Joshie...
...this one's for you, asshole.
This is something that we architects learned along the way to getting a professional degree in something other than being a smartass; earthquakes can be mitigated...to a degree. Any natural disaster, if severe enough, will take down a building.
And now, people are being tried for manslaughter in Italy for not informing the public about an event that can't entirely be predicted.
Nuts.
Just like Joshie.
UPDATE: The Profile of the Idiot du jour. Tells me volumes about him, and his personality. Self-described, "Baby sitter of things & People i.e. Security," he seems to vision himself as some sort of overseer, and it shows.
This is something that we architects learned along the way to getting a professional degree in something other than being a smartass; earthquakes can be mitigated...to a degree. Any natural disaster, if severe enough, will take down a building.
And now, people are being tried for manslaughter in Italy for not informing the public about an event that can't entirely be predicted.
Nuts.
Just like Joshie.
UPDATE: The Profile of the Idiot du jour. Tells me volumes about him, and his personality. Self-described, "Baby sitter of things & People i.e. Security," he seems to vision himself as some sort of overseer, and it shows.
Labels: Economics, Ethics, Liberal stupidity, News, Orwellian nightmares
13 Comments:
Sheesh, and I avoid the tar-baby more and more these days. :-)
It's kind of entertaining, in a way. The more he spouts, the more he discredits himself, yet he's too stupid to know it.
Some people take them selves to seriously.
The " the baby sitter of things & people" is a joke on myself as I'm a security guard. I do a lot of sitting and watching of poeple and things. It also gives my lot of time to read.
Architecture is just a Hoby of mine, so there's probably a lot you know about it that I don't. Actualy no probably about it. You started it off with a challenge to me. I thought I handled it well. You seemed to agree, so I tried to pick your brain by asking for a clarification. When I put out the book list it wasn't for you, but to show you where I was getting my info and for others reading the blogs use. I think you took that as a challenge to your expertise and that if I just didn't get it I was stupid and blew me off.
I didn't handle that well and the rest is history.
I know your in a business of providing product that people will buy at the price they are willing to pay.
Also, the misspelling of my acronym made me think you didn't respect me, so why should I respect you or what you have to say. Joshkie
Respect is a two-way street.
So, there we are,
Josh
"earthquakes can be mitigated...to a degree. Any natural disaster, if severe enough, will take down a building."
My question was relevant to the above statement. What responsibility do builders have in mitigating lose of life or damage to the property. What I think you were getting at and correct me if I'm wrong is. If you build something that you rate as say EF5 plus and it gets knocked down, this will open you up to liability for any death. So this was the prohibitive cost to your business. I was coming at drone a guy that wants to build his own house.
You could of said this. I had to come to your blog for an answer.
Josh
Answer for question from Tam's:
Your the one with the claims of being an expert. I never said take anything I said as fact.
I think my assumption are valid. I made them based on my research. There the only ones I have. Will see when I run them by an architect.
No I haven't gone to a an architect to have what I've come up with vetted. Yet.... Not at that stage, I'm still researching what out there and possible. I will; no matter what you think I'm not an idiot.
As you pointed out I am an asshole and pigheaded.
I listed the most of books I've read. There are few others on space planning, architecture and drafting, but no formal or informal training.
It's all suspect. I'm not egotistical enough to think I have all the answers, or know if I'm even asking the right questions.
We'll see,
Josh
Joshie,
Let's get a few things straight: The premise of being able to build a structure capable of withstanding a given set of circumstances wasn't at issue, EVER, and I clearly stated that. I also clearly stated that the overriding concern with these types of events is affordability, and economic factor.
You then chose to IGNORE that premise, and started spouting authoritarian-like horseshit about how it can be done, even well after I'd said that it could, and at NO TIME did you ever try to "pick my brain for clarificatoin" of anything, that I recall.
I didn't complain about anything, either (actually YOU did), and instead, I attempted to explain why it is that certain considerations are made for building most structures within a less stringent set of design parameters.
...And if you'd bothered to notice, St.John's Hospital, in Joplin, survived a direct hit of that tornado. The reason is simple; there is something called an "importance factor" in the structural engineer's calculation sheet, which skews the other safety factors significantly, resulting in buildings that have greater abilities at surviving castastrophic events such as this.
The windows are gone, and the building is largely unoccupiable, but hardly dangerous, as its superstructure was obviously not damaged enough (or at all) for it to have collapsed (or failed, as we call it).
I could write about another hundred paragraphs on the subject and not get much passed the surface of the how and why, so I'm truncating my explanation right here.
Also, I have no idea where you made any comment about a "book list," and if you did, I didn't read that comment (and I'll not apologize for it, either). I'm also quite sure that one book couldn't have possibly given you all that you needed to make such outrages assumptions about what needs to be executed to attain tornadoproofness.
As for the rest; You've screwed the pooch with me, and real good. Coming over here, and acquiescing at this point hasn't scored you any points, so I'll say it one more time, piss off, Joker.
