Mike Marlow wrote:
Bill wrote:
HeyBub wrote:
A jointer for a tool stand? You're not making a future heirloom here
- sturdy is all that counts.

None of the 2by material I bring home lies in a plane!

Not gonna set a piece of plywood across 2 wavy 2by4s, no not gonna do
it! : )

Buy better 2x4's Bill. They only cost $ 0.50 more than the "interesting"
stuff.

I don't skip on em Mike. I was just exaggerating a little..and I avoid
the S-shaped ones.

Mike Marlow wrote:
The good part about something like this is that you get to build it.
Put some of those new tools to use, and get some sawdust on your
hands... and in your shoes.

Yes, it's good for the soul! : )

The main thing that is making me pause (and ponder) is the "fine
tuning": How to get the sides precisely the same as the height of the
saw.

I just got this idea:
How about securing the saw to a square plywood base (4 bolts), then
using about 12 more bolts to secure that base say 1" above another
plywood base, using 3 nuts to accomplish this for the latter 12 (one at
the bottom securing the bolt to the lower base, and one above and below
the top base).

That ought to save about $200, I mean support the saw, ya think?! Let me
know if "the picture" is not clear.

Bill

On Mon, 18 Mar 2013 15:52:34 -0400, Bill wrote:

The main thing that is making me pause (and ponder) is the "fine
tuning":
How to get the sides precisely the same as the height of the saw.

It's easier to adjust the saw. Aim for about 1/16" to 1/8" low and use
washers and shim stock to bring it up to the height of the sides.

--
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross.

Bill wrote:


It seems like the stop-block and the fence are essential elements for
repeatability of decent-sized work. Without them, how do you
achieve it?

Careful measurements or a story stick, and a good cut.

--

-Mike-

Bill wrote:
Mike Marlow wrote:
The good part about something like this is that you get to build it.
Put some of those new tools to use, and get some sawdust on your
hands... and in your shoes.

Yes, it's good for the soul! : )

The main thing that is making me pause (and ponder) is the "fine
tuning": How to get the sides precisely the same as the height of
the saw.


Measure them. Then make some cuts.

--

-Mike-

Bill wrote:

How about securing the saw to a square plywood base (4 bolts), then
using about 12 more bolts to secure that base say 1" above another
plywood base, using 3 nuts to accomplish this for the latter 12 (one
at the bottom securing the bolt to the lower base, and one above and
below the top base).

Anyone think this is a good idea? Here is a pic of one of the 12 (hex)
bolts I mented along with the 2 plywood bases:


| |
| | | | { saw here }
---------------------------
---------------------------
| | | |
| |
| |
| | | |
---------------------------
---------------------------
|__|

Bill wrote:
Bill wrote:

How about securing the saw to a square plywood base (4 bolts), then
using about 12 more bolts to secure that base say 1" above another
plywood base, using 3 nuts to accomplish this for the latter 12 (one
at the bottom securing the bolt to the lower base, and one above and
below the top base).

Anyone think this is a good idea? Here is a pic of one of the 12
(hex) bolts I mented along with the 2 plywood bases:


That can work Bill, but it seems overly complicated to me. It's not hard to
measure the height of your saw, and then just cut lumber to fit. Cut a
whisker fat and creep up on it if you need to in order to be more
comfortable about it.

--

-Mike-

Bill wrote:
Bill wrote:

How about securing the saw to a square plywood base (4 bolts), then
using about 12 more bolts to secure that base say 1" above another
plywood base, using 3 nuts to accomplish this for the latter 12 (one
at the bottom securing the bolt to the lower base, and one above and
below the top base).

Anyone think this is a good idea? Here is a pic of one of the 12
(hex) bolts I mented along with the 2 plywood bases:


And... as someone mentioned (Jeff?), it's easier to build the stand and then
adjust the saw to fit in it - using a bolt and nut scheme like you're
currently thinking. That way you only need four bolts and nut combinations.

