A lot of rejects

Status
Not open for further replies.

tom baker

First Chief Moderator
Staff member
I read thru the proposals in Art 90 and 100. Only a few accepts, probably no more than ten total.
 

bphgravity

Senior Member
These two articles are really at the core, or heart of the NEC. It would take great and significant substantiation to change an Article 90 section and just about as much to change a definition.

I would really hate to see many Article 90 changes every code cycle, as those are the sections that seem most solid, significant, and purposefull.

It is my opinion that the code change cycle is becoming nothing more than a process to change the code for the sake of making a change rather than a true need to change the code.
 

Flex

Senior Member
These two articles are really at the core, or heart of the NEC. It would take great and significant substantiation to change an Article 90 section and just about as much to change a definition.

I would really hate to see many Article 90 changes every code cycle, as those are the sections that seem most solid, significant, and purposefull.

It is my opinion that the code change cycle is becoming nothing more than a process to change the code for the sake of making a change rather than a true need to change the code.
Havent been in this field that long but I agree with you. Almost like everyone wants to leave there own stamp on the NEC. Kinda like an ego thing.
 

weressl

Esteemed Member
Havent been in this field that long but I agree with you. Almost like everyone wants to leave there own stamp on the NEC. Kinda like an ego thing.
..and some of the 'proposals' are really funny. But hey, no qualifications are required to submit a proposal. I especially liked the one about ALL living things....in this day of age.:smile: Don't forget, electricity has a LARGE carbon footprint and probably at the 30 level of the AlGore scale of contributors.......
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top