Poll: Time to Close?

Learn the NEC with Mike Holt now!

Poll: Time to Close?

  • Close the thread in the manner described.

    Votes: 9 29.0%

  • Close the thread now, without allowing any additional posts.

    Votes: 5 16.1%

  • Leave the thread open, and let it run its course.

    Votes: 12 38.7%

  • Other (please post a comment below to describe your views).

    Votes: 5 16.1%
  • Total voters
    31
  • Poll closed .
Status
Not open for further replies.
charlie b

charlie b

Moderator
Staff member
Location
Lockport, IL
Occupation
Semi-Retired Electrical Engineer
This poll relates to the following thread: http://forums.mikeholt.com/showthread.php?t=124592
Several members who have posted on that thread have suggested that it is time to close it. So I offer the following suggestion. This process was used once before, with (I believe) good results. I suggest taking the following steps:
1. I would temporarily close the thread.
2. I would open it after a delay of three days.
3. I would close it again, this time permanently, two days later.
4. Anyone who wishes to post a summary, a new statement, or a rebuttal of someone else?s earlier comments would have the three days to compose your post.
5. During the two days that the thread will be reopened, anyone can post one, and only one additional time. If you post a second time, the second post will be deleted.
6. I will post the final comment, stating that the thread is closed, and adding some statistical information just for the sake of interest.
 
Pros for closing: It is a bit tough for someone to follow from the beginning due to the length. If someone wants to continue on with a specific sub-topic, it might be easier in a separate thread.

Close & Open: Why? Someone can start a thread on a sub-topic if they feel the need. Closing/opening only means some may miss the posting window while others won't. While it gives people time to think of other ways to present their ideas, so does a separate thread.

Preference: Just say you will close it in 3 days and anyone interested should finish what they have to say about the OP question as the thread is getting too long/cumbersome for people to follow. Also encourage posters to start specific threads to discuss sub-topics they want to delve into in more detail that might not be covered and be responded to within the 3 days. 3 days is not much time for a postings & responses but is time for posters to say "please see thread-X for a discussion on sub-topic Y". If you think about it, that is what is going to happen one way or another either through a direct link or through a member's future question.
 
mivey said:
Pros for closing: It is a bit tough for someone to follow from the beginning due to the length. If someone wants to continue on with a specific sub-topic, it might be easier in a separate thread.
Click to expand...

That is the way I see it.

Roger
 
Our instincts say: If we don't understand it, let's throw a rock at it or poke it with a stick. :grin:
 
kingpb said:
The conversation/thread is full of esoteric allusions.

Close it immediately, before the virus spreads.............
Click to expand...
It's too late. The virius has already spread - it has even infected some that have no knowledge or concern.

It has been reptative for the last 600 posts. What's to add?

I say obliterate. Leave no binary stone unturned. Go beyond scorched earth. Leave nothing behind but glowing green glass.

Yes, I voted "other"
 
I voted for closure in the manner described. It has been a fascinating thread and I thank all participants for their insight, wisdom, and input. I learned a lot, even though I had nothing to contribute..
 
NO, I will say let it to go. Because any time or in any post in the future if we see same to opposite idea than same story will start again. It is better to discuss and agree with one another. We can not call it a virus or something funny. Instead of that jump into the discussion and solve the problem.
 
I say let it run, unless the server is low on space. Anyone who want's to read through it is welcome to. It's not costing anything.



"Have a beer! It don't cost nothin'!" ~ Bluto in Animal House
 
ItsHot said:
Does the NEC require "grounds" to be up when installing receptacles?
Click to expand...

No, but it should. It has been shown through tests that this would be a safer installation, but the NEC doesn't want to admit their ignorance by admitting to something proposed many years ago. In a horizontal install, put neutral up.
 
iwire said:
Really?

Sure would like to see these tests.
Click to expand...

I got the paper somewhere, it was centered around determining the cause of bed fires in nursing/care facilities. Very valid argument, that in a nutshell they showed how as a plug pulls away from the wall, often times due simply to the weight of the cord, it exposes a gap whereby the blades are still engaged but such that paper or thin materials, such as a sheet can sit there for a lengthy period of time across both the hot and neutral blades.

Because the ground prong is longer, when placed on top, as the plug tries to pull away from the wall it can't pull down due to the longer ground prong. If it does pull out a little, anything that drops down will be blocked from falling across the hot and neutral blades by the ground prong.

You can experiment with this at home. It is really pretty elementary.

Any job I am responsible for, the ground goes up on vertical and neutral up on horizontal.

Some will say it makes it harder to plug in some molded plugs. Yeah, so what. If the code required it, the manufactures would simply start making the plugs go the other way.
 
Since the poll is closed, and the topic has been diverted, I am closing this thread. I will not close the "power factor" thread, as that is not "the will of the people."

As to ground up or down, for every reason that one way is better, there is a reason, equally valid, that the other way is better. There is no overriding safety consideration involved. That is why we don't allow discussing that topic on this forum. It's not a code issue, and I am glad it is not. As an engineer, I don't want to include any such requirements in the specs, and I wouldn't want a project to fail inspection for no better reason than the orientation of receptacles. Check the FAQs, if you want more info.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top