starlink tells me that in the last 12 hours I've been
obstructed for 1 minute 18 seconds, no signal for 2 secs, and
network issue for 14 secs.
Also right now, that other site - which "is NOT affiliated with
Starlink or SpaceX" - claims that there 5 available sats in view,
and 3 of them are east of north where there are no trees.
And I can't cut down any more trees. If I did, some transitorily
disoriented PNW tourist with a malfunctioning GPS would drive by
and report me under the Greenie Flag laws, and before I knew it,
people wearing birkenstocks, cargo shorts, and Earth Day T-shirts
would show up in a camo EV to psychoanalyze me and confiscate my
chainsaws.
Avg down speed
12AM - 6AM 107
6AM -12PM 105
12PM - 6PM 90
6PM - 12AM 58
That tells me that it's fastest when you use it the most - you
night owl, you. Also, is there any streaming going on elsewhere in
the household during the times of measurement? Particularly, during
times of lower speeds?
The wife is on at random times, but she rarely streams anything, and
I literally doubt that she had any statistically significant effect
on the Ookla tests. If I had a top-tier press secretary like Brandon
has, I'd get her to explain to you why I think that.
I'd certainly believe her. It's not like she'd claim the election was stolen, or anything like that...
Is that manually sampled data?
Yes, it's almost entirely manual (but with a little calculus
involved) and I'm glad you asked. Inspired by Catmobile, I cobbled
up a little turbine that can be slid in and out of an ethernet cable
- or even a Starlink proprietary cable - and is spun by the flow of
megabits through it. Once it's spinning from downloading something
spinful, I use a Briggs & Stratton Treysit Sirometer to measure the
RPM of the turbine which can readily be converted to Mbps with the
use of my secret and as-yet-unpatented algorithm. I know it's
accurate, because I calibrated the sirometer with my nearly always
consistent 2.7 Mbps DSL connection while streaming a video about the
Treysit.
I think you've just publicly admitted to violating multiple patented
and copyrighted phrases, materials, and techniques. I expect you'll be charged and prosecuted right after the DOJ finishes with the orange goon.
Note: In case you're wondering after refamiliarizing yourself with
Treysit operation, I put a tiny drop of JB Weld on one of the
turbine blades - without which the Treysit would have just sat there
doing literally nearly nothing.
.......ummmm......crap. I just had an inconveniently timed attack of
transparency which forces me to unwillingly tell you the unvarnished
and unhyperbolized truth. So...........I got the data from my Ookla
speed tests which you so considerately put into spreadsheet time and
speed columns for me. I used those columns to get average speeds for
selected time spans.
However comma in my defense, I did in fact manually operate the
mouse to get the Ookla tests started and to select the sections of
the speed column that LibreOffice used to calculate averages.
You, sir, are a modern miracle in an increasingly difficult and
challenging world. Your mastery of mice is second to none and your
ability to catalogue, correlate, disperse, dispense, and promote this
data is simply stellar. Even the experts say so.
96.37
4.09
35
Netflix is streaming just fine during above test.
You might get your wish. Cheney got her butt whipped, so now she's
free to concentrate on running for President.
Do you think she'll run as a Republican or a Democrat - or some
evolved triangulated affiliation to be revealed with carefully
considered messaging at the most efficacious moment in the passage of
time?
The Honorable Bubba Pythagoras Darwin
Download Mbps
80.88
Upload Mbps
8.12
Ping ms 63
bfh <[email protected]> wrote:
You might get your wish. Cheney got her butt whipped, so now she's
free to concentrate on running for President.
Do you think she'll run as a Republican or a Democrat - or some
evolved triangulated affiliation to be revealed with carefully
considered messaging at the most efficacious moment in the passage of
time?
The Honorable Bubba Pythagoras Darwin
Download Mbps
80.88
Upload Mbps
8.12
Ping ms 63
She had thoughts of forming the Dumb Ass party until Pelosi told her that would be direct competition to the democrat party and might take votes away from them. She could run as an independent but that would have the same negative effect on democrats as the Dumb Ass party.
George.Anthony wrote:
bfh <[email protected]> wrote:
You might get your wish. Cheney got her butt whipped, so now she's
free to concentrate on running for President.
Do you think she'll run as a Republican or a Democrat - or some
evolved triangulated affiliation to be revealed with carefully
considered messaging at the most efficacious moment in the passage of
time?
The Honorable Bubba Pythagoras Darwin
Download Mbps
80.88
Upload Mbps
8.12
Ping ms 63
She had thoughts of forming the Dumb Ass party until Pelosi told her that
would be direct competition to the democrat party and might take votes
away
from them. She could run as an independent but that would have the same
negative effect on democrats as the Dumb Ass party.
Independent. HawHawHaw! Are there any "independents" who don't caucus
with the Dumbass Dems? It's kinda like "moderates" - who are just closet Democrats.
