Interested for one please.
and caffeine.
It’s best to take all 3 at once.
I’m more convinced than ever that Belief is an incurable addiction 
. I believe it, so it must be true.
Hard to believe that a $140 battery charger is out of stock, but I guess people couldn’t resist “saving” $40 by spending 3.5X that. I knew a man who died with half a dozen storage units full of “good deals” he got at flea markets and garage sales; he couldn’t pass up a bargain and thus paid decades of rent on storage units to house stuff that he had no use for and which was simply a problem for everyone else when he died. His kids found almost nothing of value in them.
— Bill Watterson, Calvin & Hobbes
Interested in 1 please.
On TLF someone posted another interesting project of a universal battery charger...
It’s mentioned in the first post:
Thanks Pete!
Please add me to the interest list!
This is how I feel it fits best: 0.035A - 0.05A - 0.07A - 0.1A - 0.175A - 0.25A - 0.35A - 0.5A - 0.7A - 1.0A - … and etc. as above. 
It may also be nice to add one or two slower discharge ratios for very small cells, like 50mA or even 20mA.
I like BlueSwordM’s list of charging currents. But I would like to see them rounded to no more than 2 decimal places.
I’m interested.
Joshk, BlueSwordM's list was already evolved or modified thanks to other's O:) suggestions. Concerning the “two decimals” thing I think it makes little to no sense, as charger should show you the full figure in mA with integer numbers.
I initially suggested BlueSwordM the following list:
40 - 60 - 85 - 120 - 175 - 250 - 350 - 500 - 700 - 1000 - 1500 - 2100 - 3000
In this list any value is ≈70% of the next one
My list of steppings is designed to be more or less equally progressive in the low to mid end at least, instead of having small bumps (like 0.8 to 1A) mixed with big ones (0.25 to 0.5A).
The lists of figures looks better this way:
25 - 50 - 85 - 120 - 175 - 250 - 500 - 800 - 1000 - 1500 - 2000 - 2500 - 3000
35 - 50 - 70 - 100 - 175 - 250 - 350 - 500 - 700 - 1000 - 1500 - 2000 - 2500 - 3000 -> Uniformity.
All mA values, of course.
In any case, I do not really mind having more values instead of less. The buttons can be set to quickly scroll through the list by keeping them pressed instead of having to click each time, so problem solved. More options is always better than less.
An advanced charger needs to be advanced. If it were to my liking, I'd even install a small keypad for numeric input to the charger. 
Interested in one.
I was saying, for example, it should charge at 0.17A or 0.18A. There is no reason to charge at 0.175A.
Mmmkay, I suggest:
35 - 50 - 70 - 100 - 170 - 250 - 350 - 500 - 700 - 1000 - 1500 - 2000 - 2500 - 3000
Or (based on the current one):
25 - 50 - 80 - 120 - 180 - 250 - 350 - 500 - 700 - 1000 - 1500 - 2000 - 2500 - 3000 This one is also pretty progressive.
Albeit, for numbers strictly with just two decimal places:
30 - 50 - 80 - 120 - 180 - 250 - 350 - 500 - 700 - 1000 - 1500 - 2000 - 2500 - 3000 (all mA figures)
Or:
0.03 - 0.05 - 0.08 - 0.12 - 0.18 - 0.25 - 0.35 - 0.50 - 0.70 - 1.00 - 1.50 - 2.00 - 2.50 - 3.00 (all figures in amps)
My vote, then, goes for this one.
Wed, 09/04/2019 - 18:43
I would live 1 or 2
I’m interested too.
Wellp, someone's adamant with the available currents' mid-range selection (0.25A - … - 1.00A). 
I still think it could use the above tuning but don't wanna sound impertinent.
In any case, I hope for the charger to feature an advanced menu in which the current selection range of values could be edited and tuned to anyone's liking. I hope.
Interested
Interested in 1
put me on the list, interested.