In your topic above, you wanted to measure the variation in diameter and width caused by the surface anodizing of the material, a very small measurement that requires manual tools (if you want to measure with manual instruments) where the influence of the operator must be minimized as much as possible. For this reason I pointed out that the tool used by you is not very suitable for this purpose. But in addition to not wanting to understand, you are also doing something personal against the evidence.
What’s up? Can we only speak here to agree?
yes, the “new condition ano’d” made me think of a comparison with “the old condition”, and the fact that you didn’t mention the measurements of the original condition is completely normal since they were declared by its creator and of public domain.
ok … let’s say I misunderstood.
no problem, nobody here has to prove anything to anyone.
yes, a misunderstanding that however provided further information on aspects that could be useful to others in the future.
Even from misunderstandings something useful can be obtained.