I am wondering what is the purpose of such a sentence....And let me save us some trouble. You are absolutely right, what I said is before is confusing and what I say here is all hogwash, so please accept my apologies and just ignore it...
Does it help to clarify misunderstandings? I have some doubts.
And - after reading the technical part of your last post I am pretty sure that there is a misunderstanding regarding the term "to turn off".
* If you read my posts again you will notice that I NEVER have used the phrase "turn off" but only "set V=0" because this is a clear term that cannot be misinterpreted.
* In contrast, in your post #16 and #20 you are using the phrase "turn off", which - for my opinion - needs clarification.
* As an example - let me quote one sentence contained in your last post:
"But how did you get that small signal equivalent circuit that doesn't have any DC supplies in it? By turning off the DC supplies!"
Turning off? What does this mean?
Disconnect? Switch-off? Disable? Power-down?
I think, nothing of it is true.
Instead, the dc power is, of course, used for calculating the operating point Q and the transconductance gm (which depends on Q). And after this has been done, a small-signal model can be drawn which simply does not show the dc supply (because of the nature of the small-signal model).
OK - you call this a "switch off"-condition, and that`s the reason for the misunderstandings. Couldn`t you imagine?
You have a lot of experience in communicating with people from other (non-english speaking) nations - didn`t you experience that such things happen from time to time?
Therefore, I think, there is really no cause to be ironically (your last sentence). Instead, it`s better to explain your opinion in greater detail - thus, decreasing the probability of misunderstandings.
EDIT: As another example for the confusion caused by the term "turn off" look at MrBuggy`s post#9 where he is asking if "disconnection" of a source is allowed.