--

-Mike-

On 3/18/2013 11:21 PM, Bill wrote:
Bill wrote:

How about securing the saw to a square plywood base (4 bolts), then
using about 12 more bolts to secure that base say 1" above another
plywood base, using 3 nuts to accomplish this for the latter 12 (one
at the bottom securing the bolt to the lower base, and one above and
below the top base).

Anyone think this is a good idea? Here is a pic of one of the 12 (hex)
bolts I mented along with the 2 plywood bases:

Sorry, that should be "mentioned", not "mented".



| |
| | | | { saw here }
---------------------------
---------------------------
| | | |
| |
| |
| | | |
---------------------------
---------------------------
|___|

On 3/19/2013 6:34 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:
Bill wrote:
Bill wrote:

How about securing the saw to a square plywood base (4 bolts), then
using about 12 more bolts to secure that base say 1" above another
plywood base, using 3 nuts to accomplish this for the latter 12 (one
at the bottom securing the bolt to the lower base, and one above and
below the top base).

Anyone think this is a good idea? Here is a pic of one of the 12
(hex) bolts I mented along with the 2 plywood bases:


And... as someone mentioned (Jeff?), it's easier to build the stand and then
adjust the saw to fit in it - using a bolt and nut scheme like you're
currently thinking. That way you only need four bolts and nut combinations.


Since the heavy saw on a base is being supported by a structure of bolts
mounted in plywood, 8-12 of them seems prudent (to me), as they will
support a fair amount of weight and vibration.

And if, I mean when, anything changes (for instance if the wood sags a
little), I will be able to adjust height/level of the saw with relative
ease using nuts. Is there any reason to use other than size 3/8" hex
bolts (and the obvious washers and split washers) for this purpose?

Well, with that "leveling issue" more or less worked out, I can start
thinking about the rest of the stand. I really like the design stage!
Admittedly, I'm far from the advanced level where I might consider
"abstract elements" such as BBQ grills in my design--maybe someday! : )

More later!

Cheers,
Bill

Bill wrote:


Since the heavy saw on a base is being supported by a structure of
bolts mounted in plywood, 8-12 of them seems prudent (to me), as they
will support a fair amount of weight and vibration.

This is where the experiences of others can save you a bunch of worry and
unnecessary design time. There isn't a need for a double base. Your saw
has a plenty sturdy enough casting for a base. You can simply use the
mounting bolts that go through the base to make any adjustments. You
certainly can over design based on things that seem intuitive to you, but
we're trying to help you by telling you that those particular worries are
not valid.


And if, I mean when, anything changes (for instance if the wood sags a
little), I will be able to adjust height/level of the saw with
relative ease using nuts. Is there any reason to use other than
size 3/8" hex bolts (and the obvious washers and split washers) for
this purpose?

You aren't going to see sag if you build it properly. The weight is
distributed evenly across a farily wide area. Use 3/4" plywood and it won't
sag over the area that you're talking about. Look at the pictures that have
been posted. Karl and I have both posted pictures that disprove your
worries about sag. And mine - because it was never meant to be permanant,
was thrown together with MDF. It has not sagged at all, and still cuts just
like it did when I built it. You're worrying too much again Bill.


Well, with that "leveling issue" more or less worked out, I can start
thinking about the rest of the stand. I really like the design stage!
Admittedly, I'm far from the advanced level where I might consider
"abstract elements" such as BBQ grills in my design--maybe someday!

You've more than worked it out Bill - you've made it an issue that did not
exist.

--

-Mike-

On 3/19/2013 6:57 AM, Bill wrote:

Since the heavy saw on a base is being supported by a structure of bolts
mounted in plywood, 8-12 of them seems prudent (to me), as they will
support a fair amount of weight and vibration.

Having lived for years with a shimmed miter saw installation (plastic
shims when they became available) on a shop built wooden stand, I concur
with your quest to come up with some type of metal, screw/thread based,
leveling/flushing mechanism.

If you can pull it off, you will find that to be a much more preferable
solution than shimming a miter saw, where being flush with the wings can
affect both the cut and safety, and all too often has to be tweaked with
every change in weather or movement.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

On 3/19/2013 8:51 AM, Mike Marlow wrote:

This is where the experiences of others can save you a bunch of worry and
unnecessary design time. There isn't a need for a double base. Your saw
has a plenty sturdy enough casting for a base. You can simply use the
mounting bolts that go through the base to make any adjustments.

