Dylan said:
Yeah. And me and Dylan get Christmas cards from the other eight of them.
Now get after it Moderators. This thing belonged in the Ash Can long ago. The only heat here is under collars.
How far do you dampen down?
- Thread starter DeanBrown3D
- Start date
-
Active since 1995, Hearth.com is THE place on the internet for free information and advice about wood stoves, pellet stoves and other energy saving equipment.
We strive to provide opinions, articles, discussions and history related to Hearth Products and in a more general sense, energy issues.
We promote the EFFICIENT, RESPONSIBLE, CLEAN and SAFE use of all fuels, whether renewable or fossil.
- Status
Yeah. And me and Dylan get Christmas cards from the other eight of them.
Now get after it Moderators. This thing belonged in the Ash Can long ago. The only heat here is under collars.
DeanB, Ive found on my stove if I run the air control at 25% and the damper at 2/3 closed there will still be enough coals after 9 hours of burning pine to get the fire going. If I do the same with the air control and leave the damper open there wont be any coals after that amount of time. Also I was thinking along the line that this was helping control the amount of secondary air flowing through the stove.
Hearthstone homestead with 3ft of double wall into a 45, 6in section another 45 than 10 ft of class A.
On Topic: Dean, I have an insert with a single air control so this is way apples-to-oranges, but: If I put a fresh load in at bedtime (3 to 5 pieces, depending on the outside temp, in a 3 CF firebox) and set the air control to maybe 20% open, I can have a hot coal bed and the thermostat-controlled fan still blowing out warm air 8 to 9 hours later.
Off Topic: (though clearly what is becoming the more entertaining part of this post) - some reflections on the other avatars in this thread
- Some Like It Hot: I'm offended by the patently provocative, double-entendre nature of your handle. A clear case of approach-avoidance syndrome, possibly complicated by 9" O.D. flue envy.
- Mike Wilson: I'm offended by the trauma you've inflicted on the countless victims who have unwittingly viewed the house fire in your avatar. Shame on you for throwing a dose of reality on us
You should at least make us click a little button first that says "I am over 18 and am willing to view fire pictures of a graphic nature."
- KD460: I'm offended that your avatar looks too much like mine.
- Gooserider, I'm offended by the blatantly left-coastist nature of your avatar - mentioning only "California" below the Moto-Guzzi logo, without so much as a nod to the other 49 states not to mention the territories of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. You should be sentenced to a treatment of affirmative action requiring mention of the state of New York in every post for the next year.
- Hookspacken: Where do I even start? If the original complaining poster thought that DeanB was sexist, imagine the rearranging of her reality after spending an hour with Ted Nugent? What WERE you thinking???
- Wrenchmonster: As my late uncle Ronnie used to say: "There you go again..." in this case promulgating the male caucasian work-force stereotype. Looks like it's off to sensitivity training for you, Mister!
- Northwinds: Shame on you too! You don't have to be Sigmund Freud to figure out the symbolism in THAT avatar!
- BrotherBart: OK, so I couldn't find anything offensive in THAT avatar just yet. But give me a couple minutes, I'm working on it.
- DiscoInferno: Are you so insensitive that it never occurred to you the profound inferiority feelings you've induced in everyone that doesn't have a cool chalet-style home like yours!? I'm thinking maybe a weekend encounter group is in order.
- And Dean, last but not least I'm soooooo offended by the sexist nature of your avatar. Of course, I'm equally offended by people taking offense to it.
Oh nuts, that means I've just offended myself. D'OH
Off Topic: (though clearly what is becoming the more entertaining part of this post) - some reflections on the other avatars in this thread
- Some Like It Hot: I'm offended by the patently provocative, double-entendre nature of your handle. A clear case of approach-avoidance syndrome, possibly complicated by 9" O.D. flue envy.
- Mike Wilson: I'm offended by the trauma you've inflicted on the countless victims who have unwittingly viewed the house fire in your avatar. Shame on you for throwing a dose of reality on us
You should at least make us click a little button first that says "I am over 18 and am willing to view fire pictures of a graphic nature." - KD460: I'm offended that your avatar looks too much like mine.
