What is Living Trade?

On 10 May 2004 04:54:19 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
brought forth from the murky depths:

> I can't believe it; you actually said you like the contrast of the
>woods I used on a project. ;-) The frame is black willow. I had

So I'm picky. ;) While I love a certain shepherd's work and aspire
to his level of expertise, I hold a -vastly- different concept of
contrast than he.


>built a box for my C&W smoother using willow and walnut and they
>looked so nice together that I figured I'd try it on a larger scale.
>The willow carries just enough of a rich brown to pick up the walnut's
>color, IMHO.

I don't recall actually liking that one. (Feel better now?)


> Also, I went to quite a bit of trouble to get the willow's grain
>to match across the pieces and get a nice contour from the grain
>pattern following the lines of the frame.

Why dincha just steam bend it and make an oval chest? The compass
plane woulda fit just fine, and it would have been a reason to
go buy a cooper's rabbet plane (if you don't already have one),
which also would have fit right in. ;)


> It's nice to hear that someone else appreciates the choice of
>woods.

<pat pat pat>


> Chuck Vance (happy to be talking about woodworking again)

Yeah. I had to plonk Tawm once again since I don't want to listen
to any of the bay area crap he continues to argue with and quote.
It's to the point that anyone quoting bay spew is now plonked. I
wonder how many others at that level of disgust. <sigh>

Well, I've caught up on spring chores around here, got the garden
in and most of the drip irrigation in, so now I can get back to
the shop. First up is the pivoting sheet-goods storage rack. I need
to get them off the wood rack where they now lean. Then I'll get
back on that mantle scraping.

--
Save the Endangered ROAD NARROWS! -|- www.diversify.com
Ban SUVs today! -|- Full Service Websites

Larry Jaques wrote:

> On 10 May 2004 04:54:19 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
> brought forth from the murky depths:
>
>> I can't believe it; you actually said you like the contrast of the
>>woods I used on a project. ;-) The frame is black willow. I had
>
>
> So I'm picky. ;) While I love a certain shepherd's work and aspire
> to his level of expertise, I hold a -vastly- different concept of
> contrast than he.

A "certain shepherd"? That went right over my head.

>>built a box for my C&W smoother using willow and walnut and they
>>looked so nice together that I figured I'd try it on a larger scale.
>>The willow carries just enough of a rich brown to pick up the walnut's
>>color, IMHO.
>
> I don't recall actually liking that one. (Feel better now?)

That's more like it, Lar. :-)

It wasn't much, just a dovetailed box with a sliding top:
http://uweb.txstate.edu/~cv01/cwbox1.jpg and
http://uweb.txstate.edu/~cv01/cwbox2.jpg

But it made me realize what an affinity willow and walnut have for
each other.

>> Also, I went to quite a bit of trouble to get the willow's grain
>>to match across the pieces and get a nice contour from the grain
>>pattern following the lines of the frame.
>
> Why dincha just steam bend it and make an oval chest? The compass
> plane woulda fit just fine, and it would have been a reason to
> go buy a cooper's rabbet plane (if you don't already have one),
> which also would have fit right in. ;)

Maybe one of these days I'll do just that. :-) First I need to
practice on bending something easy like ply.

>> Chuck Vance (happy to be talking about woodworking again)
>
>
> Yeah. I had to plonk Tawm once again since I don't want to listen
> to any of the bay area crap he continues to argue with and quote.
> It's to the point that anyone quoting bay spew is now plonked. I
> wonder how many others at that level of disgust. <sigh>

Actually, I was referring more to our friend D.A., but I know what
you mean. I've gotten to the point where I just ignore the BAD stuff.
It's like target practice; it helps keep your eye sharp, but gets old
really fast.

> Well, I've caught up on spring chores around here, got the garden
> in and most of the drip irrigation in, so now I can get back to
> the shop. First up is the pivoting sheet-goods storage rack. I need
> to get them off the wood rack where they now lean. Then I'll get
> back on that mantle scraping.

Sounds like ... work. So did you wind up using your bamboo fishing
pole for garden stakes? ;-)


Chuck Vance

Tom Watson keyed:
> To get serious for only the briefest of moments - wooddorking is an
> aesthetic act. If you ain't got an appreciation for mass, scale,
> balance, figure, color, proportion, line, etc. - ya better get yaself
> some - or else start a collection of them little Ikea allen wrenches.

I knew better than to be enjoying a beverage when I pulled up this
post, and here's the evidence.

Little pearls like this are what LJ misses when he exercises his
God-given right to plonk anyone who engages in significant Bee Aye Dee
baiting. His loss.

'Course, he might see it now ;o).

O'Deen

Bay Area Dave <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> still obsessing over me, P.O.?
>

Actually no, you top-posting idjit. Reread these two sentences. They
refer to LJ losing out on interesting stuff when he plonks people who
respond to you.

> > Little pearls like this are what LJ misses when he exercises his
> > God-given right to plonk anyone who engages in significant Bee Aye Dee
> > baiting. His loss.

See? I'm suggesting that LJ misses out when he plonks. You're free to
fuck off now. Thanks.

O'Deen

since you can't think of anything of substance to complain
about, you bring up that I am a top poster?? That's about as
lame a complaint as I've seen...next you'll be complaining
if I end a question with more than one question mark. YOU
are the idiot here, you lame moron. There. I feel better
now! :)

Bite me!

I feel even BETTER!


DAVE

Patrick Olguin wrote:
> Bay Area Dave <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>>still obsessing over me, P.O.?
>>
>
>
> Actually no, you top-posting idjit. Reread these two sentences. They
> refer to LJ losing out on interesting stuff when he plonks people who
> respond to you.
>
>
>>>Little pearls like this are what LJ misses when he exercises his
>>>God-given right to plonk anyone who engages in significant Bee Aye Dee
>>>baiting. His loss.
>
>
> See? I'm suggesting that LJ misses out when he plonks. You're free to
> fuck off now. Thanks.
>
> O'Deen

I was thinking the same on the fake DA bit. His original email was different
and his moniker was "DA Clarke" not "D.A. Clarke", a similar trick employed
by our poopy-panted friend and MITD.

I won't believe it's him until he claims to be hisself...

Mind you, it's a good thing to see Chuck hoist his skirts and fire back,
with O'Neener in fine fettle too.

--
Greg

Tom Watson wrote:

> I'm not a hunnert percent perzactly sure, but this guy might not even
> be the original DA guy - his current way of expressing hisself don't
> jive with what I've read of his in the past.

You know, I was thinking this very thing after I responded to his
post. Either that, or it was a fine example of why friends shouldn't
let friends post drunk on Usenet.

> Well shit - that one hit the high C - shattered all the glasses - and
> made the dogs howl. That were a good'un O'Deener.

One of the best I've read in a long time. Superb and selective
wielding of the Hammuh.

>>So, Chuck, if you're anything like the little effeminite decorator I
>>know, at least in your efforts to conceive and execute a functional,
>>aesthetically sound design, then you are a (sensitive) man among men.
>>Now where the hell's that mesquite? ;o)
>
> To get serious for only the briefest of moments - wooddorking is an
> aesthetic act. If you ain't got an appreciation for mass, scale,
> balance, figure, color, proportion, line, etc. - ya better get yaself
> some - or else start a collection of them little Ikea allen wrenches.

That was one of the reasons I started to doubt that it really was
D.A. Besides the language, D.A.'s whole purpose for appearing on the
wreck seems to be centered around his search for the "living trade", and
you would think that would involve concepts like you mention above. It
seems out of place for him to trivialize them in some sort of homophobic
rant.


Chuck Vance

Greg Millen wrote:

> I was thinking the same on the fake DA bit. His original email was different
> and his moniker was "DA Clarke" not "D.A. Clarke", a similar trick employed
> by our poopy-panted friend and MITD.
>
> I won't believe it's him until he claims to be hisself...
>
> Mind you, it's a good thing to see Chuck hoist his skirts and fire back,
> with O'Neener in fine fettle too.

Heh. Yeah, when someone calls my manhood into question, they'd
better be prepared to be bitch-slapped into submission.


Charlene Vance

still obsessing over me, P.O.?

dave

Patrick Olguin wrote:

> Tom Watson keyed:
>
>>To get serious for only the briefest of moments - wooddorking is an
>>aesthetic act. If you ain't got an appreciation for mass, scale,
>>balance, figure, color, proportion, line, etc. - ya better get yaself
>>some - or else start a collection of them little Ikea allen wrenches.
>
>
> I knew better than to be enjoying a beverage when I pulled up this
> post, and here's the evidence.
>
> Little pearls like this are what LJ misses when he exercises his
> God-given right to plonk anyone who engages in significant Bee Aye Dee
> baiting. His loss.
>
> 'Course, he might see it now ;o).
>
> O'Deen

On 12 May 2004 09:44:48 -0700, [email protected] (Patrick Olguin)
wrote:


<intersniporama throughout>

>This has led, according to my set of biases, prejudices and
>sensibilities, to a great number of pieces - perfectly executed in
>joinery, form and function - yet outright abortions when it comes to
>final presentation of the hallowed medium: wood.

I'm thinkin' they call that "Art Furniture".
>
> Interesting.
> First your remarks about panty lace, and now when Chuck conducts a
>basic exploration in design, grain, color and balance in a project
>(regardless of its perceived loftiness), he's dismissed as a
>pissant... an effeminate little decorator.
>
>Whyn't ya come right out and call him a faggit?

I'm not a hunnert percent perzactly sure, but this guy might not even
be the original DA guy - his current way of expressing hisself don't
jive with what I've read of his in the past.

'Course - brain tumors and such can wreak substantial havoc in the
area of personality and its expression. Ya know, the whole cognitive
dissonance thing - kinda like what can be induced by too close a
proximity to certain B-Flatulent instruments (I'm thinkin' slush pumps
here - so rest easy big stallion.)


>I'm married to one. She's a restaurant designer, quite feminine and
>frankly - fucking brilliant.

Yabutt - she's really cute, too - and that takes precedence.


> Off the top of her head, she knows the
>working properties of every laminate and substrate out there (Keeter,
>stay away... I can see you getting turned on, you little Formica
>junkie),


Now you gone ane dunnit. That boy'll be up all night thinkin' 'bout
roll laminating and bending properties.


> all while knowing the difference between lavender, periwinkle
>and lilac and at the same time laughing at anyone who'd put artwork of
>Pollack and Monet in the same room.

I once painted a room with a couple of original JP paintings in it. I
started looking at my old drop cloths like they might be worth money
someday.
>

>
>I am amazed at the depth and breadth of knowledge my own little
>effeminate decorator possesses, who without any prompting knew
>precisely the difference between dado, rabbet, moving fillester, side
>bead, center bead, hollow, round, sash and coping planes, and why they
>had to work the way they did. There's just no stopping those
>intuitive feminine types when they've got a little eddyfication and
>experience.

Yabutt she's really cute, too and ...(I guess we already covered
that).
>
>Trouble is (for you), a person doesn't have to have a nice rack,

Doesn't make you a bad person.


> or be
>a flaming queer

And neither does that.

> to possess an eye for design. Tough shit if that
>doesn't fit into your homophobic paradigm.

Yeah, this is why I'm thinkin' this might not be DA but some sorta
homophobic monkey assed troll. If he starts after Boy Dave, we'll
know fer sure.


>
>And therefore, when I read of a woodworker, pal or not, discussing the
>vagaries of design, color, balance and grain - regardless of the
>judged complexity of the piece - I manage to fight through what
>obviously got the best of you, namely: that knee jerk schoolyard
>proclivity to label him a sissy-boy

We were in favor of the term, "Ya big Mary".