I see (I think). I apply the 3-nut on a bolt system to the saw base
(atop the plywood base). That WILL save some time, and I will only need
4 bolts.


Bill

Swingman wrote:
On 3/19/2013 6:57 AM, Bill wrote:

Since the heavy saw on a base is being supported by a structure of
bolts mounted in plywood, 8-12 of them seems prudent (to me), as
they will support a fair amount of weight and vibration.

Having lived for years with a shimmed miter saw installation (plastic
shims when they became available) on a shop built wooden stand, I
concur with your quest to come up with some type of metal,
screw/thread based, leveling/flushing mechanism.

If you can pull it off, you will find that to be a much more
preferable solution than shimming a miter saw, where being flush with
the wings can affect both the cut and safety, and all too often has
to be tweaked with every change in weather or movement.

Reading Karl's comment I am now wondering if I somehow lost track of the
conversation. Are you thinking about building a stand like Karl showed used
to have Bill? Somehow I had the notion that you were going down the road of
something less permanent. My comments to you might still be appropriate if
you are thinking of a rig like Karl's original stand, but I guess I'm
confused as to your direction.

As for movement - I have never had to adjust my stand or my saw. That might
be because of large differences in humidity between Houston and Syracuse,
which causes Karl problems that I don't see up here, or it could be because
Karl is much more critical of tolerances than I am. With the work he
produces, the latter could very well be the case.

--

-Mike-

As for movement - I have never had to adjust my stand or my saw. That might
be because of large differences in humidity between Houston and Syracuse,
which causes Karl problems that I don't see up here, or it could be because

My miter saw stand of old was entirely of plywood, but it was
dimensionally unstable to the point that I had to adjust/re-shim more
than a few times a year.

The fact that it left the shop a few times a year, and the Gulf Coast
temperature and humidity swings, were undoubtedly the reason ... very
little to do with AR tendencies when it comes to precision, but some of
that too.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

Mike Marlow wrote:
Swingman wrote:
On 3/19/2013 6:57 AM, Bill wrote:

Since the heavy saw on a base is being supported by a structure of
bolts mounted in plywood, 8-12 of them seems prudent (to me), as
they will support a fair amount of weight and vibration.
Having lived for years with a shimmed miter saw installation (plastic
shims when they became available) on a shop built wooden stand, I
concur with your quest to come up with some type of metal,
screw/thread based, leveling/flushing mechanism.

If you can pull it off, you will find that to be a much more
preferable solution than shimming a miter saw, where being flush with
the wings can affect both the cut and safety, and all too often has
to be tweaked with every change in weather or movement.
Reading Karl's comment I am now wondering if I somehow lost track of the
conversation. Are you thinking about building a stand like Karl showed used
to have Bill? Somehow I had the notion that you were going down the road of
something less permanent. My comments to you might still be appropriate if
you are thinking of a rig like Karl's original stand, but I guess I'm
confused as to your direction.

Well, whatever I build will probably last as long as your BBQ grill
miter saw stand. That's just the way life is. I regret I don't have a
saw yet to use my dado blade. I may use a router-- or my joiner!

Using Karl's words, a "screw/thread based, leveling/flushing mechanism"
may not be inappropriate. Since the saw has four unthreaded 1/2" holes
for fastener bolts, and four 3/16" holes too, attaching the saw to a
second piece of plywood sounds right. It can then be afixed, and
leveled, with 10-12 more bolts. If I am told this is overkill, then I
may cut back. The temperatures are still in the low to mid 20's here,
so I'm still in the talking stage. However, I drew some diagrams today.
A decent stand gets big (long) fast!

Karl made a remark about *safety* that drew my attention. What is at
risk if the blade gets pinched in a cut?

Bill

Bill wrote in
:

*snip*


Karl made a remark about *safety* that drew my attention. What is at
risk if the blade gets pinched in a cut?

