On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 20:13:55 -0300, wrote:

>On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 08:47:55 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 08:14:57 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>>I love metric, never said I didn't. It's so logical, worst ever to
>>>work with was 12 pennies 1 shilling, 20 shillings 1 pound, 21 pounds 1
>>>guinea.
>>
>>That's not really the metric system, it's called the decimal currency
>>system.
>
>It definitely wasn't decimal.

No, pennies, shillings etc. certainly weren't.

On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 20:13:00 -0300, wrote:

>On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 08:44:25 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 08:16:27 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>>On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 20:18:20 -0400, S Viemeister
> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 10/7/2015 8:10 PM, Je?us wrote:
>>>>> On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 20:54:46 -0300, wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:50:18 -0400, S Viemeister
>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On 10/7/2015 7:07 PM, wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> It's likely a good thing, he won't be tempted to don the kilt now
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> He might be tempted, though - his mother was a Gaelic-speaker from the
>>>>>>> Islands.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> OMG - hopefully she went to her rest before all his foolishness
>>>>>> started.
>>>>>
>>>>> Hmm. I'm not seing Sheila's posts for some reason.
>>>>> Wondering what other posts I'm not seeing...
>>>>>
>>>>Have you (accidentally ?) kill-field me?
>>>
>>>I wondered if it got stuck at the International Date Line
>>
>>Digital raccoons, perhaps?
>
>Don't you have platypusses ?

Yep, I have one little guy who lives in my creek.

>Or should that be platypussae ?

On 10/8/2015 6:42 PM, Bruce wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 10:39:32 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 20:13:00 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>> On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 08:44:25 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 08:16:27 -0300, wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 20:18:20 -0400, S Viemeister
>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 10/7/2015 8:10 PM, Je?us wrote:
>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 20:54:46 -0300, wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 19:50:18 -0400, S Viemeister
>>>>>>>> > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> On 10/7/2015 7:07 PM, wrote:
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>> It's likely a good thing, he won't be tempted to don the kilt now
>>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> He might be tempted, though - his mother was a Gaelic-speaker from the
>>>>>>>>> Islands.
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> OMG - hopefully she went to her rest before all his foolishness
>>>>>>>> started.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Hmm. I'm not seing Sheila's posts for some reason.
>>>>>>> Wondering what other posts I'm not seeing...
>>>>>>>
>>>>>> Have you (accidentally ?) kill-field me?
>>>>>
>>>>> I wondered if it got stuck at the International Date Line
>>>>
>>>> Digital raccoons, perhaps?
>>>
>>> Don't you have platypusses ?
>>
>> Yep, I have one little guy who lives in my creek.
>>
>>> Or should that be platypussae ?
>
> He must be good at dodging your bullets.
>

Well, unlike the rabbits he can dive and go under a cut bank.

On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 3:38:23 PM UTC-6, Mirrror of TrVth wrote:
> On 10/8/2015 10:14 AM, MisterDiddyWahDiddy wrote:
> > On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 10:16:20 AM UTC-5, Mirrror of TrVth wrote:
> >> On 10/8/2015 5:26 AM, MisterDiddyWahDiddy wrote:
> >>
> >>>> In practical terms, you look at the posted speed limit, and keep your
> >>>> speedometer at or below that limit. Doesn't matter if it says 100 or 25.
> >>>>
> >>> Very few jurisdictions ticket for less than 10 MPH over. Some rich prick in
> >>> a fancy convertible was driving about 30 in a 30, in the left lane. There
> >>> was another car going 30 in the right lane. He did this for several miles,
> >>> while it was obvious that I (and others) wanted to pass. I ended up next to
> >>> him (on the right) at a stoplight, and I told him off in front of his
> >>> children.
> >>>
> >>> Topics related to his manhood were addressed. I was angry, and went for
> >>> maximum punishment/deterrence.
> >>
> >> 'Round these parts you'd take a round to the face if you tried that,
> >> possibly some spray shooting into the rest of the car.
> >>
> >>
> > Glad that I don't live in that ******** part of the country.
> >
> > --Bryan
> >
>
> Yet under the guise of "Bosco Pelone" you vacationed out here,
> rhapsodized about the Pecos valley, then lurked nm.general for quite
> some time, perhaps hoping to be accepted by those who weren't aware what
> a sicko you truly are.
>
> So let's not for one minute let that naked lie stand, eh?
>
> You're a fraud, Bwyann.
>
> And in the Duke city, or almost anywhere else in the land of
> Enchantment, your kind of vehicular micro-aggression would be dealt with
> swiftly.
>
> Cope.
>
> Or move over to Ferguson where you belong, turd-head.
>
> --- news://freenews.netfront.net/ - complaints: ---