> and run back to the fort in the
>middle of the field, to light farts

Demonstrating scientific principles involved in the potiential use of
the stored energy of the hominid biomass is a more or less decent use
of your time - and can be damned entertaining in a darkened
environment.
>
>Your pseudo-intellectual, bloated Usenet thesaurasizing doesn't fool
>anyone, DAC. Well, it doesn't fool me. To you, the mere thought of
>embracing some sort of sensitivity (or hell, even a basic education)
>when it comes to wood selection, grain coordination/orientation (yes,
>I said orientation), color, and so on, sends your alligator-mouthed,
>hummingbird-assed faux persona screaming to the not-quite-full deck of
>latent homosexual playing cards. That's gotta be a tough way to live.
> Feel free to deal us out, Bubba, ya little Pomeranianesque
>ankle-biter.

Well shit - that one hit the high C - shattered all the glasses - and
made the dogs howl. That were a good'un O'Deener.
>
>So, Chuck, if you're anything like the little effeminite decorator I
>know, at least in your efforts to conceive and execute a functional,
>aesthetically sound design, then you are a (sensitive) man among men.
>Now where the hell's that mesquite? ;o)

To get serious for only the briefest of moments - wooddorking is an
aesthetic act. If you ain't got an appreciation for mass, scale,
balance, figure, color, proportion, line, etc. - ya better get yaself
some - or else start a collection of them little Ikea allen wrenches.


>
>O'Deen

Nicely done rant, O'Deen.


(watson - who is hoping that ole DA don't really have a brain tumor or
nuthin.)




Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

On 13 May 2004 14:45:04 -0700, [email protected] (Patrick Olguin)
brought forth from the murky depths:

>Tom Watson keyed:
>> To get serious for only the briefest of moments - wooddorking is an
>> aesthetic act. If you ain't got an appreciation for mass, scale,
>> balance, figure, color, proportion, line, etc. - ya better get yaself
>> some - or else start a collection of them little Ikea allen wrenches.
>
>I knew better than to be enjoying a beverage when I pulled up this
>post, and here's the evidence.
>
>Little pearls like this are what LJ misses when he exercises his
>God-given right to plonk anyone who engages in significant Bee Aye Dee
>baiting. His loss.
>
>'Course, he might see it now ;o).

Ayup, he might at that. ;)

Thanks for sharing the plonkee's pearls. I do miss them, but
the price for seeing them is just too high. FWIW, I plonked
another poster eons ago because I got too tired seeing the rant
about "Partial Birth Abortions" every couple dozen messages.
Then there was Joe Woody Peckerhead. KnowwhatImean,Vern? :(
Life's too short.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
When I die, I'm leaving my body to science fiction. --Steven Wright
----------------------------
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development

Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> On 14 May 2004 05:27:43 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
> brought forth from the murky depths:
>
> [pine]
>
> > Sounds like you're blaming the wood for the idjits who don't know
> >how to use it properly. :-)
>
> OK, add that it is too soft, splits easily, and has too many knots.
> The smell gets old after awhile, too.

I can't say that I mind the smell, and you just have to pick your
boards carefully to avoid knots. As for it being soft and splitting
easily, that's true with most of what you can buy at your local Borg,
but I have had the pleasure of working some stuff (guato pine) that is
as hard as dense as many hardwoods. This stuff in particular had
outstanding working properties (as well as a bit of figure):
http://uweb.txstate.edu/~cv01/stool2.jpg

> [snip]
>
> >bring down trees on their land: http://www.swt.edu/~cv01/logs2.jpg
>
> > Just say (tmPL) *meeep* *meeeep*
>
> Huh? a -firewood- gloat? Hmmm...

I don't know what you use for firewood now that you're up in
Oregon, but down here, a 4' section of mesquite log with a 24"
diameter is considered worth saving. In fact, some folks might even
try to make something out of it:
http://uweb.txstate.edu/~cv01/mesquitable.jpg


Chuck Vance

Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> On 14 May 2004 05:27:43 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
> brought forth from the murky depths:
>
> [pine]
>
> > Sounds like you're blaming the wood for the idjits who don't know
> >how to use it properly. :-)
>
> OK, add that it is too soft, splits easily, and has too many knots.
> The smell gets old after awhile, too.

I can't say that I mind the smell, and you just have to pick your
boards carefully to avoid knots. As for it being soft and splitting
easily, that's true with most of what you can buy at your local Borg,
but I have had the pleasure of working some stuff (guato pine) that is
as hard as dense as many hardwoods. This stuff in particular had
outstanding working properties (as well as a bit of figure):
http://uweb.txstate.edu/~cv01/stool2.jpg

> [snip]
>
> >bring down trees on their land: http://www.swt.edu/~cv01/logs2.jpg
>
> > Just say (tmPL) *meeep* *meeeep*
>
> Huh? a -firewood- gloat? Hmmm...

I don't know what you use for firewood now that you're up in
Oregon, but down here, a 4' section of mesquite log with a 24"
diameter is considered worth saving. In fact, some folks might even
try to make something out of it:
http://uweb.txstate.edu/~cv01/mesquitable.jpg


Chuck Vance

Well, I have to ask. Where did you find that mesquite?

Also, I like the tile topped table. I may do something similar for an Acoma
pot that I have.
Tell us the story of the tile and the pot on your table.

What is guato pine and where do you find it? I guess I'll have to call the
guy's at Clarkes Hardwoods.


"Conan The Librarian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...
>
> > On 14 May 2004 05:27:43 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
>snip>
>
> Chuck Vance

Well,
I Googled guato pine and it led me to your web site. I found the answers to
my questions. :-)


"Lowell Holmes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Well, I have to ask. Where did you find that mesquite?
>
> Also, I like the tile topped table. I may do something similar for an
Acoma
> pot that I have.
> Tell us the story of the tile and the pot on your table.
>
> What is guato pine and where do you find it? I guess I'll have to call the
> guy's at Clarkes Hardwoods.
>
>
> "Conan The Librarian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
> >
> > > On 14 May 2004 05:27:43 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
> >snip>
> >
> > Chuck Vance
>
>

On 14 May 2004 05:27:43 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
brought forth from the murky depths:

> Sounds like a residual problem from too many pharmaceuticals in the
>60's.

Nah, I stuck to alcoholism instead. I was much better at it and
it was cheaper. ;)


>> >(Well, except for O'Deener and zebrawood, but that's another story.)
>>
>> Doesn't he also have an aversion to workmuttwood?
>
> He seems to be able to saw right through it, no problem.


> Sounds like you're blaming the wood for the idjits who don't know
>how to use it properly. :-)

OK, add that it is too soft, splits easily, and has too many knots.
The smell gets old after awhile, too.


> Sounds awfully nice to me. (Of course here we get 6 months of
>90-100 degrees with humidity in the same range.)

We keep our hummerditty LOW here, thanks. Despite the rain, the
moisture is lower here than in LoCal. I am still needing to break
out the chapstick several times a year up here.


>> > Er, no ... that I don't. Just a couple of giant oaks.
>>
>> Are you as adverse to cutting them as I am mine? All i had in LoCal

Hey, who put that "d" in "averse" there? Why, I oughta...


> We saw lots of big ones down in the area around San Miguel de
>Allende. At first glance they looked like mesquites or huizaches
>(because of the foliage), but they had a totally different seedpod.

I called it a West Coast Willow. Ants loved 'em.


> As for cutting trees on my land -- no way, unless the tree became
>diseased. But I am not averse to harvesting wood from others who

So it wasn't you who added that "d", was it?


>bring down trees on their land: http://www.swt.edu/~cv01/logs2.jpg

> Just say (tmPL) *meeep* *meeeep*

Huh? a -firewood- gloat? Hmmm...


-----------------------------------------------------------------
When I die, I'm leaving my body to science fiction. --Steven Wright
----------------------------
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development

On 14 May 2004 05:01:19 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
brought forth from the murky depths:

>Phil Hansen <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>> No, you will not loose your fingers. The tiger fish further north in
>> Zimbabwe are a lot more aggressive with serious teeth and a good fighter
>> on the line. (so I'm told <G>)
>
> Those are some scary-looking fish:
>http://www.frontierstrvl.com/pages/freshwater/africa/nxamaseri.html

Ooh, dem teefs be scary alright. Here were the fish I referred to on
the other SA. http://www.scz.org/animals/p/piranha.html
I don't think you want to fish for these, Chuck.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
When I die, I'm leaving my body to science fiction. --Steven Wright
----------------------------
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development

that explains a lot...

I know, I know, larry has me plonked, but I couldn't resist.
<g>

dave


Larry Jaques wrote:

>
> Nah, I stuck to alcoholism instead. I was much better at it and
> it was cheaper. ;)
>

On 14 May 2004 21:00:29 -0700, [email protected] (D. A. Clark)
brought forth from the murky depths:

>I believe the question was...What is Living Trade?
>Only two respondents have made an effort to answer with any
>perspicacity, and they did well. So, what does that make the rest of
>you?

Um, less perspicacious?

I sold my Chinese fiddle yesterday and picked up some QS red
oak from the hardwood store today. $4.75/bf + $3.40/bf rift red.

I'll have to order QSW when I want it :( , but he doesn't force
a large purchase and is OK with small quantities. $5/bf

Now to find some good ammonia and make that small A&C entertainment
center.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
When I die, I'm leaving my body to science fiction. --Steven Wright
----------------------------
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development

[email protected] wrote in message
> so if I understand the issues correctly, you really are a troll.

He who posts off-topic is the troll, that would be most of you.
It is nice that Larry has bought himself some wood for a personal
project, but that is not the topic. On the other hand, in visiting
his website, I find a short dissertation of his personal feelings
while working wood, and that would be part of the philosophy and
psychology of living trade.
Working wood evokes emotion, from the murky depths as Larry would say,
of a man's being. Yet, that is not the whole story either, but
rather, just tip to the iceberg. There are global implications to
what most of you treat as mere hobby, spending countless hours and
dollars for very little result.
Answer this, if you have any understanding...what could be the
underlying purpose of man's emotional response? Why do men work wood,
whether they are paid to do so or not?
daclark

[email protected] (D. A. Clark) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> [email protected] wrote in message
> > so if I understand the issues correctly, you really are a troll.
>
> He who posts off-topic is the troll, that would be most of you.
> It is nice that Larry has bought himself some wood for a personal
> project, but that is not the topic. On the other hand, in visiting
> his website, I find a short dissertation of his personal feelings
> while working wood, and that would be part of the philosophy and
> psychology of living trade.
> Working wood evokes emotion, from the murky depths as Larry would say,
> of a man's being. Yet, that is not the whole story either, but
> rather, just tip to the iceberg. There are global implications to
> what most of you treat as mere hobby, spending countless hours and
> dollars for very little result.
> Answer this, if you have any understanding...what could be the
> underlying purpose of man's emotional response? Why do men work wood,
> whether they are paid to do so or not?
> daclark

Ahh so you are the professor who will assign value and quantify what
constitutes 'results' kinda arrogant

On 15 May 2004 09:39:22 -0700, [email protected] (D. A. Clark)
wrote:

>Andrew Barss <[email protected]> wrote in message:
>> People who understand that "living trade" is an odd, and incoherent,
>> collocation of words.
>
>Is that so, professor? But, would you not use the term 'living trust'
>and expect to be understood? Have you read the posted premises, or
>are you merely shaking your willy, as if I'd misspelled a single word?
>Perhaps, you should not count yourself amongst the people who
>understand.
>
>> Where on earth did you find the term "living trade"? It appears in no
>> English discussion of the trades for the last several hundred years.
>
>You make me laugh...yeah, I polled the search engines, too. Just
>because some computer twit hasn't assigned importance to the subject,
>that must mean it doesn't exist, right? And, heaven forbid, that a
>man might have original thought...but then, even Chippendale was only
>a plagarist. So, pardon me, if I don't believe you to be the last
>authority with your suppositions.
>Working wood or working words, no man is the master, we are
>apprentices all of our lives. If the uninterested and vain would only
>stop wasting space in this thread, we all might learn something.
>That is why I was here...
>daclark




so if I understand the issues correctly, you really are a troll.

Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> On Tue, 11 May 2004 07:25:09 -0500, Conan the Librarian
> <[email protected]> brought forth from the murky depths:
>
> > A "certain shepherd"? That went right over my head.
>
> Think SHEEPY, sir.

As in "black sheep"?

> > It wasn't much, just a dovetailed box with a sliding top:
> >http://uweb.txstate.edu/~cv01/cwbox1.jpg and
> >http://uweb.txstate.edu/~cv01/cwbox2.jpg
>
> Part of why I didn't like that one was the dizzy background.
> The grain in that pineywood makes me purely dizzy.

You really should see a doctor about that vertigo of yours, Lar.

> > Maybe one of these days I'll do just that. :-) First I need to
> >practice on bending something easy like ply.
>
> Dealing with melted glue + delamination is "easy"?

I was thinking about getting some of that ply that's specifically
made for bending. One of my long-term projects is to make an Aztec
calendar out of wood, and I'm trying to figure how to make a circular
frame. I'm thinking that ply might be the only way I can accomplish
that.

> > Sounds like ... work. So did you wind up using your bamboo fishing
> >pole for garden stakes? ;-)
>
> No, and as a matter of fact, I took a day off last week and went up
> the Rogue to Lost Creek Dam. Check your email box for pics of crazy
> fishermen standing in the rapids, Butte Falls, and an earthen dam.
> I just may get a fishing license this year and give 'er a go.

Oustanding pics, thanks. A couple of observations: That
fisherperson isn't just crazy, he's totally insane. Then again, when
we were in Moontana last year I saw some guys wading faster water than
that. So that madrone was 9' in circumference?! Haysoos cristo,
you'd need a big chainsaw for that guy. ;-) You mentioned a
hatchery; I would have expected that to be a mostly wild fishery
there. Do they just grow rainbows or brown trout to supplement the
natives?

So I'm starting to see why you moved up into the rainforest. If
you can keep the moss from growing on you I guess it's a nice place to
live.


Chuck Vance

On Tue, 11 May 2004 07:25:09 -0500, Conan the Librarian
<[email protected]> brought forth from the murky depths:

> A "certain shepherd"? That went right over my head.

Think SHEEPY, sir.


> It wasn't much, just a dovetailed box with a sliding top:
>http://uweb.txstate.edu/~cv01/cwbox1.jpg and
>http://uweb.txstate.edu/~cv01/cwbox2.jpg

Part of why I didn't like that one was the dizzy background.
The grain in that pineywood makes me purely dizzy.


> But it made me realize what an affinity willow and walnut have for
>each other.

I think I like the end better than the side. Less contrast within
the wood itself, more with the top.


> Maybe one of these days I'll do just that. :-) First I need to
>practice on bending something easy like ply.

Dealing with melted glue + delamination is "easy"?


> Sounds like ... work. So did you wind up using your bamboo fishing
>pole for garden stakes? ;-)

No, and as a matter of fact, I took a day off last week and went up
the Rogue to Lost Creek Dam. Check your email box for pics of crazy
fishermen standing in the rapids, Butte Falls, and an earthen dam.
I just may get a fishing license this year and give 'er a go.

--
Save the Endangered ROAD NARROWS! -|- www.diversify.com
Ban SUVs today! -|- Full Service Websites

"Bay Area Dave" wrote in message ...
> Chuck, have you found yourself in yet ANOTHER pissing
> contest?? LOL! You go!

Not really in your league is he?

By the way, we're still waiting for you to explain your lying and
slandering.

Greg

Is it the right time to poll for a splinter group of
rec.woodworking.philosophy? (d&r)

Back in the days of Paully Rad <doffs hat> fillyscoffical chats were de
rigueur; design, trade, the golden section/mean/string, Fibonacci ratios and
Roman design influences were not uncommon. Generally, we welcome any
discussion that *adds* to the understanding of our hobby. Certainly most
prefer it to some of the wildly off-beat topics that creep in from time to
time, and highbrow discussions are great - provided they are not conducted
in a monobrow manner.

--
Greg


"Conan The Librarian" <[email protected]> wrote in message ...
<snip>
> In short, we're a bit like any gathering of guys at a bar or party.
> And your entrance into the group is similar to someone barging into
> the middle of a party uninvited and hollering, "hey, look at me ...
> I'm smarter than you, and I don't care what you're talking about, you
> should all discuss what interests me".
>
> Now given that scenario, what kind of response would you really
> expect?
>
>
> Chuck Vance
> Just say (tmPL) HTH.

Phil Hansen <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> No, you will not loose your fingers. The tiger fish further north in
> Zimbabwe are a lot more aggressive with serious teeth and a good fighter
> on the line. (so I'm told <G>)

Those are some scary-looking fish:
http://www.frontierstrvl.com/pages/freshwater/africa/nxamaseri.html


Chuck Vance
Just say (tmPL) I think I'll stick to something less frightening
... like piranhas.

[email protected] (D. A. Clark) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> I believe the question was...What is Living Trade?
> Only two respondents have made an effort to answer with any
> perspicacity, and they did well. So, what does that make the rest of
> you?

For one thing: Regular newsgroup contributors, unlike you.

What you don't seem to comprehend is that aside from the
entertainment value we get from seeing your arrogant posturing, you
have added nothing whatsoever to this group. In fact, it appears that
despite your stratospheric IQ, you have failed to grasp a very simple
concept: This is a newsgroup frequented by mostly recreational
woodworkers (note the presence of "rec" in the group name) who have
formed a community of sorts. We discuss everything from joinery,
properties of wood, tool techniques and design elements to sports,
fishing, adult beverages, etc.

In short, we're a bit like any gathering of guys at a bar or party.
And your entrance into the group is similar to someone barging into
the middle of a party uninvited and hollering, "hey, look at me ...
I'm smarter than you, and I don't care what you're talking about, you
should all discuss what interests me".

Now given that scenario, what kind of response would you really
expect?


Chuck Vance
Just say (tmPL) HTH.

[email protected] (D. A. Clark) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> (Conan The Librarian) wrote in message
>
> > This is a newsgroup frequented by mostly recreational woodworkers...
>
> As self-appointed moderator for this public facility, you should read
> your own FAQ, then give it a good flush.

Let's see, first it was lingerie, then it was homosexual interior
decorators and now it's a public commode. For such a hoity-toity
intellectual, your mind sure seems to lean towards baser pursuits.

> Just for your information, Charlie, I am recreating.

I'll give you partial credit on that one, D., since the word
"recreate" has more than one meaning. You definitely are trying to
recreate this same tired thread. The phrase "one-trick-pony" comes to
mind.

> > In short, we're a bit like any gathering of guys at a bar or party.
> > And your entrance into the group is similar to someone barging into
> > the middle of a party uninvited...
>
> Since I originated the thread, as I was free to do, it must be my
> party.

In other words, just as I wrote before, D. sez: "hey, look at me ...
I'm smarter than you, and I don't care what you're talking about, you
should all discuss what interests me".

> But, you are welcome to stay

I'll be here long after you have ridden your high horse off into
the sunset. What you don't seem to realize(no doubt because of your
holier-than-thou, Mensa-fueled, delusions of grandeur), is that this
group is a virtual community. And you don't become part of that
community by swooping in, brandishing your pseudo-intellectual sword
and cape, Zorro-like, and then daring the peasants to knock the chip
off of your shoulder.

But then again, you don't really want to be part of the community,
do you? That would be so beneath you. OK, so you made your cameo,
everyone knows you're reaaalllly smart (and dashing), now please feel
free to go away for another couple of years. We'll let you know when
we need your services again.

HTH. HAND.


Chuck Vance

Bay Area Dave <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> Chuck, have you found yourself in yet ANOTHER pissing
> contest??

I've been in exactly two "pissing contests" in recent memory. One
with you and one with D.A.

Think about it.


Chuck Vance

Thanks dave, I'm glad you finally admit you'd be wasting your time trying to
substantiate your lies, I guess that's as close as you'll come to admitting
it.

--
Greg

"Bay Area Dave" wrote in message ...
> my lack of response is only because I hate wasting my time;
> which brings me to this: P L O N K! :)
>
> dave

Has D.A. ever posted pictures of his woodwork?

OBTW, what does D.A. stand for? :-)

"Patrick Olguin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> [email protected] (Conan The Librarian) wrote:
> > And your entrance into the group is similar to someone barging into
> > the middle of a party uninvited and hollering, "hey, look at me ...
> > I'm smarter than you, and I don't care what you're talking about, you
> > should all discuss what interests me".
>
> Yeah - normally you have to go to the trumpet player's forum for that
> kind of discourse. DAMHIKT.
>
> O'Deen

I believe the question was...What is Living Trade?
Only two respondents have made an effort to answer with any
perspicacity, and they did well. So, what does that make the rest of
you?
daclark

Andrew Barss <[email protected]> wrote in message:
> People who understand that "living trade" is an odd, and incoherent,
> collocation of words.

Is that so, professor? But, would you not use the term 'living trust'
and expect to be understood? Have you read the posted premises, or
are you merely shaking your willy, as if I'd misspelled a single word?
Perhaps, you should not count yourself amongst the people who
understand.

> Where on earth did you find the term "living trade"? It appears in no
> English discussion of the trades for the last several hundred years.

You make me laugh...yeah, I polled the search engines, too. Just
because some computer twit hasn't assigned importance to the subject,
that must mean it doesn't exist, right? And, heaven forbid, that a
man might have original thought...but then, even Chippendale was only
a plagarist. So, pardon me, if I don't believe you to be the last
authority with your suppositions.
Working wood or working words, no man is the master, we are
apprentices all of our lives. If the uninterested and vain would only
stop wasting space in this thread, we all might learn something.
That is why I was here...
daclark

Knowledge and understanding is always scoffed at...by those who have none.

Paul Kierstead wrote:
> Master, will you enlighten us?

Grasshopper? What do you see?
Does man work wood? Or does wood work man?

(Conan The Librarian) wrote in message

> This is a newsgroup frequented by mostly recreational woodworkers...

As self-appointed moderator for this public facility, you should read
your own FAQ, then give it a good flush.
Just for your information, Charlie, I am recreating.

> In short, we're a bit like any gathering of guys at a bar or party.
> And your entrance into the group is similar to someone barging into
> the middle of a party uninvited...

Since I originated the thread, as I was free to do, it must be my
party. It's BYOB, Charlie...(Bring Your Own Brain)...and you didn't
have the good manners to do so. But, you are welcome to stay,
Chuckie...maybe somebody else will say something intelligent for you.

Connie The Librarian wrote in message:

> I'll give you partial credit on that one, D., since the word
> "recreate" has more than one meaning.


So, what is the Dewey decimal point for pissant, Chuckie?

Dave,

thanks for answering so I am not talking to myself :-)

All I'd like is for you to substantiate the claims you made, otherwise it's
just lies and slander - as I have stated AND referenced. You have not
supported ANY of your claims, you continue to refuse to do so.

--
Greg

"Bay Area Dave" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> talking to yourself again, Millen??
>
> dave
>
> Greg Millen wrote:
>
>
> > By the way, we're still waiting for you to explain your lying and
> > slandering.
> >
> > Greg
> >
> >
> >
>

[email protected] (Conan The Librarian) wrote:
> And your entrance into the group is similar to someone barging into
> the middle of a party uninvited and hollering, "hey, look at me ...
> I'm smarter than you, and I don't care what you're talking about, you
> should all discuss what interests me".

Yeah - normally you have to go to the trumpet player's forum for that
kind of discourse. DAMHIKT.

