Search results for:

Did they let the compound cure properly?

Probably not. Bunch of tosspots.

As far as the latex goes, I'm not worried about the depth (it will probably be 10mm in places) it's more the concern that I need it to set at a slight slope. I could mix it stiffer, as you say, but I'm still leaning towards tile adhesive, just because I'm more confident working with it and know that it will hold on a slope.

^^ They call it thinset for a reason: it's fairly stable even when troweled on in a diaphanous manner.

That was my thinking, I've worked with BAL Mosaic Fix before and my impression was that it was very strong.

^^^ How big is the room? Is the 30x190cm area you mention heavily trafficed?
My experience of self levelling compound is that it rarely selfs levels itself so you probably would not have a problem with a slope if you mix it still enough. It has latex in it so can be laid to a bout 3mm thick.

The room is quite big, it was created by adding an extension (now the kitchen) and knocking through to make it all open plan. The area in question is a narrower (1.9m) point between the kitchen and living room (which are about 3.5m wide, so when you step from one room to the other you have to stride the new 30cm gap). Because the floor was laid without enough expansion room it bowed up at the weak point i.e., the narrower section.

I think they used latex self levelling compound before, and stuck the boards straight to it (perhaps to try to prevent them bowing up). The problem is that when the boards did bow up they dragged the latex up and it set into peaks which completely stuffs the levels. I'm now having to chisel it all off the floor. This has set me against it somewhat, but it may well be the right stuff for the job, so thanks for the advice.

http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l89/Fixedwheelnut/My%20bikes/chaintug2-1.jpg

http://i94.photobucket.com/albums/l89/Fixedwheelnut/My%20bikes/P.jpg

http://static.lfgss.com/attachments/7969d1239050697-dsc_0159.jpg

Funnily enough I just found that thread. Any idea if any of these can be purchased?

I can give you a couple if you can pick them up.

Was it just Feathers that you didn't get on with, or the whole DE thing?
I got a Merkur razor last summer and a huge pack of different blades to try. I thought feather were ok, but didn't really live up to the tremendous hype. My favourite so far have been Asco.

No, I love DE shaving but I found feathers to be really rough. They didn't feel half as sharp as the hype would suggest. I've settled on Astra Superior Platinum, which are smooooooooooooth! They are genuinely a step up from everything else I tried (Dorco, Shark, Derby etc.). Their only annoying feature is that they have gum on them (presumably to stick to their wrapper), which is a ballache to get off your razor. They're also not very expensive, I got 90 for 8p each.

Can somone recommend me a chain tug that will work with horizontal drop outs (not track-ends). I tried one of these:

... it didn't work because it kept slipping off the rounded end at the rear of the dropout and because the bolt wouldn't allow it to sit properly inside the dropout.

That generic rack, looks like a Velocity Hybrid to me (can't tell 100% from those photos). Sloping sides mean that your panniers sit further inboard, but leave no space for stuff on top. Good bits of kit.

Does anyone want to try out some feather DE blades? I tried them, but really didn't get on with them so I've got a few left in the box. I'll throw in some other types that I have left over as well. Free to the first person to PM me, but if you want them posted, you'll need to convince me you're over 18.

Edit: Provisionally gone

A flooring question for all y'all: I've had to take up an area (about 30cm x 190cm) of the solid oak flooring in my house because it had been laid incorrectly, leading it to bow when it expanded. I now want to replace it including a T-section threshold to allow for expansion. First, I need to fill some low spots in the concrete subfloor underneath to flatten the area. Ideally I'd use a self-levelling compound, but I can't do that because the the area needs to be flat, but not quite level: there is perhaps a (max) 5mm drop over its 300mm width. This slope would also cause the self-levelling compound to run into the tongue and groove of the in-situ oak floorboards, which would be a nightmare. So, what should I use? My understanding is that cement could crumble under repeated loading/unloading expecially if it's very thin (which it would be in some areas). My best guess is to use floor tile-adhesive, because it's strong, flexible, can be trowelled flat (but won't self level) and shouldn't crack under loading. Obviously I wouldn't stick the floorboards to it; I'd let it dry and then cover with some thin, foam underlay.

Thoughts?

Looking for ideas for the next batch, if anyone has any?

I recently tried some astonishingly good home brew made with Chinook hops that makes for a lovely bitter hoppy ale with an almost smoky flavour.

How would you know the questions have not been asked? What do you think happened when the framework for our league system was developed. I hate to break this to you but this is such an extremely complex problem that you're not 'thinking outside the box', you're just chatting the type of shit you would hear down the pub. It can broadly be summarised by 'there's no smoke without fire'.

The legal system goes out of its way not to introduce unnecessary bias by not basing convictions on previous actions. You should probably try to figure out why before your posts shake our league system to its core.

Be fair, this is at least wine-bar level shit or possibly even dinner-party level shit that we're chatting here.

Jeez's suggestions aren't a priori ridiculous and "this has all been thrashed out before, go and read this book/blog" is a perfectly valid response if you can direct him to previous discussions. There's no reason not to discuss this here except that we can't be bothered. I really don't think we're going to resolve anything and, since I don't have enough knowledge of the law, I'm no longer contributing.