Bill


My fence isn't flat, so the blade does occasionally get pinched in the
cut. Usually, nothing too bad happens and I just have to stop the cut
and sometimes start again.

It's entirely possible, however, that the piece could get caught, lifted,
and then thrown back (or richochet) in your direction. Eye protection is
a must when using any power saw.

Puckdropper
--
Make it to fit, don't make it fit.

Puckdropper wrote:
Bill wrote in
:

*snip*

Karl made a remark about *safety* that drew my attention. What is at
risk if the blade gets pinched in a cut?

Bill

My fence isn't flat, so the blade does occasionally get pinched in the
cut. Usually, nothing too bad happens and I just have to stop the cut
and sometimes start again.

It's entirely possible, however, that the piece could get caught, lifted,
and then thrown back (or richochet) in your direction.
Thank you. I'll try to make sure that doesn't happen!


Eye protection is
a must when using any power saw.

Puckdropper

Bill wrote:

Karl made a remark about *safety* that drew my attention. What is at
risk if the blade gets pinched in a cut?

"Kickforward" is common with a miter saw if the back edge of the piece
being cut is not flush with the fence (bowed, uneven or wany), or below the
plane of the wings (due to binding). Easier to control than kickback on a
TS, but still a dangerous circumstance.

The most dangerous cut on a miter saw is one that is not backed up firmly
to the fence ... ALWAYS insure that the cut on a miter saw is made with the
stock firmly against the fence, including edge on angle cuts. No
exceptions.

--
www.ewoodshop.com

On Wed, 20 Mar 2013 00:33:46 +0000, Puckdropper wrote:

My fence isn't flat, so the blade does occasionally get pinched in the
cut. Usually, nothing too bad happens and I just have to stop the cut
and sometimes start again.

A trick one of the guys I worked with showed me was to put a 2x4 or
equivalent between the fence and the blade so the offcut wasn't against
the fence on the other side - worked wonders when cutting hardwood with
an unfinished edge.



--
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross.





--
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross.

On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:24:22 -0500, Swingman wrote:

The most dangerous cut on a miter saw is one that is not backed up
firmly to the fence ... ALWAYS insure that the cut on a miter saw is
made with the stock firmly against the fence, including edge on angle
cuts. No exceptions.

Well, I just posted an exception :-).

--
When fascism comes to America, it will be wrapped in the flag and
carrying a cross.

On 3/20/2013 12:58 PM, Larry Blanchard wrote:
On Tue, 19 Mar 2013 20:24:22 -0500, Swingman wrote:

The most dangerous cut on a miter saw is one that is not backed up
firmly to the fence ... ALWAYS insure that the cut on a miter saw is
made with the stock firmly against the fence, including edge on angle
cuts. No exceptions.

Well, I just posted an exception :-).

An "extension" to the fence is not an "exception", but is in actuality
still using the fence.

I'll say it again, you want to get hurt on a miter saw sooner or later,
practice cutting without using the fence, you will live to regret it.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

Swingman wrote:

I'll say it again, you want to get hurt on a miter saw sooner or
later, practice cutting without using the fence, you will live to
regret it.


I well-appreciate the warning. I had no idea the tool was "ready to
pounce"!

Bill

"Swingman" wrote in message
...

An "extension" to the fence is not an "exception", but is in actuality
still using the fence.

I'll say it again, you want to get hurt on a miter saw sooner or later,
practice cutting without using the fence, you will live to regret it.

....that and using a blade with a lot of positive rake. I learned that the
hard way when I mounted my Freud Ultimate Crosscut blade on the CMS. It
would pick up short cut offs and wing them violently... I didn't realize
what was causing the problem initially and ended up damaging the blade
guard. That blade works just fine on the table saw... Stick with neutral or
negative rake teeth on the CMSs... My Forrest Chopmaster blade leaves
cutoffs laying on the saw and if they vibrate into the blade before it stops
they just sit there.