O'Deen

talking to yourself again, Millen??

dave

Greg Millen wrote:


> By the way, we're still waiting for you to explain your lying and
> slandering.
>
> Greg
>
>
>

my lack of response is only because I hate wasting my time;
which brings me to this: P L O N K! :)

dave

Greg Millen wrote:
> Dave,
>
> thanks for answering so I am not talking to myself :-)
>
> All I'd like is for you to substantiate the claims you made, otherwise it's
> just lies and slander - as I have stated AND referenced. You have not
> supported ANY of your claims, you continue to refuse to do so.
>

In article <[email protected]>, Larry Jaques
<novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> says...
> Do the fish bite back, Phil, or is that only in the Amazon?
> (in the other SA)

No, you will not loose your fingers. The tiger fish further north in
Zimbabwe are a lot more aggressive with serious teeth and a good fighter
on the line. (so I'm told <G>)
--

Phillip Hansen
Skil-Phil Solutions

In article <[email protected]>, cv01
@txstate.edu says...
> Just say (tmPL) I think I'll stick to something less frightening
> ... like piranhas.
Try these links for a bit more info on the area and whats available

nottingham.kzn.org.za/nottingham/

www.drakensberg-tourism.com/nottingham-road.html

www.sa-venues.com/kzn/thebend.htm

www.sa-venues.com/accommodation/kzn_nottinghamroad.htm

www.roomsforafrica.com/dest/south_africa/kwazulu_natal/nottingham_road.j
sp (watch wrap)

www.safarinow.com/Destinations/Nottingham-Road/

Nice brewery
Cheers

--

Phillip Hansen
Skil-Phil Solutions

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] says...
> I believe the question was...What is Living Trade?
> Only two respondents have made an effort to answer with any
> perspicacity, and they did well. So, what does that make the rest of
> you?

Who cares about your question. The other stuff is a lot more
interesting.
--

Phillip Hansen
Skil-Phil Solutions

Chuck, have you found yourself in yet ANOTHER pissing
contest?? LOL! You go!

dave

Conan the Librarian wrote:

> D. A. Clark wrote:
>
>> So, what is the Dewey decimal point for pissant, Chuckie?
>
>
> That's your idea of a comeback?
>
>
> Chuck Vance
> Just say (tmPL) I've thoughtfully included my previous post below,
> so you can give it another try. This time try to keep the poopie words
> to a minimum. They don't reflect well on you, old chap.
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>
> [email protected] (D. A. Clark) wrote in message
> news:<[email protected]>...
>
> >> (Conan The Librarian) wrote in message
> >>
> >
> >>> > This is a newsgroup frequented by mostly recreational woodworkers...
> >
> >>
> >> As self-appointed moderator for this public facility, you should read
> >> your own FAQ, then give it a good flush.
>
> Let's see, first it was lingerie, then it was homosexual interior
> decorators and now it's a public commode. For such a hoity-toity
> intellectual, your mind sure seems to lean towards baser pursuits.
>
> >> Just for your information, Charlie, I am recreating.
>
> I'll give you partial credit on that one, D., since the word
> "recreate" has more than one meaning. You definitely are trying to
> recreate this same tired thread. The phrase "one-trick-pony" comes to
> mind.
>
> >> Since I originated the thread, as I was free to do, it must be my
> >> party.
>
> In other words, just as I wrote before, D. sez: "hey, look at me ...
> I'm smarter than you, and I don't care what you're talking about, you
> should all discuss what interests me".
>
> >> But, you are welcome to stay
>
> I'll be here long after you have ridden your high horse off into
> the sunset. What you don't seem to realize(no doubt because of your
> holier-than-thou, Mensa-fueled, delusions of grandeur), is that this
> group is a virtual community. And you don't become part of that
> community by swooping in, brandishing your pseudo-intellectual sword
> and cape, Zorro-like, and then daring the peasants to knock the chip
> off of your shoulder.
>
> But then again, you don't really want to be part of the community,
> do you? That would be so beneath you. OK, so you made your cameo,
> everyone knows you're reaaalllly smart (and dashing), now please feel
> free to go away for another couple of years. We'll let you know when
> we need your services again.
>
> HTH. HAND.

Larry Jaques wrote:

> On 12 May 2004 05:00:09 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
> brought forth from the murky depths:
>
>> As in "black sheep"?
>
> Bingo, after only HOW MANY tries? ;)

OK, so I'm not always the sharpest knife in the drawer. :-)

>> You really should see a doctor about that vertigo of yours, Lar.
>
>
> Vertigo, hell. That's pineygo, plain and simple, son.

Vertigo, pineygo, whatever. I've never seen someone with such a
prejudice against a particular wood. (Well, except for O'Deener and
zebrawood, but that's another story.) Pine has a long and noble history
in furniture-making and building.

>> Oustanding pics, thanks. A couple of observations: That
>>fisherperson isn't just crazy, he's totally insane. Then again, when
>>we were in Moontana last year I saw some guys wading faster water than
>
> I didn't see any backup, either. (Y'know, a guy with an Marlin
> rig and a line to the back of the fisherman.)

From the looks of the current, I doubt that would help much. :-o

>>You mentioned a
>>hatchery; I would have expected that to be a mostly wild fishery
>>there. Do they just grow rainbows or brown trout to supplement the
>>natives?
>
> Mostly steelhead and salmon but trout are included in the 85 species.
> http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ODFWhtml/InfoCntrFish/PDFs/BKGHatcheryFacts.pdf
> Amazing, wot?

Interesting. So they raise and plant fish to benefit commercial
fisheries as well as sportfishing? I'd be curious to see what sorts of
policies they have on harvesting these fish. Catch and release doesn't
really seem to jive with commercial harvesting.

>> So I'm starting to see why you moved up into the rainforest. If
>>you can keep the moss from growing on you I guess it's a nice place to
>>live.
>
> I'm south of the rainforest. We average just 32"/yr here in the Rogue
> Valley, while the coast gets 100"+. Washington's Olympia rainforest
> gets 140"+. And for the most part, our rainfall here is light when it
> does hit, with sunshine for part of the day (before or afterward.)

Ah, so you don't need gills to live there?

> Neener: you don't have a redwood tree in your back yard like I do.

Er, no ... that I don't. Just a couple of giant oaks.


Chuck Vance

D. A. Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
: I believe the question was...What is Living Trade?
: Only two respondents have made an effort to answer with any
: perspicacity, and they did well. So, what does that make the rest of
: you?


People who understand that "living trade" is an odd, and incoherent,
collocation of words.

Where on earth did you find the term "living trade"? It appears in no
English discussion of the trades for the last several hundred years.


-- Andy Barss

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (Conan The Librarian) writes (to D.A.):
> everyone knows you're reaaalllly smart (and dashing), now please feel

On the contrary, Chuck.

OB on topic (for D.A.): I first heard of the Living Bra as an
impressionable child, and had this cartoonish image of a
brassiere that went around chasing you.

Oh wait ...

Sorry.

--
Jeff Thunder
Dept. of Mathematical Sciences
Northern Illinois Univ.
jthunder at math dot niu dot edu

D. A. Clark wrote:

> So, what is the Dewey decimal point for pissant, Chuckie?

That's your idea of a comeback?


Chuck Vance
Just say (tmPL) I've thoughtfully included my previous post
below, so you can give it another try. This time try to keep the poopie
words to a minimum. They don't reflect well on you, old chap.

----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[email protected] (D. A. Clark) wrote in message
news:<[email protected]>...

>> (Conan The Librarian) wrote in message
>>
>
>>> > This is a newsgroup frequented by mostly recreational woodworkers...
>
>>
>> As self-appointed moderator for this public facility, you should read
>> your own FAQ, then give it a good flush.

Let's see, first it was lingerie, then it was homosexual interior
decorators and now it's a public commode. For such a hoity-toity
intellectual, your mind sure seems to lean towards baser pursuits.

>> Just for your information, Charlie, I am recreating.

I'll give you partial credit on that one, D., since the word
"recreate" has more than one meaning. You definitely are trying to
recreate this same tired thread. The phrase "one-trick-pony" comes to
mind.

>> Since I originated the thread, as I was free to do, it must be my
>> party.

In other words, just as I wrote before, D. sez: "hey, look at me ...
I'm smarter than you, and I don't care what you're talking about, you
should all discuss what interests me".

>> But, you are welcome to stay

I'll be here long after you have ridden your high horse off into
the sunset. What you don't seem to realize(no doubt because of your
holier-than-thou, Mensa-fueled, delusions of grandeur), is that this
group is a virtual community. And you don't become part of that
community by swooping in, brandishing your pseudo-intellectual sword
and cape, Zorro-like, and then daring the peasants to knock the chip
off of your shoulder.

But then again, you don't really want to be part of the community,
do you? That would be so beneath you. OK, so you made your cameo,
everyone knows you're reaaalllly smart (and dashing), now please feel
free to go away for another couple of years. We'll let you know when
we need your services again.

HTH. HAND.

On 12 May 2004 05:00:09 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
brought forth from the murky depths:

>Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>> On Tue, 11 May 2004 07:25:09 -0500, Conan the Librarian
>> <[email protected]> brought forth from the murky depths:
>>
>> > A "certain shepherd"? That went right over my head.
>>
>> Think SHEEPY, sir.
>
> As in "black sheep"?

Bingo, after only HOW MANY tries? ;)


> You really should see a doctor about that vertigo of yours, Lar.

Vertigo, hell. That's pineygo, plain and simple, son.


> I was thinking about getting some of that ply that's specifically
>made for bending. One of my long-term projects is to make an Aztec
>calendar out of wood, and I'm trying to figure how to make a circular
>frame. I'm thinking that ply might be the only way I can accomplish
>that.



>> > Sounds like ... work. So did you wind up using your bamboo fishing
>> >pole for garden stakes? ;-)
>>
>> No, and as a matter of fact, I took a day off last week and went up
>> the Rogue to Lost Creek Dam. Check your email box for pics of crazy
>> fishermen standing in the rapids, Butte Falls, and an earthen dam.
>> I just may get a fishing license this year and give 'er a go.
>
> Oustanding pics, thanks. A couple of observations: That
>fisherperson isn't just crazy, he's totally insane. Then again, when
>we were in Moontana last year I saw some guys wading faster water than

I didn't see any backup, either. (Y'know, a guy with an Marlin
rig and a line to the back of the fisherman.)


>that. So that madrone was 9' in circumference?! Haysoos cristo,

NO, it was closer to 30', but the front limb was 9' in circ.
Note the diminutive car in the foreground for scale.


>you'd need a big chainsaw for that guy. ;-) You mentioned a
>hatchery; I would have expected that to be a mostly wild fishery
>there. Do they just grow rainbows or brown trout to supplement the
>natives?

Mostly steelhead and salmon but trout are included in the 85 species.
http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ODFWhtml/InfoCntrFish/PDFs/BKGHatcheryFacts.pdf
Amazing, wot?


> So I'm starting to see why you moved up into the rainforest. If
>you can keep the moss from growing on you I guess it's a nice place to
>live.

I'm south of the rainforest. We average just 32"/yr here in the Rogue
Valley, while the coast gets 100"+. Washington's Olympia rainforest
gets 140"+. And for the most part, our rainfall here is light when it
does hit, with sunshine for part of the day (before or afterward.)

Neener: you don't have a redwood tree in your back yard like I do.



-----------------------------------------------------------------
When I die, I'm leaving my body to science fiction. --Steven Wright
----------------------------
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development

"D. A. Clark" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I believe the question was...What is Living Trade?
> Only two respondents have made an effort to answer with any
> perspicacity, and they did well. So, what does that make the rest of
> you?
> daclark

Un-interested

In article <[email protected]>,
[email protected] (D. A. Clark) wrote:

> I believe the question was...What is Living Trade?
> Only two respondents have made an effort to answer with any
> perspicacity, and they did well. So, what does that make the rest of
> you?
> daclark

Me too dumb to know. Master, will you enlighten us?