Picking on Bryan again...geez, don't you ever give up? Is there nobody on this forum that you
don't pick on?
=====

On 08/10/2015 5:11 PM, wrote:
> On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 08:39:12 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 08:21:20 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 11:35:05 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Wed, 7 Oct 2015 20:08:20 -0400, Dave Smith
>>>> > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 2015-10-07 19:08, wrote:
>>>>>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 10:03:34 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> On Wed, 07 Oct 2015 06:52:54 -0300, wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Lol and yet he sets himself up as being so sensitive to what people in
>>>>>>>> general want that if he became President he would ship all refugees
>>>>>>>> back where they came from.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Those damned immgrants with their filthy metric system have to go!
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Lol is he against metric too ?
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Am I the only North American who actually likes the metric system and
>>>>> sees it has being so much easier to understand and to use?
>>>>
>>>> LOL. I know a few old coots in Aus that still hate the metric system,
>>>> it completely baffles me why there would be any resistance to it.
>>>>
>>>> I learned firstly imperial and later metric in school, it was a
>>>> no-brainer as far as I am concerned as to which system is the better
>>>> and easier one. Imperial, you basically have to learn it by rote, as
>>>> there no consistency at all. Metric... all you need to know is that it
>>>> goes up or down by 1, 10, 100, etc. making it so easy. No more '28
>>>> hogs heads to 1 chain', or whatever...
>>>
>>> It's a dying thing here, my grandchildren down only learned metric in
>>> school. The supermarkets still put price per pound in small letters
>>> to help seniors, when looking at some one day it occurred to me if
>>> they really want to help, surely the pound factor should be in the
>>> larger print
>>
>> We also have some persistent inconstancies here too, certain products
>> such as farm gates are still generally referred to in ft and not
>> metres.
>>
>> With heights, I'm still more imperial than metric - I can relate to
>> 6ft but not 188cm so much. Yet for distances I'm metric
>
> I heard an argument the other day on the radio, somebody felt the
> measurements for a cord of wood should be changed. Currently a cord
> of wood is 8ft. by 4 ft by 4ft stacked, that makes sense to anyone
> buying firewood. Somehow it was one time the metric measurement
> seemed much more complicated.
>
My B-I-L has a sawmill in the scottish borders to supply his businesses
in SE England. He always talks of cubic metres for their product. What
we call a 2x4 used to be called a 4x2 in the UK but is now a metric size.
Graham

On 10/08/2015 04:37 PM, Jeßus wrote:

>
> Yes, it doesnt work for everything. Firewood here gets sold by the
> tonne or square metre.
>

Don't see how a square meter could be used. A cubic meter, sure. AKA a
"stere".

On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 19:29:56 -0700, Whirled Peas >
wrote:

>On 10/08/2015 04:37 PM, Jeßus wrote:
>
>>
>> Yes, it doesnt work for everything. Firewood here gets sold by the
>> tonne or square metre.
>>
>
>Don't see how a square meter could be used. A cubic meter, sure. AKA a
>"stere".

Yes, cubic metre, sorry.

On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 5:54:50 PM UTC-4, Embudo wrote:
> On 10/8/2015 10:55 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> > On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 12:10:51 PM UTC-4, Embudo wrote:
> >
> >> Know that at the upper and lower end of the two scales it is very common
> >> to experience changes of a degree or three as significant, far more so
> >> than a single degree.
> >
> > The lower end of the Celsius scale is -273.15, which is -459.67 F.
>
> Yes, so?
>
> Are we measuring diurnal temps on Mars or Earth?
>
> > Even a 10 degree change (one either scale) wouldn't feel much different.
>
> Because you have chosen a frozen state.
>
> > The upper end is, well, in the millions.
> >
> > Cindy Hamilton
>
> And would be ignition for hominids or other life forms.
>
> Another pathetic non sequitur.
>
> Gawd how you fail, or should I say 'flail'...
>
> Now please, do tender some more Roman-times grade excuses while I make
> the popcorn and put my feet back up.
>
> ;-)))

You are getting way too emotional about this. I think it's time for a
time-out.

Cindy Hamilton

On 2015-10-08 10:39 PM, Je�us wrote:

>>
>> Don't see how a square meter could be used. A cubic meter, sure. AKA a
>> "stere".
>
> Yes, cubic metre, sorry.

It is sold by the cord here, but from what I have seen, there appears to
be no consistently applied dimension to those cords.