On 3/20/2013 2:59 PM, John Grossbohlin wrote:

...that and using a blade with a lot of positive rake. I learned that
the hard way when I mounted my Freud Ultimate Crosscut blade on the CMS.
It would pick up short cut offs and wing them violently... I didn't
realize what was causing the problem initially and ended up damaging the
blade guard. That blade works just fine on the table saw... Stick with
neutral or negative rake teeth on the CMSs... My Forrest Chopmaster
blade leaves cutoffs laying on the saw and if they vibrate into the
blade before it stops they just sit there.

My lesson was similar some 35 years ago, cutting an angle on the end of
a longer board without backing up the cut with the fence/or clamps ...
luckily all I lost were four finger nails on my left hand (and a months
worth of bass gigs) when the blade hit a defect and slammed the board
against the fence, taking my hand with it.

The speed at which it happened still makes me shiver at the thought.

--
eWoodShop: www.eWoodShop.com
Wood Shop: www.e-WoodShop.net
https://plus.google.com/114902129577517371552/posts
http://www.custommade.com/by/ewoodshop/
KarlCaillouet@ (the obvious)

Swingman wrote:
On 3/20/2013 2:59 PM, John Grossbohlin wrote:

...that and using a blade with a lot of positive rake. I learned that
the hard way when I mounted my Freud Ultimate Crosscut blade on the CMS.
It would pick up short cut offs and wing them violently... I didn't
realize what was causing the problem initially and ended up damaging the
blade guard. That blade works just fine on the table saw... Stick with
neutral or negative rake teeth on the CMSs... My Forrest Chopmaster
blade leaves cutoffs laying on the saw and if they vibrate into the
blade before it stops they just sit there.

My lesson was similar some 35 years ago, cutting an angle on the end
of a longer board without backing up the cut with the fence/or clamps
... luckily all I lost were four finger nails on my left hand (and a
months worth of bass gigs) when the blade hit a defect and slammed the
board against the fence, taking my hand with it.

The speed at which it happened still makes me shiver at the thought.

I appreciate the benefit of the lesson over the Internet. I do not need
a "first hand" lesson!

Bill

Bill wrote:
Swingman wrote:

I'll say it again, you want to get hurt on a miter saw
sooner or
later, practice cutting without using the fence, you will
live to
regret it.


I well-appreciate the warning. I had no idea the tool was
"ready to
pounce"!

Bill

any power tool is ready to pounce, when you use it
improperly.
take a Milwakee magnum 1/2" holeshooter and get it in a bind
and it could fling you off the roof or ladder

On 3/20/2013 3:59 PM, John Grossbohlin wrote:
"Swingman" wrote in message
...

An "extension" to the fence is not an "exception", but is in actuality
still using the fence.

I'll say it again, you want to get hurt on a miter saw sooner or
later, practice cutting without using the fence, you will live to
regret it.

...that and using a blade with a lot of positive rake. I learned that
the hard way when I mounted my Freud Ultimate Crosscut blade on the CMS.
It would pick up short cut offs and wing them violently... I didn't
realize what was causing the problem initially and ended up damaging the
blade guard. That blade works just fine on the table saw... Stick with
neutral or negative rake teeth on the CMSs... My Forrest Chopmaster
blade leaves cutoffs laying on the saw and if they vibrate into the
blade before it stops they just sit there.



I think that was the problem too with mine before I destroyed my
Makita,, I had the 80tooth Freud, and it lifted the piece up and I had
kick back. Freud replaced the blade, (everyone here told me I must not
have had it against the fence,but it happened again after the
replacement blade came in, and yes I had it against the fence.

My older blade never had that happen, so I came to the same conclusion
that the rake (even though they said it was for miter saws) was too much
for the CMS...

That was a costly blade to have to learn that on.

--
Jeff

Swingman wrote:


My lesson was similar some 35 years ago, cutting an angle on the end
of a longer board without backing up the cut with the fence/or clamps
... luckily all I lost were four finger nails on my left hand (and a
months worth of bass gigs) when the blade hit a defect and slammed
the board against the fence, taking my hand with it.


I was wondering what you were referring to when you had posted your original
caution, not able to figure out what you meant. Now I understand. With
that understanding - I fully agree.