Paul "Computer Twit" Kierstead

On Thu, 13 May 2004 07:08:44 -0500, Conan the Librarian
<[email protected]> brought forth from the murky depths:

>Phil Hansen wrote:
>
>> In article <[email protected]>, cv01
>> @txstate.edu says...
>>
>>> Just curious ... what area do you live in? I'm always looking for
>>>new places to travel to see interesting scenery and fish.
>>
>> Live in a rural village (Rosetta) in the KZN Midlands in South Africa.
>> Great fishing area. When are you coming <G>

Do the fish bite back, Phil, or is that only in the Amazon?
(in the other SA)


> I'll have to check with SWMBO. (She's my travel agent.) She's got
>us booked for the Crowsnest Pass (Canuckistan) in July, and probably San
>Miguel de Allende (Mexico) later in the year. After that I know she
>wants to see Australia and New Zealand (so do I .... supposed to be
>outstanding trout fishing in NZ).

Give big, sloppy kisses to Xena, Gabrielle, and Callisto for me
when you get to NZ, will ya, Conan? They're sure to love your
handle. (No, I meant "nickname".)


-----------------------------------------------------------------
When I die, I'm leaving my body to science fiction. --Steven Wright
----------------------------
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development

Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On Thu, 13 May 2004 07:25:22 -0500, Conan the Librarian
> <[email protected]> brought forth from the murky depths:
>

> > Vertigo, pineygo, whatever. I've never seen someone with such a
> >prejudice against a particular wood.
>
> I just get plain -dizzy- seeing that particular striping in your
> vertical-grained benchtop, that's all. It may be a side-effect
> of my astigmatism. Houndstooth and small checkerboard patterns do
> the same thing to me,

Sounds like a residual problem from too many pharmaceuticals in the
60's.

> >(Well, except for O'Deener and zebrawood, but that's another story.)
>
> Doesn't he also have an aversion to workmuttwood?

He seems to be able to saw right through it, no problem.

> >Pine has a long and noble history
> >in furniture-making and building.
>
> My prejudice is from several things. First, it being so cheap, so
> many dumb things being made from it. Pukey ducks, bird houses, etc.
> Second, I lived in a house with badly stained (naughty) pine in it
> for 26 years and never did pull up the carpet and strip/refinish it.
> You know how it goes. A bad stain job lives forever (until paint).
> (I'd like to hamstring the person who "finished" the interior of my
> last house. He may have puked into the shellac before applying it.)

Sounds like you're blaming the wood for the idjits who don't know
how to use it properly. :-)

> > Interesting. So they raise and plant fish to benefit commercial
> >fisheries as well as sportfishing? I'd be curious to see what sorts of
> >policies they have on harvesting these fish. Catch and release doesn't
> >really seem to jive with commercial harvesting.
>
> Salmon are overfished/endangered, so farming is necessary. BTW, there
> is no fishing permitted within the hatcheries, so forget about it.
> (No C&R either.) ;)

Heh. I'm not much on shooting fish in a barrel, thanks.

As an aside, one result of all the stocking of hatchery fish has
been that ingenious anglers have come up with a special fly for
catching those guys. It's called the Purina fly. Looks just like a
little brown pellet.

> > Ah, so you don't need gills to live there?
>
> No, it's like a chillier, less-smoggy, friendlier, less-crowded LoCal.
> Summers get to 100F (with nice, cool nights.) There is no rain for 5+
> months, just like LoCal. Winters are colder and wetter, down to 20F
> (with m+aybe an inch or two of shortlived snow) but not bad. I've
> almost adjusted to it now, after only 2 years here.

Sounds awfully nice to me. (Of course here we get 6 months of
90-100 degrees with humidity in the same range.)

> > Er, no ... that I don't. Just a couple of giant oaks.
>
> Are you as adverse to cutting them as I am mine? All i had in LoCal
> were poplars which I had planted myself. No, I take that back. I
> sorely miss my old pepper tree which graced the northeast corner of
> the lot. Beautiful! I don't think they grow up here but I really
> should check with the local Master Gardener's extension. My tree
> wasn't quite as large or full as this one, but close.
> http://ag.arizona.edu/pima/gardening/aridplants/Schinus_molle.html

We saw lots of big ones down in the area around San Miguel de
Allende. At first glance they looked like mesquites or huizaches
(because of the foliage), but they had a totally different seedpod.

As for cutting trees on my land -- no way, unless the tree became
diseased. But I am not averse to harvesting wood from others who
bring down trees on their land: http://www.swt.edu/~cv01/logs2.jpg


Chuck Vance
Just say (tmPL) *meeep* *meeeep*

On Thu, 13 May 2004 07:25:22 -0500, Conan the Librarian
<[email protected]> brought forth from the murky depths:

>Larry Jaques wrote:
>> Vertigo, hell. That's pineygo, plain and simple, son.
>
> Vertigo, pineygo, whatever. I've never seen someone with such a
>prejudice against a particular wood.

I just get plain -dizzy- seeing that particular striping in your
vertical-grained benchtop, that's all. It may be a side-effect
of my astigmatism. Houndstooth and small checkerboard patterns do
the same thing to me, but I can climb into the rigging of a moving
schooner without any trouble. No vertigo.


>(Well, except for O'Deener and zebrawood, but that's another story.)

Doesn't he also have an aversion to workmuttwood?


-----------------------------------------------------------------
When I die, I'm leaving my body to science fiction. --Steven Wright
----------------------------
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development

On Thu, 13 May 2004 07:25:22 -0500, Conan the Librarian
<[email protected]> brought forth from the murky depths:

>Larry Jaques wrote:
>
>> On 12 May 2004 05:00:09 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
>> brought forth from the murky depths:
>>
>>> As in "black sheep"?
>>
>> Bingo, after only HOW MANY tries? ;)
>
> OK, so I'm not always the sharpest knife in the drawer. :-)

So ScaryGingko(tmLJ) it, eh?


> Vertigo, pineygo, whatever. I've never seen someone with such a
>prejudice against a particular wood. (Well, except for O'Deener and
>zebrawood, but that's another story.)


>Pine has a long and noble history
>in furniture-making and building.

My prejudice is from several things. First, it being so cheap, so
many dumb things being made from it. Pukey ducks, bird houses, etc.
Second, I lived in a house with badly stained (naughty) pine in it
for 26 years and never did pull up the carpet and strip/refinish it.
You know how it goes. A bad stain job lives forever (until paint).
(I'd like to hamstring the person who "finished" the interior of my
last house. He may have puked into the shellac before applying it.)


> From the looks of the current, I doubt that would help much. :-o

He was in the slower stream, too. About 10' further and he would have
been in 25mph faster rapids.


>>>You mentioned a
>>>hatchery; I would have expected that to be a mostly wild fishery
>>>there. Do they just grow rainbows or brown trout to supplement the
>>>natives?
>>
>> Mostly steelhead and salmon but trout are included in the 85 species.
>> http://www.dfw.state.or.us/ODFWhtml/InfoCntrFish/PDFs/BKGHatcheryFacts.pdf
>> Amazing, wot?
>
> Interesting. So they raise and plant fish to benefit commercial
>fisheries as well as sportfishing? I'd be curious to see what sorts of
>policies they have on harvesting these fish. Catch and release doesn't
>really seem to jive with commercial harvesting.

Salmon are overfished/endangered, so farming is necessary. BTW, there
is no fishing permitted within the hatcheries, so forget about it.
(No C&R either.) ;)


> Ah, so you don't need gills to live there?

No, it's like a chillier, less-smoggy, friendlier, less-crowded LoCal.
Summers get to 100F (with nice, cool nights.) There is no rain for 5+
months, just like LoCal. Winters are colder and wetter, down to 20F
(with m+aybe an inch or two of shortlived snow) but not bad. I've
almost adjusted to it now, after only 2 years here.


>> Neener: you don't have a redwood tree in your back yard like I do.
>
> Er, no ... that I don't. Just a couple of giant oaks.

Are you as adverse to cutting them as I am mine? All i had in LoCal
were poplars which I had planted myself. No, I take that back. I
sorely miss my old pepper tree which graced the northeast corner of
the lot. Beautiful! I don't think they grow up here but I really
should check with the local Master Gardener's extension. My tree
wasn't quite as large or full as this one, but close.
http://ag.arizona.edu/pima/gardening/aridplants/Schinus_molle.html

Thanks for reminding me.


-----------------------------------------------------------------
When I die, I'm leaving my body to science fiction. --Steven Wright
----------------------------
http://diversify.com Comprehensive Website Development

On Thu, 13 May 2004 20:00:58 -0700, Larry Jaques
<novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote:


>Thanks for sharing the plonkee's pearls. I do miss them, but
>the price for seeing them is just too high. FWIW, I plonked
>another poster eons ago because I got too tired seeing the rant
>about "Partial Birth Abortions" every couple dozen messages.
>Then there was Joe Woody Peckerhead. KnowwhatImean,Vern? :(
>Life's too short.


"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do
nothing.” (Edmund Burke)





Regards,
Tom.

Thomas J.Watson - Cabinetmaker (ret.)
tjwatson1ATcomcastDOTnet (real email)
http://home.comcast.net/~tjwatson1

Larry Jaques <novalidaddress@di\/ersify.com> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> On 8 May 2004 17:23:48 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
> brought forth from the murky depths:
>
> >http://uweb.txstate.edu/~cv01/chicabinet.jpg
>
> Whassa chick abinet, Chuckrateez? (Purty!)

Thanks, lar. It's a chisel cabinet. I store mostly carving tools
there, but also have mortising chisels and a few other odds-and-ends.

> Elm (or poplar? or izzat some more of your dizzy
> pineywood) and walnut? Nice contrast without too
> much distraction.

I can't believe it; you actually said you like the contrast of the
woods I used on a project. ;-) The frame is black willow. I had
built a box for my C&W smoother using willow and walnut and they
looked so nice together that I figured I'd try it on a larger scale.
The willow carries just enough of a rich brown to pick up the walnut's
color, IMHO.

Also, I went to quite a bit of trouble to get the willow's grain
to match across the pieces and get a nice contour from the grain
pattern following the lines of the frame.

It's nice to hear that someone else appreciates the choice of
woods.


Chuck Vance (happy to be talking about woodworking again)

[email protected] (Conan The Librarian) wrote in message
> I can't believe it; you actually said you like the contrast of the
> woods I used on a project. ;-) The frame is black willow. I had
> built a box for my C&W smoother using willow and walnut and they
> looked so nice together that I figured I'd try it on a larger scale.
> The willow carries just enough of a rich brown to pick up the walnut's
> color, IMHO.
> Also, I went to quite a bit of trouble to get the willow's grain
> to match across the pieces and get a nice contour from the grain
> pattern following the lines of the frame.
> It's nice to hear that someone else appreciates the choice of
> woods.
> Chuck Vance (happy to be talking about woodworking again)

Geez, Chuckie, ya sound like the effeminate little decorator ya
are...taking credit for inherent color and grain as if you had created
it. That ain't working wood, ya little pissant.

Conan the Librarian <[email protected]> wrote
> It's got two rows of chisel holders, which are nothing more than
> some 4/4 oak with a series of vertical holes drilled and slots cut in
> the front edge.
> Chuck Vance

Wow, that's way beyond the synthesis of my ganglion
perceptibilities...what website did you find that idea on, Chuckie?
By the way, why did ya use all that fancy wood stuff on that
fool...er, stool cabinet?

[email protected] (D. A. Clark) aiming up a rope, excreted:
>
> Geez, Chuckie, ya sound like the effeminate little decorator ya
> are...taking credit for inherent color and grain as if you had created
> it. That ain't working wood, ya little pissant.

It's been my observation that one of the least understood, it seems,
and least discussed topics in woodworking is the design aesthetic.
This has led, according to my set of biases, prejudices and
sensibilities, to a great number of pieces - perfectly executed in
joinery, form and function - yet outright abortions when it comes to
final presentation of the hallowed medium: wood.