Dave Smith wrote:
>
> On 2015-10-08 7:56 AM, Gary wrote:
> > Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> >>
> >> No, you're not. I'd love to see the U.S. abandon the old system,
> >> even if it were just a soft conversion.
> >>
> >> Isn't plywood thickness actually sized in mm now?
> >
> > Not in my area. Still see 1/4", 1/2", 3/4" plywood. I agree that the
> > metric is more efficient but it would take several generations to
> > change to that in the US.
> >
>
> How wide are those panels? Are they really 1/4", 1/2" and 3/4". Let me
> know if they 2x4s are 2" by 4" because I have not seen a real 2x4 in
> years. I guess the story is that they are nominally 2x4 and then
> supposedly planed down a bit.

Without looking it up, I do believe that the size difference is
because of sawing the boards to size. You might measure 2X4 but each
cut on every side takes away a saw-blade width. What you end up with
is slightly less than 2X4.

Same with all lumber. It's just accepted.

On 2015-10-09 9:36 AM, Gary wrote:
> Dave Smith wrote:
>>
>> On 2015-10-08 7:56 AM, Gary wrote:
>>> Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>>>
>>>> No, you're not. I'd love to see the U.S. abandon the old system,
>>>> even if it were just a soft conversion.
>>>>
>>>> Isn't plywood thickness actually sized in mm now?
>>>
>>> Not in my area. Still see 1/4", 1/2", 3/4" plywood. I agree that the
>>> metric is more efficient but it would take several generations to
>>> change to that in the US.
>>>
>>
>> How wide are those panels? Are they really 1/4", 1/2" and 3/4". Let me
>> know if they 2x4s are 2" by 4" because I have not seen a real 2x4 in
>> years. I guess the story is that they are nominally 2x4 and then
>> supposedly planed down a bit.
>
> Without looking it up, I do believe that the size difference is
> because of sawing the boards to size. You might measure 2X4 but each
> cut on every side takes away a saw-blade width. What you end up with
> is slightly less than 2X4.


The official story is that the lumber starts off at 2x4 but after drying
and planing they are 1 -1/2 by 3-1/2..... a half inch lost in the
processing.


> Same with all lumber. It's just accepted.

I think most people who work with lumber realize it. Some do not. Think
of some guy wanting to put up a solid fence around his yard. He sets the
posts at 8 foot centre to centre intervals and uses 1x6 boards hung
vertically. He is likely to base his materials supplies on 16 boards
per section. Then he realizes that each board is 1/2 inch narrower than
he had figured and he is 8" short.

It gets worse when you get into even wider boards. They end up 3/4" less
than the nominal sizes.

Think of it in relation to the discussion about metric vs imperial. It
is difficult to seriously consider concerns about exactness of lumber
measurement when imperial measurements are nominal and not exact
measurements.

On 10/9/2015 4:37 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
> On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 5:54:50 PM UTC-4, Embudo wrote:
>> On 10/8/2015 10:55 AM, Cindy Hamilton wrote:
>>> On Thursday, October 8, 2015 at 12:10:51 PM UTC-4, Embudo wrote:
>>>
>>>> Know that at the upper and lower end of the two scales it is very common
>>>> to experience changes of a degree or three as significant, far more so
>>>> than a single degree.
>>>
>>> The lower end of the Celsius scale is -273.15, which is -459.67 F.
>>
>> Yes, so?
>>
>> Are we measuring diurnal temps on Mars or Earth?
>>
>>> Even a 10 degree change (one either scale) wouldn't feel much different.
>>
>> Because you have chosen a frozen state.
>>
>>> The upper end is, well, in the millions.
>>>
>>> Cindy Hamilton
>>
>> And would be ignition for hominids or other life forms.
>>
>> Another pathetic non sequitur.
>>
>> Gawd how you fail, or should I say 'flail'...
>>
>> Now please, do tender some more Roman-times grade excuses while I make
>> the popcorn and put my feet back up.
>>
>> ;-)))
>
> You are getting way too emotional about this.

You are playing a straw man because you have no factual arguments left.

> I think it's time for a time-out.
>
> Cindy Hamilton
>

As long as you need to catch your breath, dearie.

On 10/9/2015 6:33 AM, Dave Smith wrote:
> On 2015-10-08 10:39 PM, Je�us wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Don't see how a square meter could be used. A cubic meter, sure. AKA a
>>> "stere".
>>
>> Yes, cubic metre, sorry.
>
> It is sold by the cord here, but from what I have seen, there appears to
> be no consistently applied dimension to those cords.
>
>

A cord has a measure, your tundra pseudo-capitalists are just shaking
you hosers down for no good reason.

http://www.woodheat.org/cord-wood.html

A full cord is a large amount of wood. It measures four feet high by
four feet wide by eight feet long (4 ft. x 4 ft. x 8 ft.) and has a
volume of 128 cubic feet. The amount of solid wood in a cord varies
depending on the size of the pieces, but for firewood it averages about
85 cubic feet. The rest of the cord volume is air space.