You-
"What happens when can't build a concrete bunker, because the construction cost is too prohibitive, or, gawd forbid, the fucking Gummint won't let you?"
Me-
"theirritablearchitect -
Question: what's prohibitive? If more contractors used ICF's & other durable building methodologies the costs would come down. Plus in our bloated housing market it was cheeper to build new. I'm not sure what the margin is now I haven't crunched the numbers in a couple of years.
But, we've turned into a 'I want my McMansion and I want it now' Sociaty. My list of books to read:
"The Not So Big House" by Sarah Susanka.
"Creating the Not So Big House" by Sarah Susanka.
"The Concrete House" by Pueter A. VanderWerf.
"prefab modern" by Jill Herbers.
"Great Houses on a Budget" by James Greyson Trulove.
"The Smaller Home" by Dan F. Sater.
"sustainable architecture low tech houses" by Arian Mostaedi.
"Off the Grid" by Lori Ryker.
"Building the Japanese House Today" by Rap Brackett (My Fav.)
Just a little research in just those book can get you the house you want at the price you can afford.
Spending more upfront can usually be recouped or even save you money in the long run.
:-)
Josh"
You -
"I hardly need a dissertation on building technology, from you or anyone else; I do this stuff everyfreakinday, dude. I've either been formally studying this stuff or actively practicing for twenty years. Save it."
Defensive much. A demand for recognition of your authority.
You -
"Secondly, though you may be correct on one or more points, implementation is something else entirely, and getting ANY contractor to even LOOK at something they've never done before will get you one of two things; a much higher price for the work, regardless of the ease of application, or, half-assed, shoddy work, or possibly both."
You imply that I'm to stupid to find an architect or general contract that has worked with new material and design features.
You -
"Look; I'm with you in spirit on this, but you MUST understand that there are forces at work in this market that have pushed toward certain means and methods for construction, and some are so much so as to have become tradition, such as Western framing in the US and Canuckistan, which is good at doing a bunch of things well..."
Another call for me to submit to your authority. I 'MUST'.....
Understand wood frames cheep and versatile. Eas of use. And it's tradition.
I don't deal with bullies very well... And you call me authoritarian.... So I stopes lessening and started needling you.
Oh well last post no more bothering you.
Josh
"Another call for me to submit to your authority. I 'MUST'....."
You obviously can't read, or at least comprehend very well...I said nothing of the sort. I CLEARLY STATED THAT YOU MUST UNDERSTAND THAT THERE ARE, "forces work in this market that have pushed toward certain means and methods for construction..." which is hardly ME pressing MY point of view on YOU. IT'S A MARKET FORCE, NOT MINE, YOU MORON!
Wake the fuck UP!
Jeezis.
My understanding of market force at work
"Question: what's prohibitive? If more contractors used ICF's & other durable building methodologies the costs would come down." (right or wrong)
That you discounted.
I MUST accept your definition or understanding of market force in play.
Sheees to you.
I do know how to read and understand a conversation.
Josh
You can call me name all you want. It's your house/blog.
I know you looked at my profile. Did you happen to take a look at my blog?
Josh
Joshie,
It's not about MY definition of the market. It's there, despite what I may "think" about it. Do you understand? It lays outside of my perception of what it is? There are FACTS involved here, and that is something that you've obtuse about since this whole bit started.
IF developers did this, IF contractors did that, IF this is what was actually happening, THEN there would be something in play regarding the MARKET FORCES at work. Until there is something of substance being put forth, a tangible in this case, there is no market. Not my definition, that is THE definition.
My advice to you is to stop this non-sense you've managed to steop in and learn to think. Clearly. Start by studying elementary logic. Master the If-Then statement. Until you can do that, you've no business here, and no, I didn't look at your blog. I doubt it's my speed, dude.
BTW, most all of your reading list is writen by Lefty-bullshit wannabe intellectuals. I'd seriously reconsider most of it, if I were you.
".... I didn't look at your blog. I doubt it's my speed, dude."
You can't just say, "I think you're wrong." No you got to put in how much smarter, you think, you are than me.
"BTW, most all of your reading list is writen by Lefty-bullshit wannabe intellectuals. I'd seriously reconsider most of it, if I were you."
Since you are wilingl to judge my blog with out reading it, I'm wondering if you have read any of the books I listed. I didn't get any leftwing propaganda vibe from any of it, but what do I know as you keep telling me; I be stupid. I just thought they were about; space lay out, the design process, architects and what they have built.
Thanks for saving me from the dark-side.
I notice you like to throw labels and names about.
Do you know what the difference between a Lefty-bullshit wannabe intellectual and a right-wing wannabe intellectual is?
I think you confuse ignorance with stupidity.
Most of this disconnect between us I think is do to my crappy ability to communicate with the written word and your continued personal attacks.
Oh well,
Josh
Poshie,
OK, here it is, gothefuckaway.
Clear enough?
Post a Comment
<< Home