In the Chuckmeister's post [deleted per Usenet FAQ], he doesn't claim
credit for the wood's inherent color and grain, but is merely pleased
that a couple other folks are appreciative of some thoughtful use of
the wood's grain/color. Do you have a reading comprehension problem,
DAC, or is this a deeper issue? In addition, you apparently you find
the consideration of grain/color matching (I prefer to think of it as
finding complementary, as the grain rarely matches unless it is
bookmatched, and in Chuck's case he was looking for a pleasing
contrast) to be effeminate behavior, worthy of derision. Interesting.
First your remarks about panty lace, and now when Chuck conducts a
basic exploration in design, grain, color and balance in a project
(regardless of its perceived loftiness), he's dismissed as a
pissant... an effeminate little decorator.

Whyn't ya come right out and call him a faggit?

My my my, what a strong, burly, worldly tradesman you are. Do you
really know anything about what a designer's resume' is like? I do,
I'm married to one. She's a restaurant designer, quite feminine and
frankly - fucking brilliant. Off the top of her head, she knows the
working properties of every laminate and substrate out there (Keeter,
stay away... I can see you getting turned on, you little Formica
junkie), including what can span which distance and why. She hand
draws shop drawings, joinery detail, outlets, soffets, lighting,
wiring, plumbing, elevations, spacing, ducting, crown moulding, and so
on... all while knowing the difference between lavender, periwinkle
and lilac and at the same time laughing at anyone who'd put artwork of
Pollack and Monet in the same room.

Suddenly effeminite little decorator is pretty damned hip, eh?

I am amazed at the depth and breadth of knowledge my own little
effeminate decorator possesses, who without any prompting knew
precisely the difference between dado, rabbet, moving fillester, side
bead, center bead, hollow, round, sash and coping planes, and why they
had to work the way they did. There's just no stopping those
intuitive feminine types when they've got a little eddyfication and
experience.

Trouble is (for you), a person doesn't have to have a nice rack, or be
a flaming queer to possess an eye for design. Tough shit if that
doesn't fit into your homophobic paradigm.

And therefore, when I read of a woodworker, pal or not, discussing the
vagaries of design, color, balance and grain - regardless of the
judged complexity of the piece - I manage to fight through what
obviously got the best of you, namely: that knee jerk schoolyard
proclivity to label him a sissy-boy and run back to the fort in the
middle of the field, to light farts or burn ants with a magnifying
glass or whatever it was you found entertaining as a youth.

Your pseudo-intellectual, bloated Usenet thesaurasizing doesn't fool
anyone, DAC. Well, it doesn't fool me. To you, the mere thought of
embracing some sort of sensitivity (or hell, even a basic education)
when it comes to wood selection, grain coordination/orientation (yes,
I said orientation), color, and so on, sends your alligator-mouthed,
hummingbird-assed faux persona screaming to the not-quite-full deck of
latent homosexual playing cards. That's gotta be a tough way to live.
Feel free to deal us out, Bubba, ya little Pomeranianesque
ankle-biter.

So, Chuck, if you're anything like the little effeminite decorator I
know, at least in your efforts to conceive and execute a functional,
aesthetically sound design, then you are a (sensitive) man among men.
Now where the hell's that mesquite? ;o)

O'Deen

"Conan The Librarian" wrote in message ...
> Thanks, lar. It's a chisel cabinet. I store mostly carving tools
> there, but also have mortising chisels and a few other odds-and-ends.

I had a sneak around your site but couldn't see inside the box- you did
build an inside for it didn't you?


> I can't believe it; you actually said you like the contrast of the
> woods I used on a project. ;-) The frame is black willow. I had
> built a box for my C&W smoother using willow and walnut and they
> looked so nice together that I figured I'd try it on a larger scale.
> The willow carries just enough of a rich brown to pick up the walnut's
> color, IMHO.

I have to agree with Larry, tres' nice. The fly tying station is beautiful
wood though, I don't fish but it makes me want to use it.

> It's nice to hear that someone else appreciates the choice of
> woods.

More'n one Chuck, more'n one.

I tried to build a small sewing cabinet spool holder on the weekend and
stuffed it up totally. It turned out to be firewood, my worst effort yet.
Measure twice they say, well, I did that - but why don't they say "get the
right spool" instead?

Better days are just ahead...

Greg

Greg Millen wrote:

> "Conan The Librarian" wrote in message ...
>
>> Thanks, lar. It's a chisel cabinet. I store mostly carving tools
>>there, but also have mortising chisels and a few other odds-and-ends.
>
> I had a sneak around your site but couldn't see inside the box- you did
> build an inside for it didn't you?

Damn, I got so busy with the outside that I totally forgot about
that. :-)

It's got two rows of chisel holders, which are nothing more than
some 4/4 oak with a series of vertical holes drilled and slots cut in
the front edge.

> I have to agree with Larry, tres' nice. The fly tying station is beautiful
> wood though, I don't fish but it makes me want to use it.

Hey, you don't have to fish to tie flies. :-) As an aside, SWMBO
saw the wood that I was using for the station and commented something to
the effect of, "Why are you using all that fancy stuff for nothing more
than a tool?".

Oh well, she still doesn't quite get it. :-) (But you obviously do.)

>> It's nice to hear that someone else appreciates the choice of
>>woods.
>
> More'n one Chuck, more'n one.

Thanks, Groggy.

> I tried to build a small sewing cabinet spool holder on the weekend and
> stuffed it up totally. It turned out to be firewood, my worst effort yet.
> Measure twice they say, well, I did that - but why don't they say "get the
> right spool" instead?

Oooops, that hurts. I dunno how sewing thread goes, but thankfully,
the flytying thread spools are pretty uniform.

So can you at least rationalize it as "practice"? :-}


Chuck Vance

D. A. Clark wrote:

> Geez, Chuckie, ya sound like the effeminate little decorator ya
> are...taking credit for inherent color and grain as if you had created
> it. That ain't working wood, ya little pissant.

Go away trollboy ... there are grownups here who want to talk about
woodworking.


Chuck Vance

"Conan the Librarian" wrote in message ...
> So can you at least rationalize it as "practice"? :-}

done!

On 8 May 2004 17:23:48 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
wrote:

> On the contrary, DA. I also do a bit of woodworking. And all the
>wood is dimensioned, carved and joined with handtools:

Nice work, Chuck!

Barry

On 8 May 2004 17:23:48 -0700, [email protected] (Conan The Librarian)
brought forth from the murky depths:

>[email protected] (D. A. Clark) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
>
>> [email protected] (Conan The Librarian) wrote in message
>> >
>> > Verbal flatulance isn't really my area of expertise.
>>
>> On the contrary, Charlie. It would seem your only expertise.
>
> On the contrary, DA. I also do a bit of woodworking. And all the
>wood is dimensioned, carved and joined with handtools:

>http://uweb.txstate.edu/~cv01/chicabinet.jpg

Whassa chick abinet, Chuckrateez? (Purty!)
Elm (or poplar? or izzat some more of your dizzy
pineywood) and walnut? Nice contrast without too
much distraction.

--
Save the Endangered ROAD NARROWS! -|- www.diversify.com
Ban SUVs today! -|- Full Service Websites

[email protected] (D. A. Clark) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...

> [snip of the usual blather]
>
> There is a spot reserved for you in the corner of the inane. See
> Conan, he has your pointy hat...

As opposed to your pointy head.


Chuck Vance

> >bridger wrote in message

> as I see it, you started a thread that was almost, but not quite
> completely off topic...

The topic is, What is Living Trade?

> it's a part of being social mammals. it's about communication, on a
> level somewhere a bit deeper than language. it keeps us from killing
> and eating our young, which is a good thing for social mammals. it's
> wired in deep, man, so deep that it's really difficult to analyze what
> it is and why it's there, especially using cognitive functions that
> are "higher" than emotional response...

A good answer, for not knowing the question...

> the working of wood is one of our base technologies. like weaving,
> cooking food and making maps it is something that must be developed in
> order to build a complex civilization. why do we do that? beats me,
> but we sure do...

Collectively, we do so as a civilization, but real progress is
individual effort, wouldn't you agree?

> being a base technology, we will return to it time and again. it sits
> there in our subconscious and feeds our minds principles and metaphors
> that show up in diverse and seemingly unrelated endeavors. while we
> are not without alternatives to wood for materials with which to
> construct the acouterments of this complex civilization that we have
> built for ourselves, wood appeals to us on a number of levels. it's a
> material used by our ancestors, and humans are nothing if not suckers
> for sentimentality. it's also a pretty good material for lots of
> things. it has a sweet strength to weight ratio. it has failure modes
> that are fairly predictable. coming from a living thing it gives us a
> connection to nature. it's easily worked with fairly simple tools.

Not a fully concise assimilation, but lots of emotion. A good
statement in favor of seeking an answer to what is living trade.

> people like making things. we're just wired that way. it comes from
> walking upright and having hands with opposable thumbs.

This is an answer that I am not satisfied with. To work wood is not
just an inherent condition, there is no such thing as a naturally born
woodworker. The ability to truly work wood comes through the
acquisition of knowledge and understanding. Skills, the assimilation
of tools and techniques are the by-product of time spent in
apprenticeship, whether at trade or in your own shop.

> we do it for pay because there exists considerable demand for things made by
> people with specific skills. such is the nature of complex civilizations. we
> do it for recreation because whatever we do for pay provides insufficient
> stimulation to that part of our psyches that runs on the principles and
> metaphors of woodworking. in short, we can't help it.

This is where your thesis breaks down. If you give it some thought, I
believe you will see that you are straddling a pointy fence.
Well, bridger, for not wanting to play, you made a fine contribution.
daclark

"Rob Stokes" wrote in message:
> We do it tomorrow because we did it today, and there's the natural challenge
> to make our next product better than our last. The trade lives because as
> intelligent as the human race is, a true craftsman can always make "it"
> better...

Hello Rob,
In seeking an answer to living trade, I cannot accept the 'just
because' or the 'natural challenge' thesis as the whole of
understanding. And while common sense and manual dexterity can
enhance individual accomplishment in pursuit of trade, I do not adhere
to a belief in the natural craftsman's ability for improvement.
Knowledge is not collective per individual, like books on a shelf; but
rather cumulative in the subconsious of experience...and this is
derived through time in apprenticeship, which is a lifelong pursuit.


> The resulting new innovations though many, are simple
> derivatives of circuitous technology. Tools, means, methods,
> efficiencies...all are simple but plodding enhancements yet the core of the
> technology still lies with rudimentary tools, rudimentary materials and
> rudimentary physics...

I agree, the core of technology is based in the physics of the
material; yet, the innovations of modern technology are not
circuitous...they are destined for obsolescence and have failed to
provide such enhancement of product, that may be derived only from the
assimulation of a human eye and the articulation of a man's hand.
Therefore, man is the greatest technological force at work. As man
returns to the basic material, so too must he return to the first
principles of working the wood...to cut, to shape, to fasten...to find
an answer to what is living trade?

"Rob Stokes" wrote in message:

> Don't discount the strength of a natural challenge; it's been the father of
> the majority of the world we know today and continues to be thr driving
> force behind the very payckecks many people spend in an attempt to re-find
> their roots.

The strength of natural challenge is, of course, a viable force; most
evident in the proliferation of sports; what caused me climb to the
top of a redwood tree. For root cause, however, I perceive the force
of living trade, to work wood or metal or soil, to be an immanent
force of man's nature; an applied subconscious mental event with no
connection to historical fact.

> The Craftsman's natural ability for improvement is spawned from many core
> ideals however the prime mover for improvment, as it is in so many cases, is
> the efficiencies needed to compete with those who are on a like quest. These
> efficiencies are found in both time and materials resulting in lower cost,
> larger profit or perhaps both.