--

-Mike-

Bill wrote in
:

Bill wrote:

How about securing the saw to a square plywood base (4 bolts), then
using about 12 more bolts to secure that base say 1" above another
plywood base, using 3 nuts to accomplish this for the latter 12 (one
at the bottom securing the bolt to the lower base, and one above and
below the top base).

Anyone think this is a good idea? Here is a pic of one of the 12 (hex)
bolts I mented along with the 2 plywood bases:


| |
| | | | { saw here }
---------------------------
---------------------------
| | | |
| |
| |
| | | |
---------------------------
---------------------------
|__|


Bill,

I used to mount goosenecks for Telephone entry systems and card readers
for apartment complexes and that is exactly the method I used. I would
put bolts into the base and with one nut above the mounting plate and
another below. I believe that this is the same method they use around
here for street lights in parking lots. With 12 bolts you should be able
to account for any sag you might get in the middle.

Steve

replying to Bill, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
The stand is a very nice stand. My problem is with the instructions. The
figures don't come close to matching the instructions. Very poorly written and
confusing.

--
for full context, visit https://www.homeownershub.com/woodwo...nd-560237-.htm

On 4/6/2018 2:14 PM, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
replying to Bill, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
The stand is a very nice stand. My problem is with the instructions. The
figures don't come close to matching the instructions. Very poorly written and
confusing

Why is it we're suddenly seeing all of these replies to ancient posts? In
this case we're talking five years although in one recent case it was
fifteen(!) years old. C'mon folks. Take a look at the original date and ask
yourself if anything you post might still be relevant.

On Fri, 6 Apr 2018 15:07:11 -0400, John McGaw wrote:

On 4/6/2018 2:14 PM, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
replying to Bill, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
The stand is a very nice stand. My problem is with the instructions. The
figures don't come close to matching the instructions. Very poorly written and
confusing

Why is it we're suddenly seeing all of these replies to ancient posts? In
this case we're talking five years although in one recent case it was
fifteen(!) years old. C'mon folks. Take a look at the original date and ask
yourself if anything you post might still be relevant.

Because it is just a click bait troll for the link (same one for every
post) that is always posted?

"Click on over here to see the context - and we need/want all the clicks
we can get. Rather than just asking, "Please click our link" someone is
doing his best to be sneaky and hoping his post garners a click or two.
--

Jerry O.

John McGaw writes:
On 4/6/2018 2:14 PM, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
replying to Bill, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
The stand is a very nice stand. My problem is with the instructions. The
figures don't come close to matching the instructions. Very poorly written and
confusing

Why is it we're suddenly seeing all of these replies to ancient posts? In
this case we're talking five years although in one recent case it was
fifteen(!) years old. C'mon folks. Take a look at the original date and ask
yourself if anything you post might still be relevant.

Home Moaners Hub and Google Groups, neither of which prominently show
the posting date apparently. HMH is simply driving traffic to their
site, so they likely DGAS.

On Friday, April 6, 2018 at 3:46:28 PM UTC-4, Scott Lurndal wrote:
John McGaw writes:
On 4/6/2018 2:14 PM, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
replying to Bill, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
The stand is a very nice stand. My problem is with the instructions. The
figures don't come close to matching the instructions. Very poorly written and
confusing

Why is it we're suddenly seeing all of these replies to ancient posts? In
this case we're talking five years although in one recent case it was
fifteen(!) years old. C'mon folks. Take a look at the original date and ask
yourself if anything you post might still be relevant.

Home Moaners Hub and Google Groups, neither of which prominently show
the posting date apparently.

Not sure what you mean by that. Both HOH and GG prominently show the date
in the upper right corner of every post. HOH even includes the words
"posted on".

HMH is simply driving traffic to their
site, so they likely DGAS.

DGAS?