- Gooserider, I'm offended by the blatantly left-coastist nature of your avatar - mentioning only "California" below the Moto-Guzzi logo, without so much as a nod to the other 49 states not to mention the territories of Puerto Rico and the U.S. Virgin Islands. You should be sentenced to a treatment of affirmative action requiring mention of the state of New York in every post for the next year.
- Hookspacken: Where do I even start? If the original complaining poster thought that DeanB was sexist, imagine the rearranging of her reality after spending an hour with Ted Nugent? What WERE you thinking
???- Wrenchmonster: As my late uncle Ronnie used to say: "There you go again..." in this case promulgating the male caucasian work-force stereotype. Looks like it's off to sensitivity training for you, Mister!
- Northwinds: Shame on you too! You don't have to be Sigmund Freud to figure out the symbolism in THAT avatar!
- BrotherBart: OK, so I couldn't find anything offensive in THAT avatar just yet. But give me a couple minutes, I'm working on it.
- DiscoInferno: Are you so insensitive that it never occurred to you the profound inferiority feelings you've induced in everyone that doesn't have a cool chalet-style home like yours!? I'm thinking maybe a weekend encounter group is in order.
- And Dean, last but not least I'm soooooo offended by the sexist nature of your avatar. Of course, I'm equally offended by people taking offense to it.
Oh nuts, that means I've just offended myself. D'OH
PacificGuyInCNY said:- Master of Fire: I'm offended by the trauma you've inflicted on the countless victims who have unwittingly viewed the house fire in your avatar. Shame on you for throwing a dose of reality on us
D'OH
Hi, my name is Mike Wilson, and the Master of Fire thing just shows up because I post too much. I was hoping if I posted a real lot, it would change to Smoldering Ember, but I guess not.
3 points on the Homer reference, welcome to the club.
-- Mike
Hi Mike, my above post has been edited to correct your name. Guess I shouldna had that second cold frosty.
You're still not off the hook for that offensive avatar, however ...
You're still not off the hook for that offensive avatar, however ...
- Feb 5, 2006
- 400
Man, I have been biting my lip. Time to stop biting. What I thought was some good clean fun, yes I said clean, has turned out kind of ugly.
OK, so one person had a problem with an avatar and voiced their opinion. Great. Freedom of speech at it's finest. However, that freedom is multifaceted, you can not pick and choose. Have to take the good with the bad. After all, good and bad are based on one's opinion.
I do take exception to one poster (only one) who while I am sure feels intellectually superior because they can use some "really fancy wordin" (I say that with my backwards country inbred deliverance accent) has done nothing more than take a few personal stabs at other posters. Way to go. I'm sure you feel very smug and important right now. Still pattin yourself on your back? I don't think anyone else has gone to this personal level, but then again, "superior intellect" entitles someone to fight someone else's fight and take personal stabs at other people. Even though it is poorly disguised in some prose.
Looks like this is gonna get locked down, so, before it does, I will say "I'm sorry". Nobody is perfect. Nothing is perfect. Acceptance of people for "who they are" is what makes personal interaction, companionship, friendship, and camaraderie. The ability to accept people for who they are (I believe the word is tolerance) is a wonderful thing. I'm going to use a term called "chemistry". Take away one component and the end product is not the same.
Let it go. Can't make everybody happy. It's not gonna happen. This is all getting blown way out of proportion. Once again sorry if anything I say or do, past, present or in the future, offends anyone. No malice or ill will intended. KD
OK, so one person had a problem with an avatar and voiced their opinion. Great. Freedom of speech at it's finest. However, that freedom is multifaceted, you can not pick and choose. Have to take the good with the bad. After all, good and bad are based on one's opinion.
I do take exception to one poster (only one) who while I am sure feels intellectually superior because they can use some "really fancy wordin" (I say that with my backwards country inbred deliverance accent) has done nothing more than take a few personal stabs at other posters. Way to go. I'm sure you feel very smug and important right now. Still pattin yourself on your back? I don't think anyone else has gone to this personal level, but then again, "superior intellect" entitles someone to fight someone else's fight and take personal stabs at other people. Even though it is poorly disguised in some prose.