Profit as a motivational force does more to negate the propagation of
living trade than to reinforce man's knowledge and understanding of
the basic material. Industrialization induces a narrow view of the
trade subject; while, the introduction of modern machines, which
require modern materials, separates man from the perception of his own
potential.

> to realize these gains have themselves taken a life or pride where product
> produced by those who excel above the basic need for feed is measured in the
> fineness of the skills required to make the product efficient in the first
> place.

I am not sure what you mean here, but let's emphasize skill.
Demonstrable skill is individual expertise with tool and technique,
where a man's common sense and manual dexterity will prevail; whereas,
production efficiency is a mental exercise, knowing what you want to
build and planning each step well in advance of your feet; this, too,
is cumulative skill, most evident in the finished product, but
undoubtedly the least appreciated.

> The quest for happiness begins at the acceptance of wisdom.

Well, you're talking to the guy who has been accused of being a legend
in his own mind on this very thread; I suppose my accepted wisdom is
not to be overly wise in approaching living trade. No man is the
master; working wood is an infinite phenomenon, the more you know the
more you realize you know very little. But, I perceive the pursuit of
living trade to be a life's journey.

> but is this not the very meaning of circuitous technology?
> And man is the greatest threat to the very technology that sets him apart in
> the way. Ironic isn't it?

Ironic, indeed, if you define circuitous as a neanderphobe with more
planes then brains. The problem with today's technology is that
innovation is the provenance of machine and tool manufacturers,
computer science, and the industrial complex...none, of whom, work
wood.
Two decades ago, I located shelf standard products that would have
provided retrofit to the standard tablesaw for numerical control of
fence and the height/angle adjustments of the blade...for less than a
thousand dollars. Yet, today, no standard tablesaw, at any price, is
fitted for these basic functions.
Still, the most intricate detail in wood can only be accomplished with
a single edge of steel...

> In this there is peace.

A man in pursuit of living trade is at peace. You might peruse the
Four Ages in the Metamorphoses of Ovid for the effects of technology
on man's peace from the man who lived his trade two-thousand years
ago.
In defining living trade, and bringing to light the underlying
resource that is the driving force of living trade, perhaps, we may
witness a renaissance in man's inherent capability to work wood...
As always, Rob, you have provided opportunity...thank you.

(Ray Kinzler) wrote in message
> I think this thread has gone on long enough. Geesh. From what I
> gather is being said is that no one man has EVER known ALL there is to
> know about woodworking ever--especially since, I guess, none of us
> know what the future holds. So with this sort if nit-picking, sort of
> silly argument...

I guess, if you are willing to live life with your head stuck in the
sand, I can only assume that that butt sticking up is your real face.
Man is not the only woodworker; a beaver builds a dam, and a bird
builds a nest, but what does the woodchuck chuck? Chuck???
Certainly, the dumb animals of the world utilize the basic material
for their very survival, but would you ascribe man to an equal state
of ignorant grace? The monkey has an opposable thumb; it is in
seeking the resources of knowledge and understanding that sets man
apart.
There is a spot reserved for you in the corner of the inane. See
Conan, he has your pointy hat...

> because I do believe there was a man who lived on this earth who DID
> know everything that was and ever will be known about woodworking and
> he was a carpenter who lived 2,000 years ago
> If enybody knew everything there is to know about wood (and
> woodworking and everything else), it was Him.

By invoking God in defence of your irrelevancies, you have accidently
struck upon a central theme in the assertation of what is living
trade. Those of us who believe in God would not deny His hand in all
that we think, say or do.
On your part, the assumption that Jesus, as the carpenter's son,
qualified himself as a woodworker is a fallacy. Otherwise, when
inquired of by the merchant...Ben Hur, 1956...Jesus would have been
there to finish the guy's table, but instead, was in the hills
contemplating his Father's business.

Hence, I maintain, that no two men may have the same knowledge or
understanding of working wood. It is an infinite phenomenon, and
thus, a living trade.

LOL!!!

Oh man, there goes the monitor...!

Rob

--


http://www.robswoodworking.com

"Bay Area Dave" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Zuchick, is that you?
>
> dave
><snipped>

Zuchick, is that you?

dave

Ray Kinzler wrote:

> I don't want to start yet another flame war that goes off on another
> tangent but I, myself, have to disagree with the original poster
> because I do believe there was a man who lived on this earth who DID
> know everything that was and ever will be known about woodworking and
> he was a carpenter who lived 2,000 years ago who was later hung on a
> cross.
>
> If enybody knew everything there is to know about wood (and
> woodworking and everything else), it was Him.
>
> (I am ready to take the hits now.)

We do it tomorrow because we did it today, and there's the natural challenge
to make our next product better than our last. The trade lives because as
intelligent as the human race is, a true craftsman can always make "it"
better than the last guy choosing only to use the highlights of what he's
learned through passed on lessons, choosing to improve on that which he
feels justified. The resulting new innovations though many, are simple
derivatives of circuitous technology. Tools, means, methods,
efficiencies...all are simple but plodding enhancements yet the core of the
technology still lies with rudimentary tools, rudimentary materials and
rudimentary physics..... such as it is with any trade that continues, such
that it is that any trade plied today can trace it's ancestral roots to
trades of yesterday, all of which were required to provide basic food and
shelter. As long as the race shall live, so to will the trade....

Rob

--


http://www.robswoodworking.com

"D. A. Clark" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > >bridger wrote in message
>
> > as I see it, you started a thread that was almost, but not quite
> > completely off topic...
>
> The topic is, What is Living Trade?
>
> > it's a part of being social mammals. it's about communication, on a
> > level somewhere a bit deeper than language. it keeps us from killing
> > and eating our young, which is a good thing for social mammals. it's
> > wired in deep, man, so deep that it's really difficult to analyze what
> > it is and why it's there, especially using cognitive functions that
> > are "higher" than emotional response...
>
> A good answer, for not knowing the question...
>
> > the working of wood is one of our base technologies. like weaving,
> > cooking food and making maps it is something that must be developed in
> > order to build a complex civilization. why do we do that? beats me,
> > but we sure do...
>
> Collectively, we do so as a civilization, but real progress is
> individual effort, wouldn't you agree?
>
> > being a base technology, we will return to it time and again. it sits
> > there in our subconscious and feeds our minds principles and metaphors
> > that show up in diverse and seemingly unrelated endeavors. while we
> > are not without alternatives to wood for materials with which to
> > construct the acouterments of this complex civilization that we have
> > built for ourselves, wood appeals to us on a number of levels. it's a
> > material used by our ancestors, and humans are nothing if not suckers
> > for sentimentality. it's also a pretty good material for lots of
> > things. it has a sweet strength to weight ratio. it has failure modes
> > that are fairly predictable. coming from a living thing it gives us a
> > connection to nature. it's easily worked with fairly simple tools.
>
> Not a fully concise assimilation, but lots of emotion. A good
> statement in favor of seeking an answer to what is living trade.
>
> > people like making things. we're just wired that way. it comes from
> > walking upright and having hands with opposable thumbs.
>
> This is an answer that I am not satisfied with. To work wood is not
> just an inherent condition, there is no such thing as a naturally born
> woodworker. The ability to truly work wood comes through the
> acquisition of knowledge and understanding. Skills, the assimilation
> of tools and techniques are the by-product of time spent in
> apprenticeship, whether at trade or in your own shop.
>
> > we do it for pay because there exists considerable demand for things
made by
> > people with specific skills. such is the nature of complex
civilizations. we
> > do it for recreation because whatever we do for pay provides
insufficient
> > stimulation to that part of our psyches that runs on the principles and
> > metaphors of woodworking. in short, we can't help it.
>
> This is where your thesis breaks down. If you give it some thought, I
> believe you will see that you are straddling a pointy fence.
> Well, bridger, for not wanting to play, you made a fine contribution.
> daclark

On 16 May 2004 10:42:12 -0700, [email protected] (D. A. Clark)
wrote:

>[email protected] wrote in message
>> so if I understand the issues correctly, you really are a troll.
>
>He who posts off-topic is the troll, that would be most of you.

as I see it, you started a thread that was almost, but not quite
completely off topic, framed it in such a way as to ensure few would
figure WTF the question was, defined terms in such a way as to
obfuscate the point and jumped on anybody who pointed this out.

looks like a duck, waddles like a duck, quacks....



>It is nice that Larry has bought himself some wood for a personal
>project, but that is not the topic. On the other hand, in visiting
>his website, I find a short dissertation of his personal feelings
>while working wood, and that would be part of the philosophy and
>psychology of living trade.
>Working wood evokes emotion, from the murky depths as Larry would say,
>of a man's being. Yet, that is not the whole story either, but
>rather, just tip to the iceberg. There are global implications to
>what most of you treat as mere hobby, spending countless hours and
>dollars for very little result.

why does anyone do anything?





>Answer this, if you have any understanding...what could be the
>underlying purpose of man's emotional response?

it's a part of being social mammals. it's about communication, on a
level somewhere a bit deeper than language. it keeps us from killing
and eating our young, which is a good thing for social mammals. it's
wired in deep, man, so deep that it's really difficult to analyze what
it is and why it's there, especially using cognitive functions that
are "higher" than emotional response...


it's also WAAAAY off topic for this forum.....






> Why do men work wood,
>whether they are paid to do so or not?
>daclark


the working of wood is one of our base technologies. like weaving,
cooking food and making maps it is something that must be developed in
order to build a complex civilization. why do we do that? beats me,
but we sure do...

being a base technology, we will return to it time and again. it sits
there in our subconscious and feeds our minds principles and metaphors
that show up in diverse and seemingly unrelated endeavors. while we
are not without alternatives to wood for materials with which to
construct the acouterments of this complex civilization that we have
built for ourselves, wood appeals to us on a number of levels. it's a
material used by our ancestors, and humans are nothing if not suckers
for sentimentality. it's also a pretty good material for lots of
things. it has a sweet strength to weight ratio. it has failure modes
that are fairly predictable. coming from a living thing it gives us a
connection to nature. it's easily worked with fairly simple tools.

people like making things. we're just wired that way. it comes from
walking upright and having hands with opposable thumbs. we do it for
pay because there exists considerable demand for things made by people
with specific skills. such is the nature of complex civilizations. we
do it for recreation because whatever we do for pay provides
insufficient stimulation to that part of our psyches that runs on the
principles and metaphors of woodworking.

in short, we can't help it.

I think this thread has gone on long enough. Geesh. From what I
gather is being said is that no one man has EVER known ALL there is to
know about woodworking ever--especially since, I guess, none of us
know what the future holds. So with this sort if nit-picking, sort of
silly argument, the original poster will always be right. I guess
what he wants is everybody to say is, "Geez. You knw what? You're
right."

I agree with the person who said the rest of us are uninterested.

Sort of like when the wife asks you waht time it is and you tell her
it's, say, 4:15. And your eight-year-old says, "No, daddy. It's
actually 4:13 and 18 seconds. It's not 4:15. You're lying!" (True
story!) How can you argue?! The kid was 'technically' right.
Extremely nitpicky and sort of anal but, technically right.

I don't want to start yet another flame war that goes off on another
tangent but I, myself, have to disagree with the original poster
because I do believe there was a man who lived on this earth who DID
know everything that was and ever will be known about woodworking and
he was a carpenter who lived 2,000 years ago who was later hung on a
cross.

If enybody knew everything there is to know about wood (and
woodworking and everything else), it was Him.

(I am ready to take the hits now.)