What does the Delta Natural Gas Company have to do with this? Do you
own some of their stock? ;-)

On Fri, 06 Apr 2018 19:46:24 GMT, (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

John McGaw writes:
On 4/6/2018 2:14 PM, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
replying to Bill, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
The stand is a very nice stand. My problem is with the instructions. The
figures don't come close to matching the instructions. Very poorly written and
confusing

Why is it we're suddenly seeing all of these replies to ancient posts? In
this case we're talking five years although in one recent case it was
fifteen(!) years old. C'mon folks. Take a look at the original date and ask
yourself if anything you post might still be relevant.

Home Moaners Hub and Google Groups, neither of which prominently show
the posting date apparently. HMH is simply driving traffic to their
site, so they likely DGAS.

Homeowners Hub does prominently displays the date at the top of the
page GG not sure.

DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, April 6, 2018 at 3:46:28 PM UTC-4, Scott Lurndal wrote:
John McGaw writes:
On 4/6/2018 2:14 PM, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
replying to Bill, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
The stand is a very nice stand. My problem is with the instructions. The
figures don't come close to matching the instructions. Very poorly written and
confusing

Why is it we're suddenly seeing all of these replies to ancient posts? In
this case we're talking five years although in one recent case it was
fifteen(!) years old. C'mon folks. Take a look at the original date and ask
yourself if anything you post might still be relevant.

Home Moaners Hub and Google Groups, neither of which prominently show
the posting date apparently.

Not sure what you mean by that. Both HOH and GG prominently show the date
in the upper right corner of every post. HOH even includes the words
"posted on".

HMH is simply driving traffic to their
site, so they likely DGAS.

DGAS?

What does the Delta Natural Gas Company have to do with this? Do you
own some of their stock? ;-)


Do a google search.

On Friday, April 6, 2018 at 9:57:29 PM UTC-4, Markem wrote:
On Fri, 06 Apr 2018 19:46:24 GMT, (Scott Lurndal)
wrote:

John McGaw writes:
On 4/6/2018 2:14 PM, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
replying to Bill, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
The stand is a very nice stand. My problem is with the instructions. The
figures don't come close to matching the instructions. Very poorly written and
confusing

Why is it we're suddenly seeing all of these replies to ancient posts? In
this case we're talking five years although in one recent case it was
fifteen(!) years old. C'mon folks. Take a look at the original date and ask
yourself if anything you post might still be relevant.

Home Moaners Hub and Google Groups, neither of which prominently show
the posting date apparently. HMH is simply driving traffic to their
site, so they likely DGAS.

Homeowners Hub does prominently displays the date at the top of the
page GG not sure.

Now you can be sure about GG. This was copied from the Dolphin browser on an iPad, but it's
essentially the same across all browsers and platforms. That's one of the beauties of using GG.
Very portable and sync'd across all devices.

https://i.imgur.com/VX13SVV.jpg

On Saturday, April 7, 2018 at 9:46:18 AM UTC-4, Leon wrote:
DerbyDad03 wrote:
On Friday, April 6, 2018 at 3:46:28 PM UTC-4, Scott Lurndal wrote:
John McGaw writes:
On 4/6/2018 2:14 PM, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
replying to Bill, Curtis M Gauthier wrote:
The stand is a very nice stand. My problem is with the instructions. The
figures don't come close to matching the instructions. Very poorly written and
confusing

Why is it we're suddenly seeing all of these replies to ancient posts? In
this case we're talking five years although in one recent case it was
fifteen(!) years old. C'mon folks. Take a look at the original date and ask
yourself if anything you post might still be relevant.

Home Moaners Hub and Google Groups, neither of which prominently show
the posting date apparently.

Not sure what you mean by that. Both HOH and GG prominently show the date
in the upper right corner of every post. HOH even includes the words
"posted on".

HMH is simply driving traffic to their
site, so they likely DGAS.

DGAS?

What does the Delta Natural Gas Company have to do with this? Do you
own some of their stock? ;-)


Do a google search.

That's DAGS, not DGAS.

II was giving Scott a little bit of Mike's $hit. ;-)

On Sat, 7 Apr 2018 06:53:05 -0700 (PDT), DerbyDad03
wrote:

That's one of the beauties of using GG.
Very portable and sync'd across all devices.

One of few, maybe the only one.