A 'full' cord (4' x 4' x 8') is the official, standard firewood measure,
but four foot pieces are never used for home heating, and dealers rarely
sell firewood in that form. So firewood is not offered for sale in the
form of its official unit measurement, which is why buying firewood can
be confusing.


One-third of a full cord has pieces 16 inches long
Other terms, such as face cord, stove cord or furnace cord are sometimes
used to describe a stack of wood measuring 4 ft. high and 8 ft. long
with a piece length shorter than 4 ft. A common firewood piece length
is 16 inches, or one-third of a full cord, but other lengths are also
available.

Because a winter's supply can cost several hundred dollars, you don't
want to be confused when you are purchasing firewood. If you want to
compare prices from a number of suppliers, take a tape measure to the
dealers' yards and measure the average piece length. If the dealer does
not price the wood in the standard full cord measure, convert the price
to this basic unit. Here are some examples to illustrate the conversion.

Forest Firewood sells what they call a 'face cord' for $75. You find
that the pile is 4 feet high and 8 feet long, with an average piece
length of 16 inches. Divide this length (16 in.) into the full cord
length of 48 in. and multiply by the price.

48 ÷ 16 = 3 x $75 = $225.

Therefore, Forest Firewood sells firewood for $225 per cord.

Sparky sells what he calls a 'stove cord' for $60. It is a pile
measuring 4 feet by 8 feet with an average length of 12 inches. The
calculation is:

48 ÷ 12 = 4 x $60 = $240.

Therefore, Sparky sells firewood for $240 per cord.

Frontier Fuel sells a 4 foot x 8 foot x 18 inch 'furnace cord' for $85.
The result is:

48 ÷ 18 = 2.67 x $85 = $227.

Therefore, Frontier Fuel sells firewood for $227 per cord.



If possible, avoid buying firewood in units that cannot be related to
the standard full cord. Station wagon loads, pick-up truck loads other
units are difficult to compare and can conceal a high price per cord
measure.

Avoid buying firewood by telephone without going to see the wood at the
suppliers yard. Ideally, you can pace off the particular stacks that you
will buy so you know exactly what you are buying.

Looks Scrumptious Steve!

William

On 10/8/2015 2:43 PM, dsi1 wrote:
>>> Automobile repair guys (including me) have been using metric fasteners for decades. Back in the old days, the Japanese cars would use 10, 12, 14, and 16mm bolts. The Italian cars I had would use 13, 15, and 17 mm bolts. The result being that the Italian cars had beefier, more robust, fasteners. I can't say if that's still the case but I always thought that was pretty strange.
>>> > >
>> >
>> >This is very interesting to me and something I have noticed before.
>> >
>> >I would guess the Japanese like the numeric efficiency of even numbers.
>> >
>> >The Italians I have never understood.
> You try to find meaning in the things you observe. I do the exact same thing. Hee hee.


Had to revise my answer on this one.

Perhaps the Italians are just serious tractor people. Think of where
Lamborghini came from - a tractor company.

They lull us into all that sexy styling, sumptuous leather, sculpted
curves, etc.

Then you start wrenching and it's like you need a diesel mechanic to
break those bolts!

;-)

In article >,
says...
>
> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 08:14:57 -0300, wrote:
>
> >I love metric, never said I didn't. It's so logical, worst ever to
> >work with was 12 pennies 1 shilling, 20 shillings 1 pound, 21 pounds 1
> >guinea.
>
> That's not really the metric system, it's called the decimal currency
> system.

Nope, it's the old £sd pre-decimal system :-)

Janet UK

On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 10:05:57 -0300, wrote:

>On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 08:33:43 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>
>>On 2015-10-08 10:39 PM, Je?us wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> Don't see how a square meter could be used. A cubic meter, sure. AKA a
>>>> "stere".
>>>
>>> Yes, cubic metre, sorry.
>>
>>It is sold by the cord here, but from what I have seen, there appears to
>>be no consistently applied dimension to those cords.
>>
>That's buyer beware stuff. I had a couple of cords delivered and
>when stacked it clearly was not correct. I called him and there was
>no argument. Interestingly enough, the second truck load brought it
>exactly to the measurements so I figure he knew damn fine but thought
>I was stupid enough not to know, or that I might not get around to
>stacking it.

Time for another supplier. He's probably throwing in a bit of
unseasoned wood as well.

