"John Rumm" wrote in message
...
:::Jerry:::: wrote:

This group really is showing up the rational behind Part P in the
last
few days... :~(

How do you figure that?

I would say the *group* is providing the correct answers to this
question everytime someone asks it.



Oh yes I agree, but sometimes those question and answers are
coming
*after* work has started, when the person doing the work obviously
doesn't have a clue to start the job - no problem with people
asking
how to do the job, I just wish that they would ask first and be
realistic about their abilities...

Perhaps you missed part of the thrust of my question, i.e. since
what
the OP is doing is outside the scope of part P anyway (i.e. a minor
work) how is it supposed to help? Part P makes the law into an ass
whichever way you look at it.

Isn't this work in a kitchen area and thus comes under Part P ?


You do raise an intersting question however: How are we to be
"realistic" about our abilities without knowing where the limits of
those lay? How do we test where those are without actually
attempting to
do something and reaching them? Surely reaching the limits of ones
abilities is not a significant event in itself, what we do next
however
is significant (e.g. seek help, give up, press on regardless). In an
ideal world we could research every step of a job from start to
finish
before starting, but the real world has a habit of not being so
deterministic.


There does seem to be some confusion about basic feeds, switched feeds
and (neutral) returns though, if someone can't get to grips with what
needs to be present already were they wish to extend the circuit from
that to me suggests that they need to learn considerably more before
they start altering existing wiring.