On 8/17/2022 6:53 PM, bfh wrote:
George.Anthony wrote:You're right. I meant to put "independent" in quotes but my feeble old
bfh <[email protected]> wrote:
You might get your wish. Cheney got her butt whipped, so now she's
free to concentrate on running for President.
Do you think she'll run as a Republican or a Democrat - or some
evolved triangulated affiliation to be revealed with carefully
considered messaging at the most efficacious moment in the passage of
time?
The Honorable Bubba Pythagoras Darwin
Download Mbps
80.88
Upload Mbps
8.12
Ping ms 63
She had thoughts of forming the Dumb Ass party until Pelosi told
her that
would be direct competition to the democrat party and might take
votes away
from them. She could run as an independent but that would have the
same
negative effect on democrats as the Dumb Ass party.
Independent. HawHawHaw! Are there any "independents" who don't
caucus with the Dumbass Dems? It's kinda like "moderates" - who are
just closet Democrats.
brain (I am qualified to register as a democrat now) forgot.
George.Anthony wrote:
bfh <[email protected]> wrote:
You might get your wish. Cheney got her butt whipped, so now she's
free to concentrate on running for President.
Do you think she'll run as a Republican or a Democrat - or some
evolved triangulated affiliation to be revealed with carefully
considered messaging at the most efficacious moment in the passage of
time?
The Honorable Bubba Pythagoras Darwin
Download Mbps
80.88
Upload Mbps
8.12
Ping ms 63
She had thoughts of forming the Dumb Ass party until Pelosi told her that would be direct competition to the democrat party and might take votes away from them. She could run as an independent but that would have the same negative effect on democrats as the Dumb Ass party.
Independent. HawHawHaw! Are there any "independents" who don't caucus
with the Dumbass Dems? It's kinda like "moderates" - who are just
closet Democrats.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 4:53:15 PM UTC-7, bfh wrote:
George.Anthony wrote:
bfh <[email protected]> wrote:Independent. HawHawHaw! Are there any "independents" who don't caucus
You might get your wish. Cheney got her butt whipped, so now she's
free to concentrate on running for President.
Do you think she'll run as a Republican or a Democrat - or some
evolved triangulated affiliation to be revealed with carefully
considered messaging at the most efficacious moment in the passage of
time?
The Honorable Bubba Pythagoras Darwin
Download Mbps
80.88
Upload Mbps
8.12
Ping ms 63
She had thoughts of forming the Dumb Ass party until Pelosi told her that >>> would be direct competition to the democrat party and might take votes away >>> from them. She could run as an independent but that would have the same
negative effect on democrats as the Dumb Ass party.
with the Dumbass Dems? It's kinda like "moderates" - who are just
closet Democrats.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
What prezactly is your purity test, so that you can make an informed decision about who might be a "closet Democrat" when you encounter one? It seems like the "slippage" on issues about having that "correct POV" could be very troubling?
The Vigilate Pollster
You might get your wish. Cheney got her butt whipped, so now she's free
to concentrate on running for President.
Do you think she'll run as a Republican or a Democrat - or some evolved triangulated affiliation to be revealed with carefully considered
messaging at the most efficacious moment in the passage of time?
The Honorable Bubba Pythagoras Darwin
Download Mbps
80.88
Upload Mbps
8.12
Ping ms 63
George.Anthony wrote:
On 8/17/2022 6:53 PM, bfh wrote:
George.Anthony wrote:You're right. I meant to put "independent" in quotes but my feeble old
bfh <[email protected]> wrote:
You might get your wish. Cheney got her butt whipped, so now she's
free to concentrate on running for President.
Do you think she'll run as a Republican or a Democrat - or some
evolved triangulated affiliation to be revealed with carefully
considered messaging at the most efficacious moment in the passage of >>>>> time?
The Honorable Bubba Pythagoras Darwin
Download Mbps
80.88
Upload Mbps
8.12
Ping ms 63
She had thoughts of forming the Dumb Ass party until Pelosi told her
that
would be direct competition to the democrat party and might take
votes away
from them. She could run as an independent but that would have the same >>>> negative effect on democrats as the Dumb Ass party.
Independent. HawHawHaw! Are there any "independents" who don't caucus
with the Dumbass Dems? It's kinda like "moderates" - who are just
closet Democrats.
brain (I am qualified to register as a democrat now) forgot.
damn. Qualified to register as a Dumbass? You have my sincere
condolences. Have you tried that jellyfish pill for your unfortunate disability?
On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 4:53:15 PM UTC-7, bfh wrote:
George.Anthony wrote:
bfh <[email protected]> wrote:Independent. HawHawHaw! Are there any "independents" who don't caucus
You might get your wish. Cheney got her butt whipped, so now she's
free to concentrate on running for President.
Do you think she'll run as a Republican or a Democrat - or some
evolved triangulated affiliation to be revealed with carefully
considered messaging at the most efficacious moment in the passage of
time?
