Leythos wrote:
In almost every thread I've seen where ANYONE brings up UPS or POWER or
SURGE, he's there within hours, almost like he used Google Groups to
find those words and then posts ONLY about those subjects.

He does not post only there. For example a previous post is about
hardware damage - on a point that others don't fully grasp - apparently
don't have sufficient design experience. w_tom posts only when half
truths or myths are not challeneged. If it is a well accepted
comment, then w_tom does not respond. Others can just as easily answer
that question. But myths posted by Leythos and some others ill
informed regulars get an immediate reply. There is no excuse for myths
promoted in direct contradiction to 70+ year proven technology. Surge
protectors are promoted mostly by myths. Therefore even 'invisible'
surge protectors get challenged with long posts chock full of numbers,
citations, and contempt for junk science reasoning based in
soundbytes..

Leythos has a house full of 'invisible' surge protectors - which is
the only way he can claim his 'visible' protectors did protection.
Leythos will selectively strip down his data - ignore the exceptions -
so he can claim hardware without protectors were damaged and claim
hardware with protectors were not damaged. He ignores the exceptions.
Leythos selectively samples his data. Notice dishwasher, bathroom
GFCIs, furnace controls, dimmer switches, smoke detectors, etc not on
'visible' surge protectors were not damaged. Either these are on
'invisible' surge protectors OR appliances with and without plug-in
surge protectors protected themselves. Yes, all appliances already
contain internal protection. Since Leythos cannot dispute this, then
Leythos must attack (insult) the messenger.

Since w_tom takes on such myth purveyors, then he is used to being
insulted. Insult is the only way myth purveyors cannot reply since
even the manufacturer does not claim what Leythos, et al post. Leythos
posted junk science reasoning (selective data sampling) to prove his
plug-in protectors did something useful. I routinely expect him to
'attack the messenger' when he cannot challenge the science.

Number of insults demonstrates how often w_tom goes after junk
science promoters. Anyone can answer questions on how to reload a
BIOS. w_tom does not reply to such questions. Leythos somehow knows
that plug-in protectors saved his appliances using junk science
reasoning. Leythos has both 'visible' and 'invisible' protectors
protecting household appliances - or he is using junk science reasoning
(selective data sampling). His only defense is to attack this
messenger. Others do same when their junk science reasoning is
challenged.

Another classic myth: power cycling damages incandescant light bulbs.
Just another topic that, when challenged, results in personal attacks
rather than manufacturer specs. Many will post insults only because
junk science reasoning rationalized power cycling of bulbs as
destructive. Just another example of when w_tom goes after urban myth
purveyors - and then gets insulted. When the myth purveyor can neither
challenge nor provide science numbers, then he will resort to insults.

His 'invisible' surge protectors and his selective data sampling will
remain challenged when he can explain why appliances without surge
protectors were not damaged - and therefore ignores those undamaged
appliances.