Epic WTF thread becomes Epic WTF

LFGSS getting more meta by the day.

It looks like he wants to replace "evidence" with "common sense".

Just like in *every other goddamn thread on the entire forum*.

Ha! Although, having argued for a similar thing when it comes to people weasling out of parking fines because the double yellow lines don't have a "T" on the end, I'm not in a position to give Jeez too much grief.

Dibs gloves

It is neither back tracking nor clarification. I repeated what I said before as you clearly did not read that I said "some merit in considering" or did not understand it, or assumed I said it but did not mean it when in fact I had chosen my words fairly carefully.

I was unclear whether you meant that it's worth having this discussion in a general sense (which is what you seemed to be backtracking to) or that "there is some merit in [the jury] considering other things other than evidence in the case." If it's the latter then it's obviously very problematic, if for no other reason than: if the jury are using it to reach their decision, then it must be considered "evidence". What the rest of your post does is essentially try to give a special, broader definition of "evidence" that would be used only in rape cases. My initial response to this is to disagree (which is why I suggested you read what you had written, because it sounded daft to suggest that not-evidence should be evidence), but I'm open to being persuaded.

(1) some merit in **considering. **By that I mean that *considering *the use of things other than evidence in a case has some merit. Not is right, some merit. Not should be done, should be considered.

Is this backtracking or clarification? Bear in mind that you could be talking about us considering ways to improve matters or a jury being allowed to consider other things.

(2) It is already done I believe. eg character witnesses.
I don't know enough about how character witnesses are used to comment.

(3) Do you think that there is an issue with conviction rates in rape cases and if so then what should be done to get them higher?
"Yes" and "not-overturning-the whole-basis-of the-justice-system" in that order. As I mentioned above I think a large component of the solution is societal rather than legal i.e., reduce the number of sexual assaults rather than convict more of the people who commit them. Better minds than mine have tried to address the legal side and I doubt I can offer much that's new.

And finally -

(4) If you were on a jury and you thought someone was probably guilty of rape (ie if it was a civil case they would lose) but you were not sufficiently convinced to think that it was beyond reasonable doubt you would have to find them not guilty. How would you feel as he walked out of court to find that he had a string of previous rape convictions?
Shit, obviously. But how I would feel is not a sufficient justification for the changes that you are suggesting. Considering the past history of people in rape cases has not generally been considered a good thing. There's been too much of the "she slept with loads of blokes so she was probably leading him on". I don't see why introducing more "evidence" on the same level as that would be beneficial.

Edit: " I am posing questions and giving opinions in the hope that it can be a (tiny) part of moveing to a better way of doing things." Likewise, this is a debate to keep alive, not kill with daft quibbling.

Festive 500 bruv

Calories consumed per hour?

It seems to me that there is some merit in considering other things other than evidence in the case.

Just read that back to yourself once or twice...

Roughly speaking, you're reckless by getting drunk. Recklessness doesn't imply consent to anything that anyone else does to you. But it does mean that you are reckless as to your own actions while you are drunk, including killing someone.

I certainly wasn't implying that drunkeness implies consent, just that it could be seen as odd that being drunk renders you apparently reckless to some of your own actions (e.g., killing someone) but not others (e.g., consenting). It would strike me as even more complicated if both people are drunk. Person A is considered not competent to give consent, but Person B is considered competent to judge the level of drunkenness of Person A and so judge whether Person A can meaningfully give consent. Would this simply come down to Person B being reckless, or would a case which is the word of one drunken person against another just never go anywhere?

Anyway thanks for all the answers, they do help clarify things but, as you say, reality is messy. Given the problems that these cases present on a legal level, a large part of the solution seems to be from ground up, educating people as to what constitutes consent and how they can have a greater sense of agency in their own sex lives.

My sons name starts with 'J', as mine, my dads and my uncles does. The reason being that all the tools in the family are marked with that letter...

Tools? Seems a bit harsh on yourself, your dad and your uncle.

If anyone is having 'oh shit' moments spare a thought for this guy

Epic win>>>>>>>>

This may have been done upthread but I'll raise it here. I heard someone ask this question and I'm sure there's a completely obvious answer but I can't articulate it clearly (apologies in advance for crap paraphrasing):

"Why, from a legal standpoint, is a drunk person not considered sufficiently competent to be responsible when giving consent (i.e., yes doesn't mean yes if you're drunk), but is considered to be responsible for their actions if they murder someone?"

we should have tshirts made

"meh about boning"?

I think many people feel that to be explicit about their intent, by asking, is likely to be more offensive than being suggestive with their behaviour. This is not in itself bad, but unfortunately this traditional and slightly prudish behaviour creates an environment in which someone with a wholly unhealthy attitude can hide.

It's also about saving face and possibly your feelings too. If you are implicit, rather than explicit, about what you want to do, then you can always claim that you never really wanted to do it if you get knocked back.

and, as an aside, is there a way of searching by rep? That might also give a slightly more scientific "what's hot and what's not"

I was wondering this.