On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 22:24:46 +0100, Janet > wrote:

>In article >,
>says...
>>
>> On Thu, 08 Oct 2015 08:14:57 -0300, wrote:
>>
>> >I love metric, never said I didn't. It's so logical, worst ever to
>> >work with was 12 pennies 1 shilling, 20 shillings 1 pound, 21 pounds 1
>> >guinea.
>>
>> That's not really the metric system, it's called the decimal currency
>> system.
>
> Nope, it's the old £sd pre-decimal system :-)

YES, the pounds, shillings etc. are the old £sd pre-decimal system.

wrote in rec.food.cooking:

> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:25:32 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 10:05:57 -0300, wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 08:33:43 -0400, Dave Smith
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > > On 2015-10-08 10:39 PM, Je?us wrote:
> > > >
> > > > > >
> >>>>> Don't see how a square meter could be used. A cubic meter,
> sure. AKA a >>>>> "stere".
> > > > >
> >>>> Yes, cubic metre, sorry.
> > > >
> > > > It is sold by the cord here, but from what I have seen, there
> > > > appears to be no consistently applied dimension to those cords.
> > > >
> > > That's buyer beware stuff. I had a couple of cords delivered and
> > > when stacked it clearly was not correct. I called him and there
> > > was no argument. Interestingly enough, the second truck load
> > > brought it exactly to the measurements so I figure he knew damn
> > > fine but thought I was stupid enough not to know, or that I might
> > > not get around to stacking it.
> >
> > Time for another supplier. He's probably throwing in a bit of
> > unseasoned wood as well.
>
> I was okay with this years wood as I didn't intend to use it this
> year

I'm good this year too. I get 2 cords at a shot and the fellow uses a
generous measure for it, compared to others. Fireplace split, all
hardwood. Generally pretty well seasoned. $285 for 2 cords.
Technically he prices by the truckload but I forget the tonnage of the
truck (it's not like a ford flatbed or anything, big monster), Stacked
you get 2 rows, 4.5ft high and about 30ft long.

That reminds me, time to order another stacking unit (firewood holder).
I'm slowly adding 1-2 a year for better storage. Right now I only have
about 32ft worth plus a cheater that uses 2x4 runners which have to be
replaced pretty often since it sits on the ground.

http://www.amazon.com/Landmann-82433...dp/B0000TPRD6/
ref=zg_bs_3563995011_2

Thats pretty much what we get.

Here's the cheater:
http://www.lowes.com/pd_544426-59254...ctId=50285313&
pl=1

The cheater works well enough in the center of 2 of the better ones.

Right now we have less than that amount since we burned much last year,
but we have plenty for this winter then will order more in spring. I
have enough for a harder winter right now since I had about 3/4 cord
left when I ordered 2 more last year. I have about 1.5 of their
version of cords left.

When we order more, we deconstruct the remaining and stack the new then
add the old on top.

Carol

PS: heating with wood effectively will drop your bills but takes some
work to do. It's also great to be able to have a backup incase of a
power outage.



--

On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 20:37:35 -0300, wrote:

>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:25:32 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>>On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 10:05:57 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>>On Fri, 9 Oct 2015 08:33:43 -0400, Dave Smith
> wrote:
>>>
>>>>On 2015-10-08 10:39 PM, Je?us wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Don't see how a square meter could be used. A cubic meter, sure. AKA a
>>>>>> "stere".
>>>>>
>>>>> Yes, cubic metre, sorry.
>>>>
>>>>It is sold by the cord here, but from what I have seen, there appears to
>>>>be no consistently applied dimension to those cords.
>>>>
>>>That's buyer beware stuff. I had a couple of cords delivered and
>>>when stacked it clearly was not correct. I called him and there was
>>>no argument. Interestingly enough, the second truck load brought it
>>>exactly to the measurements so I figure he knew damn fine but thought
>>>I was stupid enough not to know, or that I might not get around to
>>>stacking it.
>>
>>Time for another supplier. He's probably throwing in a bit of
>>unseasoned wood as well.
>
>I was okay with this years wood as I didn't intend to use it this
>year

Good to plan ahead

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:14:26 -0300, wrote:

>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:54:03 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>>On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 20:37:35 -0300, wrote:
>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:25:32 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>>>>
>>>>Time for another supplier. He's probably throwing in a bit of
>>>>unseasoned wood as well.
>>>
>>>I was okay with this years wood as I didn't intend to use it this
>>>year
>>
>>Good to plan ahead
>
>I had one of those small Jotul stoves and no way I wanted to use green
>wood in it.

Very bad for their longevity.

