On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 13:40:18 -0600, Duane Bozarth
wrote:

DJ wrote:

On Fri, 18 Nov 2005 09:10:23 -0600, Duane Bozarth
wrote:

DJ wrote:

On Thu, 17 Nov 2005 13:17:19 -0600, Duane Bozarth
wrote:

...
... after 20+ years,
it's pretty good indication of no _major_ issue.

Not to be a stickler for detail, but try 30 years,
...

FO

Ok, guess you didn't like that one, how about 29 years? I rounded up,
you rounded down. OP indicates house built in 1976, I'm closer...
...

What does 30 add over "20+" to the intent or content of the thread?

Probably more than your "FO", at least mine was relevant to the
thread.

I didn't "round" I literalized w/o going back to look up what _specific_
year OP said as it wheter it was 20 or 30 years wasn't significant to
the point I was making--that _a significant time_ had passed w/ not much
sign of any real structural fault.

Other than the chance to put in a dig at someone, there was no point
whatsoever in your posting afaict.

Lighten up, I was agreeing with you and going on to say it had been
even longer "w/ not much sign of any real structural fault." I happen
to remember the date mentioned by the OP, probably because my home is
also of that vintage.

DJ