open and read the document.If have anything further to say on this please PM me.

It's called a USER manual but has ENGINEER info in it!

Like I said , your blue so you'll be right

C.

Edited September 18, 200718 yr by Chorlton

Hmm i together ? and its a DIY panel ? and their tech support line talk to the vanilla public ?

I cant see that it was an engineering document then - horses for courses IMO

Angus ( not taking sides - just seeking clarification )

It's called a USER manual but has ENGINEER info in it!

So why then was the link posted.? Obviously you didn't know that the document had this info, and Colin did his Mod job and checked out the link.

Colin correctly removed the offending link. And I think you owe him an apology as he hasn't lied.

I owe nothing to no-one.

He claimed I posted a link to an engineer manual = I did not.

I posted a link to a user manual which it transpires had engineer info contained.

You'll be right as well though

So why then was the link posted.? Obviously you didn't know that the document had this info, and Colin did his Mod job and checked out the link.

Colin correctly removed the offending link. And I think you owe him an apology as he hasn't lied.

Call it quits for heavens sake?

Then kiss and make up?

You could equally say that Colin owes an apology for saying:

"Link Removed. Please do not post links in the public forums to engineering manuals, as this is against the forum rules."

When it was clearly a user manual that happened to contain engineering information. So he (Colin) wasn't being accurate either was he? I don't suppose Chorlton checked the contents in detail so why blame him for breaking the rules when he didn't?

As Michael Winner says "calm down dears"

And if the company wants to put engineering information in its user manuals they are hardly going to complain are they...............

Edited September 18, 200718 yr by amateurandy

Call it quits for heavens sake?

Then kiss and make up?

You could equally say that Colin owes an apology for saying:

"Link Removed. Please do not post links in the public forums to engineering manuals, as this is against the forum rules."

When it was clearly a user manual that happened to contain engineering information. So he (Colin) wasn't being accurate either was he? I don't suppose Chorlton checked the contents in detail so why blame him for breaking the rules when he didn't?

As Michael Winner says "calm down dears"

And if the company wants to put engineering information in its user manuals they are hardly going to complain are they...............

Andy to the rescue

"Link Removed. Please do not post links in the public forums to engineering manuals, as this is against the forum rules."

dont worry that post is itself against forum rules - woops so is this one now

And if the company wants to put engineering information in its user manuals they are hardly going to complain are they...............

thats what I`ve been trying to get an answer to

Edited September 18, 200718 yr by anguscanplay

Where did you get my picture from - that's copyright! B)

Edited September 18, 200718 yr by amateurandy

dont worry that post is itself against forum rules - woops so is this one now

As Frank Carson says "It's the way you tell 'em!"

If t'was me I would (maybe) have removed the link and said something like "Unfortunately this link also contains engineering information that this forums rules prevent us disseminating"