On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 21:12:23 -0300, wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:30:54 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:14:26 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:54:03 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>>>>On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 20:37:35 -0300, wrote:
>>>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:25:32 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Time for another supplier. He's probably throwing in a bit of
>>>>>>unseasoned wood as well.
>>>>>
>>>>>I was okay with this years wood as I didn't intend to use it this
>>>>>year
>>>>
>>>>Good to plan ahead
>>>
>>>I had one of those small Jotul stoves and no way I wanted to use green
>>>wood in it.
>>
>>Very bad for their longevity.
>
>It was an excellent stove, you could put two logs in at night and
>there was enough go left in them to add two more in the morning.

Clearly an older model then I assume it is the same where you are -
here wood stoves and fires have to be designed by law to not be able
to be fully shut down, if you know what I mean (the air vents)?

The reason for it is to reduce smoke pollution... but it does mean
it's nigh on impossible to get a new fire to burn overnight and well
into the morning. Most are easy to modify, however.

On 10/11/2015 4:58 AM, wrote:
> Well~ that got my hackles up and I put a note in their door

**** you, worthless judgmental whore!

In article >,
says...
>
> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:30:54 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>
> >On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:14:26 -0300, wrote:
> >
> >>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:54:03 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
> >>>On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 20:37:35 -0300, wrote:
> >>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:25:32 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
> >>>>>
> >>>>>Time for another supplier. He's probably throwing in a bit of
> >>>>>unseasoned wood as well.
> >>>>
> >>>>I was okay with this years wood as I didn't intend to use it this
> >>>>year
> >>>
> >>>Good to plan ahead
> >>
> >>I had one of those small Jotul stoves and no way I wanted to use green
> >>wood in it.
> >
> >Very bad for their longevity.
>
> It was an excellent stove, you could put two logs in at night and
> there was enough go left in them to add two more in the morning.

A friend of mine used to bake great bread in their Jotul. Burn up some
thinnish logs ; when the stove is good and hot rake/push the wood to the
back end of the stove and put the bread in at the front end, straight on
the ash. Close stove.

Janet UK

In article >,
says...
>
> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 21:12:23 -0300, wrote:
>
> >On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:30:54 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
> >
> >>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:14:26 -0300, wrote:
> >>
> >>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:54:03 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
> >>>>On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 20:37:35 -0300, wrote:
> >>>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:25:32 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>Time for another supplier. He's probably throwing in a bit of
> >>>>>>unseasoned wood as well.
> >>>>>
> >>>>>I was okay with this years wood as I didn't intend to use it this
> >>>>>year
> >>>>
> >>>>Good to plan ahead
> >>>
> >>>I had one of those small Jotul stoves and no way I wanted to use green
> >>>wood in it.
> >>
> >>Very bad for their longevity.
> >
> >It was an excellent stove, you could put two logs in at night and
> >there was enough go left in them to add two more in the morning.
>
> Clearly an older model then I assume it is the same where you are -
> here wood stoves and fires have to be designed by law to not be able
> to be fully shut down, if you know what I mean (the air vents)?
>
> The reason for it is to reduce smoke pollution... but it does mean
> it's nigh on impossible to get a new fire to burn overnight and well
> into the morning. Most are easy to modify, however.

When we heated the whole house from a French EFEL woodstove, in winter
a couple of logs at bedtime kept it in all night, ready to roar up in
the morning. (No emission restrictions where we lived) I kept it burning
for seven days and nights then the eighth day let it go out to clear ash
and relight. We were burning (very) seasoned hardwood. An average of 20
tons a year, delivered as treetrunks on a forestry low-loader with a
crane grab, and all cut into logs by us.

Janet UK

In article >,
says...
>
> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 17:55:10 +0100, Janet > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> says...
> >>
> >> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:30:54 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:14:26 -0300, wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:54:03 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
> >> >>>On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 20:37:35 -0300, wrote:
> >> >>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:25:32 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>Time for another supplier. He's probably throwing in a bit of
> >> >>>>>unseasoned wood as well.
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>I was okay with this years wood as I didn't intend to use it this
> >> >>>>year
> >> >>>
> >> >>>Good to plan ahead
> >> >>
> >> >>I had one of those small Jotul stoves and no way I wanted to use green
> >> >>wood in it.
> >> >
> >> >Very bad for their longevity.
> >>
> >> It was an excellent stove, you could put two logs in at night and
> >> there was enough go left in them to add two more in the morning.
> >
> > A friend of mine used to bake great bread in their Jotul. Burn up some
> >thinnish logs ; when the stove is good and hot rake/push the wood to the
> >back end of the stove and put the bread in at the front end, straight on
> >the ash. Close stove.
> >
> > Janet UK
> >
> >
> I also used to cook steak and kidney pud on top of the stove, cooked
> slowly for 24 hours, a beautiful thing, reminiscent of Aga cooking.