[email protected] (D. A. Clark) wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> "Rob Stokes" wrote in message:
> > We do it tomorrow because we did it today, and there's the natural challenge
> > to make our next product better than our last. The trade lives because as
> > intelligent as the human race is, a true craftsman can always make "it"
> > better...
>
> Hello Rob,
> In seeking an answer to living trade, I cannot accept the 'just
> because' or the 'natural challenge' thesis as the whole of
> understanding. And while common sense and manual dexterity can
> enhance individual accomplishment in pursuit of trade, I do not adhere
> to a belief in the natural craftsman's ability for improvement.
> Knowledge is not collective per individual, like books on a shelf; but
> rather cumulative in the subconsious of experience...and this is
> derived through time in apprenticeship, which is a lifelong pursuit.
>
>
> > The resulting new innovations though many, are simple
> > derivatives of circuitous technology. Tools, means, methods,
> > efficiencies...all are simple but plodding enhancements yet the core of the
> > technology still lies with rudimentary tools, rudimentary materials and
> > rudimentary physics...
>
> I agree, the core of technology is based in the physics of the
> material; yet, the innovations of modern technology are not
> circuitous...they are destined for obsolescence and have failed to
> provide such enhancement of product, that may be derived only from the
> assimulation of a human eye and the articulation of a man's hand.
> Therefore, man is the greatest technological force at work. As man
> returns to the basic material, so too must he return to the first
> principles of working the wood...to cut, to shape, to fasten...to find
> an answer to what is living trade?

nope.


Bay Area Dave <[email protected]> wrote in message news:<[email protected]>...
> Zuchick, is that you?
>
> dave
>
> Ray Kinzler wrote:
>
> > I don't want to start yet another flame war that goes off on another
> > tangent but I, myself, have to disagree with the original poster
> > because I do believe there was a man who lived on this earth who DID
> > know everything that was and ever will be known about woodworking and
> > he was a carpenter who lived 2,000 years ago who was later hung on a
> > cross.
> >
> > If enybody knew everything there is to know about wood (and
> > woodworking and everything else), it was Him.
> >
> > (I am ready to take the hits now.)

> I guess, if you are willing to live life with your head stuck in the
> sand, I can only assume that that butt sticking up is your real face.
> Man is not the only woodworker; a beaver builds a dam, and a bird
> builds a nest, but what does the woodchuck chuck? Chuck???
> Certainly, the dumb animals of the world utilize the basic material
> for their very survival, but would you ascribe man to an equal state
> of ignorant grace? The monkey has an opposable thumb; it is in
> seeking the resources of knowledge and understanding that sets man
> apart.
> There is a spot reserved for you in the corner of the inane. See
> Conan, he has your pointy hat...
>

You know what, DA? If I said that you were rude or arrogant or
anything like that, I was wrong. You are actually pretty funny! I
think the only thing you are guilty of is overanalysis paralysis,
that's all!

Yes, it is my opinion you think too much. That's okay, though.
Whatever floats your boat!

But I don't think you have any right to force any other person to
deleve into any subject any deeper than they want to go. And I do not
think you should get us to say "Yes" to you.

When you nitpick to the point of being ridiculous, it sort of forces
others to actually say "No" when you really want them to say "Yes" and
I see that happening here.

Oh, I know you will come back with some really snappy, Mensa-like
retort but, oh well, it is just something I will have to endure.



> > because I do believe there was a man who lived on this earth who DID
> > know everything that was and ever will be known about woodworking and
> > he was a carpenter who lived 2,000 years ago
> > If enybody knew everything there is to know about wood (and
> > woodworking and everything else), it was Him.
>
> By invoking God in defence of your irrelevancies, you have accidently
> struck upon a central theme in the assertation of what is living
> trade. Those of us who believe in God would not deny His hand in all
> that we think, say or do.
> On your part, the assumption that Jesus, as the carpenter's son,
> qualified himself as a woodworker is a fallacy. Otherwise, when
> inquired of by the merchant...Ben Hur, 1956...Jesus would have been
> there to finish the guy's table, but instead, was in the hills
> contemplating his Father's business.
>

I know I started it and I don't want to go off on too much of a
tangent but I have to rebuke what you are saying. It is not a
fallacy. You are basing your biblical facts on a fictional movie made
in Hollywood?! Talk about shallowness!

First off, Jesus was a carpenter; a woodworker. I do not have the
actual documents at my fingertips but you can write to Chuck Colson at
Prison Fellowship Ministries for them but he reported that it was
discovered that some plows Jesus of Nazareth built were still used
over 100 years after His death. I am not going to go any deeper
becauseit may offend some people but I think you saying my assumption
is a fallacy is, well, a fallacy.


> Hence, I maintain, that no two men may have the same knowledge or
> understanding of working wood. It is an infinite phenomenon, and
> thus, a living trade.

Here is how "The Merriam Webster Dictionary" published in Springfield,
Massachusetts and copyrighted in 1994 defines the word "TRADE" as it
is used as a noun:

1. one's regular business or work: OCCUPATION
2. an occupation requiring manual or mechanical skill
3. the person's engaged in a business or industry

I take it you are using the word "TRADE" (or "living trade") as a
noun.

As such, to nitpick, I would have to say that how you describe it is
absolutely not 100% true 100% of the time.

I have been in the IT business since 1978 when I was 17-years-old.
That is still the business I am in. Ain't never changed.

I have never used woodworking as a form of income. I have never sold
anything but I have made things for people and given the product to
them. It is far from my occupation, however.

And woodworking is something more and something less than what you
claim it to be. I, personally, use woodworking as a means of clearing
my mind. I don't WANT to necessarily think. I do that for 10, 11,
12-hours a day; sometimes 6 or 7-days-a-week.

When I go into the garage to mess around with wood, I use it as a
means of clearing my mind. There are times when I clamp a price of
scrap wood into the old vise, grab a hand plane, and scrape away. I
doitbecause I like the sond it makes. I do it because I like to see
the thin shaving fall all over. I like the smell of the wood. I like
the feeling I get in my hands, my arms, and my shoulders as I use the
hand plane. I like the way it allows my mind to, well, do nothing!
No thinking--just use it to enjoy what is happening at the moment.
When the price of scrap is gone, sometime I grab another and start all
over again.

I view woodworking, FOR ME, as a pasttime, not a trade. As such, I am
going to nit-pick and say that woodworking is not a living trade. For
me, woodworking is a way to pass the time and do something I find as
enjoyable--even if I am not making something.

I know you will morph a lot of my words and say I am agreeing with you
and I should just swallow my pride and say such but I don't.

If my shallowness annoys you, is it my problem?

If I don't agree with you, should I be flogged?

If a man says something and there is no woman around, is he still
wrong?


I think I will continue to view woodworking the way I always have: as
a nice way to pass the time and to have fun. I choose NOT to think
about it too much. If you feel that makes me something less than you,
well, that's the way it will be. I can't change that and I am not
going to work to hard to change your mind.

D. A. Clark <[email protected]> wrote:
:> >bridger wrote in message
:
:> as I see it, you started a thread that was almost, but not quite
:> completely off topic...

: The topic is, What is Living Trade?



Here's the problem. YOU made the term "living trade" up. As a result
coming in here and asking what it means is contrary to how things usually
work (here, and elsewhere). When one invents a new term, it's to describe
something that ALREADY exists, or already is a focus of discussion.
You don't make a term up and then wander around trying to get people to
help you define it. That's just ornery.

-- Andy Barss

Ray Kinzler wrote:

> I think this thread has gone on long enough. Geesh. From what I
> gather is being said is that no one man has EVER known ALL there is to
> know about woodworking ever--especially since, I guess, none of us
> know what the future holds. So with this sort if nit-picking, sort of
> silly argument, the original poster will always be right. I guess
> what he wants is everybody to say is, "Geez. You knw what? You're
> right."

Of course D.A. will always be right. He created the term "living
trade", and is free to define it as he sees fit. Anyone entering into
the discussion to disagree has lost before he even started.

It's a heck of a way to carry on a "debate". Any other participants
must either agree with him and acknowledge his greatness or they are a
priori wrong. And to top it off, he berates those who dare to point out
his arrogance and pretentiousness.



Chuck Vance

"Rob Stokes" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:<exVqc.630$gx1.531@clgrps12>...

> Chuck:
>
> I think it's more a conversation than a debate and the root of the
> conversation is a interpretation of history and an attempt at using it to
> forecast the future as it pertains to skills being lost. I don't believe
> I've agreed or disagreed with DA (individual points aside) and I
don't feel
> this is a win/lose conversation, nor do I perceive his quest to strike a
> conversation as arrogance.
>
> Then again, I enjoy a good single malt and have been known to ramble
about
> the sublime on occasion so maybe it's all perception <g!>

Rob,

I respect your opinion and don't begrudge you choosing to
participate in the discussion. My sole issue in all of this is our
friend. He makes a grand entrance to the wreck once every few years and
seems to expect that everyone should stop what they're talking about and
concentrate solely on his personal great white whale.

While sitting on his imagined lofty perch, he displays an attitude
of condescension and disregard towards the very people with whom he
ostensibly hopes to carry on a discussion. I love a good philosophical
discussion, but I choose to participate on my own terms. Unfortunately,
due to the way he frames the debate, it can only be done on *his* terms.

The only thing he has contributed to the wreck is this single
mantra. He doesn't bother to participate as an equal; instead he
chooses to virtually snipe the group. He takes a few potshots, checks
for casualties and then moves on until the next time he gets bored with
his Mensa meetings.

In that regard, he is no better than a troll. And I don't care for
trolls, no matter how well-versed they are with Roget's.

Anyhow, have fun with it. I know I'll continue to do the same. :-)


Chuck Vance

it appears you are STILL pissing... so while YOU count the
pissing contests at TWO, you are getting maximum mileage out
of them. tsk, tsk. (Now it's time for you to have the last
word, Chucky, as I know you are unable to resist a
challenge, simple as it may be)


dave

Conan the Librarian wrote:

> Rob,
>
> I respect your opinion and don't begrudge you choosing to participate
> in the discussion. My sole issue in all of this is our friend. He
> makes a grand entrance to the wreck once every few years and seems to
> expect that everyone should stop what they're talking about and
> concentrate solely on his personal great white whale.
>
> While sitting on his imagined lofty perch, he displays an attitude of
> condescension and disregard towards the very people with whom he
> ostensibly hopes to carry on a discussion. I love a good philosophical
> discussion, but I choose to participate on my own terms. Unfortunately,
> due to the way he frames the debate, it can only be done on *his* terms.
>
> The only thing he has contributed to the wreck is this single
> mantra. He doesn't bother to participate as an equal; instead he
> chooses to virtually snipe the group. He takes a few potshots, checks
> for casualties and then moves on until the next time he gets bored with
> his Mensa meetings.
>
> In that regard, he is no better than a troll. And I don't care for
> trolls, no matter how well-versed they are with Roget's.
>
> Anyhow, have fun with it. I know I'll continue to do the same. :-)
>
>
> Chuck Vance

Chuck:

I think it's more a conversation than a debate and the root of the
conversation is a interpretation of history and an attempt at using it to
forecast the future as it pertains to skills being lost. I don't believe
I've agreed or disagreed with DA (individual points aside) and I don't feel
this is a win/lose conversation, nor do I perceive his quest to strike a
conversation as arrogance.

Then again, I enjoy a good single malt and have been known to ramble about
the sublime on occasion so maybe it's all perception <g!>

Rob

--


http://www.robswoodworking.com

"Conan the Librarian" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Ray Kinzler wrote:
>
> > I think this thread has gone on long enough. Geesh. From what I
> > gather is being said is that no one man has EVER known ALL there is to
> > know about woodworking ever--especially since, I guess, none of us
> > know what the future holds. So with this sort if nit-picking, sort of
> > silly argument, the original poster will always be right. I guess
> > what he wants is everybody to say is, "Geez. You knw what? You're
> > right."
>
> Of course D.A. will always be right. He created the term "living
> trade", and is free to define it as he sees fit. Anyone entering into
> the discussion to disagree has lost before he even started.
>
> It's a heck of a way to carry on a "debate". Any other participants
> must either agree with him and acknowledge his greatness or they are a
> priori wrong. And to top it off, he berates those who dare to point out
> his arrogance and pretentiousness.
>
>
>
> Chuck Vance