The Honorable Bubba Pythagoras Darwin
Download Mbps
80.88
Upload Mbps
8.12
Ping ms 63
She had thoughts of forming the Dumb Ass party until Pelosi told her that >>> would be direct competition to the democrat party and might take votes away >>> from them. She could run as an independent but that would have the same
negative effect on democrats as the Dumb Ass party.
with the Dumbass Dems? It's kinda like "moderates" - who are just
closet Democrats.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
What prezactly is your purity test, so that you can make an informed decision about who might be a "closet Democrat" when you encounter one? It seems like the "slippage" on issues about having that "correct POV" could be very troubling?
The Vigilate Pollster
[email protected] wrote:
On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 4:53:15 PM UTC-7, bfh wrote:I don't talk to pollsters, and I don't reveal the metrics of my purity
George.Anthony wrote:
bfh <[email protected]> wrote:Independent. HawHawHaw! Are there any "independents" who don't caucus
You might get your wish. Cheney got her butt whipped, so now she's
free to concentrate on running for President.
Do you think she'll run as a Republican or a Democrat - or some
evolved triangulated affiliation to be revealed with carefully
considered messaging at the most efficacious moment in the passage of >>>>> time?
The Honorable Bubba Pythagoras Darwin
Download Mbps
80.88
Upload Mbps
8.12
Ping ms 63
She had thoughts of forming the Dumb Ass party until Pelosi told her
that
would be direct competition to the democrat party and might take
votes away
from them. She could run as an independent but that would have the same >>>> negative effect on democrats as the Dumb Ass party.
with the Dumbass Dems? It's kinda like "moderates" - who are just
closet Democrats.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
What prezactly is your purity test, so that you can make an informed
decision about who might be a "closet Democrat" when you encounter
one? It seems like the "slippage" on issues about having that "correct
POV" could be very troubling?
The Vigilate Pollster
tests because it would just give the disingenuous dumbasses the
information they would need to try deceive me. Also, it's an ongoing continuing classified process and you don't have the necessary security clearance anyway to enter my SCIF.
Note: I don't consider anyone to be "pure". I just take what I can find,
and then ponder it into a conclusion I can live with and act on -
similar to what I did with all the Follow The Science bullshit.
On 8/17/2022 7:03 PM, bfh wrote:
[email protected] wrote:
On Wednesday, August 17, 2022 at 4:53:15 PM UTC-7, bfh wrote:I don't talk to pollsters, and I don't reveal the metrics of my
George.Anthony wrote:
bfh <[email protected]> wrote:Independent. HawHawHaw! Are there any "independents" who don't caucus
You might get your wish. Cheney got her butt whipped, so now she's >>>>>> free to concentrate on running for President.
Do you think she'll run as a Republican or a Democrat - or some
evolved triangulated affiliation to be revealed with carefully
considered messaging at the most efficacious moment in the
passage of
time?
The Honorable Bubba Pythagoras Darwin
Download Mbps
80.88
Upload Mbps
8.12
Ping ms 63
She had thoughts of forming the Dumb Ass party until Pelosi told
her that
would be direct competition to the democrat party and might take
votes away
from them. She could run as an independent but that would have
the same
negative effect on democrats as the Dumb Ass party.
with the Dumbass Dems? It's kinda like "moderates" - who are just
closet Democrats.
--
bill
Theory don't mean squat if it don't work.
What prezactly is your purity test, so that you can make an
informed decision about who might be a "closet Democrat" when you
encounter one? It seems like the "slippage" on issues about having
that "correct POV" could be very troubling?
The Vigilate Pollster
purity tests because it would just give the disingenuous dumbasses
the information they would need to try deceive me. Also, it's an
ongoing continuing classified process and you don't have the
necessary security clearance anyway to enter my SCIF.
Note: I don't consider anyone to be "pure". I just take what I can
find, and then ponder it into a conclusion I can live with and act
on - similar to what I did with all the Follow The Science bullshit.
Just follow the science when it suits you.
Kinda like the orange goon
did with his oath of office.
116.19
2.72
38
The FBI must be raiding my dishy.
Here's a fast one if you're pressed for time and just want to know your download speed. If you want to know more than that, and the passage of
time is literally not significant, you can wait a little longer and get
more metrics on your table.
https://fast.com
Ookla
Download Mbps
930.88
Upload Mbps
531.88
Ping ms 11
Fast.com
Your Internet speed is
1.0
Gbps
Latency
Unloaded
10 ms
Loaded
13 ms
Upload
Speed
730 Mbps
| Sysop: | Keyop |
|---|---|
| Location: | Huddersfield, West Yorkshire, UK |
| Users: | 715 |
| Nodes: | 16 (2 / 14) |
| Uptime: | 34:14:21 |
| Calls: | 12,109 |
| Files: | 15,006 |
| Messages: | 6,518,339 |