Mine had a hotplate for that, but I also had an AGA in that house, so
I only cooked on the woodstove hotplate during power cuts.

Janet UK

On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 07:58:50 -0300, wrote:

>On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 11:24:52 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>
>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 21:12:23 -0300, wrote:
>>
>>>On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:30:54 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>>>
>>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:14:26 -0300, wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:54:03 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>>>>>>On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 20:37:35 -0300, wrote:
>>>>>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:25:32 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>Time for another supplier. He's probably throwing in a bit of
>>>>>>>>unseasoned wood as well.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>I was okay with this years wood as I didn't intend to use it this
>>>>>>>year
>>>>>>
>>>>>>Good to plan ahead
>>>>>
>>>>>I had one of those small Jotul stoves and no way I wanted to use green
>>>>>wood in it.
>>>>
>>>>Very bad for their longevity.
>>>
>>>It was an excellent stove, you could put two logs in at night and
>>>there was enough go left in them to add two more in the morning.
>>
>>Clearly an older model then I assume it is the same where you are -
>>here wood stoves and fires have to be designed by law to not be able
>>to be fully shut down, if you know what I mean (the air vents)?
>>
>>The reason for it is to reduce smoke pollution... but it does mean
>>it's nigh on impossible to get a new fire to burn overnight and well
>>into the morning. Most are easy to modify, however.
>
>I don't know what the regs are now, we were at our cottage and nobody
>else for miles around. When I lived by the sea there was a hippie
>couple moved in up the road. They put notices in all our doors about
>using pesticides as they did not want their little boy running through
>it all.
>
>Well~ that got my hackles up and I put a note in their door pointing
>out my dandelion free grass was the result of hard work with a garden
>claw over a couple of years and that more to the point, if they would
>stop burning green wood in their wood stove then my grandson could
>wait at the mailboxes up near them for the school bus without
>triggering his asthma.

Well done

I might have followed that up throwing an empty herbicide container in
or near their yard. I have no problem with them being adverse to
herbicides, but the way they went about dealing with it was completely
wrong.

On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 18:03:51 +0100, Janet > wrote:

>In article >,
>says...
>>
>> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 21:12:23 -0300, wrote:
>>
>> >On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:30:54 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>> >
>> >>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:14:26 -0300, wrote:
>> >>
>> >>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:54:03 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>> >>>>On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 20:37:35 -0300, wrote:
>> >>>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:25:32 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>> >>>>>>
>> >>>>>>Time for another supplier. He's probably throwing in a bit of
>> >>>>>>unseasoned wood as well.
>> >>>>>
>> >>>>>I was okay with this years wood as I didn't intend to use it this
>> >>>>>year
>> >>>>
>> >>>>Good to plan ahead
>> >>>
>> >>>I had one of those small Jotul stoves and no way I wanted to use green
>> >>>wood in it.
>> >>
>> >>Very bad for their longevity.
>> >
>> >It was an excellent stove, you could put two logs in at night and
>> >there was enough go left in them to add two more in the morning.
>>
>> Clearly an older model then I assume it is the same where you are -
>> here wood stoves and fires have to be designed by law to not be able
>> to be fully shut down, if you know what I mean (the air vents)?
>>
>> The reason for it is to reduce smoke pollution... but it does mean
>> it's nigh on impossible to get a new fire to burn overnight and well
>> into the morning. Most are easy to modify, however.
>
> When we heated the whole house from a French EFEL woodstove, in winter
>a couple of logs at bedtime kept it in all night, ready to roar up in
>the morning. (No emission restrictions where we lived) I kept it burning
>for seven days and nights then the eighth day let it go out to clear ash
>and relight. We were burning (very) seasoned hardwood. An average of 20
>tons a year, delivered as treetrunks on a forestry low-loader with a
>crane grab, and all cut into logs by us.

Do you miss not having the wood stove, or was the wood chopping too
much of a chore for you? Then again, re-reading your post, you might
still have it...

In article >,
says...
>
> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 18:03:51 +0100, Janet > wrote:
>
> >In article >,
> >says...
> >>
> >> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 21:12:23 -0300, wrote:
> >>
> >> >On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:30:54 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
> >> >
> >> >>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:14:26 -0300, wrote:
> >> >>
> >> >>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:54:03 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
> >> >>>>On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 20:37:35 -0300, wrote:
> >> >>>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:25:32 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
> >> >>>>>>
> >> >>>>>>Time for another supplier. He's probably throwing in a bit of
> >> >>>>>>unseasoned wood as well.
> >> >>>>>
> >> >>>>>I was okay with this years wood as I didn't intend to use it this
> >> >>>>>year
> >> >>>>
> >> >>>>Good to plan ahead
> >> >>>
> >> >>>I had one of those small Jotul stoves and no way I wanted to use green
> >> >>>wood in it.
> >> >>
> >> >>Very bad for their longevity.
> >> >
> >> >It was an excellent stove, you could put two logs in at night and
> >> >there was enough go left in them to add two more in the morning.
> >>
> >> Clearly an older model then I assume it is the same where you are -
> >> here wood stoves and fires have to be designed by law to not be able
> >> to be fully shut down, if you know what I mean (the air vents)?
> >>
> >> The reason for it is to reduce smoke pollution... but it does mean
> >> it's nigh on impossible to get a new fire to burn overnight and well
> >> into the morning. Most are easy to modify, however.
> >
> > When we heated the whole house from a French EFEL woodstove, in winter
> >a couple of logs at bedtime kept it in all night, ready to roar up in
> >the morning. (No emission restrictions where we lived) I kept it burning
> >for seven days and nights then the eighth day let it go out to clear ash
> >and relight. We were burning (very) seasoned hardwood. An average of 20
> >tons a year, delivered as treetrunks on a forestry low-loader with a
> >crane grab, and all cut into logs by us.
>
> Do you miss not having the wood stove, or was the wood chopping too
> much of a chore for you? Then again, re-reading your post, you might
> still have it...

No, not in this house. Partly, difficulties of wood supply (most of
the island forestry here is softwood conifer; no thanks); but also the
climate here is so much milder we don't really need it. High insulation,
all-electric heating.
I do miss watching the flames. We were in a restaurant where they had
a fireplace screen playing a DVD of real flames; with nice crackling
sound effects.. I might get one of those, lol.

Janet UK

On Thu, 15 Oct 2015 01:35:33 +0100, Janet > wrote:

>In article >,
>says...
>>
>> On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 18:03:51 +0100, Janet > wrote:
>>
>> >In article >,
>> >says...
>> >>
>> >> On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 21:12:23 -0300, wrote:
>> >>
>> >> >On Sun, 11 Oct 2015 10:30:54 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>> >> >
>> >> >>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 07:14:26 -0300, wrote:
>> >> >>
>> >> >>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 11:54:03 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>> >> >>>>On Fri, 09 Oct 2015 20:37:35 -0300, wrote:
>> >> >>>>>On Sat, 10 Oct 2015 10:25:32 +1100, Jeßus > wrote:
>> >> >>>>>>
>> >> >>>>>>Time for another supplier. He's probably throwing in a bit of
>> >> >>>>>>unseasoned wood as well.
>> >> >>>>>
>> >> >>>>>I was okay with this years wood as I didn't intend to use it this
>> >> >>>>>year
>> >> >>>>
>> >> >>>>Good to plan ahead
>> >> >>>
>> >> >>>I had one of those small Jotul stoves and no way I wanted to use green
>> >> >>>wood in it.
>> >> >>
>> >> >>Very bad for their longevity.
>> >> >
>> >> >It was an excellent stove, you could put two logs in at night and
>> >> >there was enough go left in them to add two more in the morning.
>> >>
>> >> Clearly an older model then I assume it is the same where you are -
>> >> here wood stoves and fires have to be designed by law to not be able
>> >> to be fully shut down, if you know what I mean (the air vents)?
>> >>
>> >> The reason for it is to reduce smoke pollution... but it does mean
>> >> it's nigh on impossible to get a new fire to burn overnight and well
>> >> into the morning. Most are easy to modify, however.
>> >
>> > When we heated the whole house from a French EFEL woodstove, in winter
>> >a couple of logs at bedtime kept it in all night, ready to roar up in
>> >the morning. (No emission restrictions where we lived) I kept it burning
>> >for seven days and nights then the eighth day let it go out to clear ash
>> >and relight. We were burning (very) seasoned hardwood. An average of 20
>> >tons a year, delivered as treetrunks on a forestry low-loader with a
>> >crane grab, and all cut into logs by us.
>>
>> Do you miss not having the wood stove, or was the wood chopping too
>> much of a chore for you? Then again, re-reading your post, you might
>> still have it...
>
> No, not in this house. Partly, difficulties of wood supply (most of
>the island forestry here is softwood conifer; no thanks); but also the
>climate here is so much milder we don't really need it. High insulation,
>all-electric heating.
> I do miss watching the flames. We were in a restaurant where they had
>a fireplace screen playing a DVD of real flames; with nice crackling
>sound effects.. I might get one of those, lol.

Better than nothing, hey?