Looks like this is gonna get locked down, so, before it does, I will say "I'm sorry". Nobody is perfect. Nothing is perfect. Acceptance of people for "who they are" is what makes personal interaction, companionship, friendship, and camaraderie. The ability to accept people for who they are (I believe the word is tolerance) is a wonderful thing. I'm going to use a term called "chemistry". Take away one component and the end product is not the same.
Let it go. Can't make everybody happy. It's not gonna happen. This is all getting blown way out of proportion. Once again sorry if anything I say or do, past, present or in the future, offends anyone. No malice or ill will intended. KD
- Feb 5, 2006
- 400
Dylan, I hope you do not think my previous post was directed to you, as it was not.
As far as my writing, grammar, sentence structure skills, I don't have em. "Really fancy wordin" is my expression and directed to words used in previous posts that I personally do not hear on a regular basis. Apology? Thanks for the correction. Interpret as you wish. KD
As far as my writing, grammar, sentence structure skills, I don't have em. "Really fancy wordin" is my expression and directed to words used in previous posts that I personally do not hear on a regular basis. Apology? Thanks for the correction. Interpret as you wish. KD
kd460 said:
Maybe he's/she's talking about me Dylan? I hope not, but if so I'm not quite sure of what "fancy wordin" I've EVER used here at the forum. Or perhaps he's/she's talking about someone else. Why don't you just come out and tell us to whom you are referring?
If you are indeed talking about me, and possibly hinting at the little tiff Hogwildz and I had a while back, well, in case you haven't noticed things have been worked out. I might be bold enough to suggest that we've even become friends.
Regardless, what is your point at making a specific statement to a non-specific person? Trying to pick a fight? Trying to get your jabs in behind the back?
-Kevin
Kevin the fancy words could mean only one person.
Add this to my New Years lLst
I promise not to use fancy words again.
Hopefully all the way to the ash can
Hey the spell chceker worked!!
Add this to my New Years lLst
I promise not to use fancy words again.
Hopefully all the way to the ash can
Hey the spell chceker worked
!!
- Feb 5, 2006
- 400
I was actually referring to statements made on page one of this post only. Wrenchmonster, I actually felt you summed it up really well and agree with allot of what you stated, as well as many others who posted.
Statements like "narrowmindedness, another jewel of crotch-wisdom… today must be the day for you to show us your most enlightened thinking, so we know that you at least have some taste" are the statements I have a problem with. KD
Statements like "narrowmindedness, another jewel of crotch-wisdom… today must be the day for you to show us your most enlightened thinking, so we know that you at least have some taste" are the statements I have a problem with. KD
kd460 said:
So just say it then!
KD460 has a problem with precaud.
There, its out in the open now. Phew.
-- Mike
Whew, I wuz afraid KD was upset with me there for a minute. I was just jokin' about your Avatar there buddy, really ... :red:
kd460 said:
There you go again. Now you're assuming we're all a bunch of drunks whose goodwill can be bought with beer.
What's that? <looks around>
Oh. (Does best Gilda Radner impression) Nevermind...
In no particular order, some of the tea returns to the tempest:
1) It is very typical that when women complain about displays of a sexual nature they are personally insulted, to try to deflect the nature of the complaint. It is suggested they are unattractive, jealous, whatever. For the record, in my youth I was tall and thin and had an excellent (and not scrawny) butt, and hubby is very fond of it to this day. Men found me attractive enough that it was sometimes frightening. Been there, done that, no jealousy issue. Relieved to be past it. Oddly enough, it is not that great to have strange men grab you on the street, and pinch you in clubs, and holler rude things at you as you're walking or riding your bike. But, if I was incredibly hideous or misshapen, my point would still be the same.
2) I am mostly concerned about the "BOYS CLUB - Girls keep out (or shut up)" nature of the avatar. It is saying "Look at this woman's ass." "Look at this woman's ass." "Look at this woman's ass." Repeat many times. This is NOT conducive to making women comfortable in this forum, since DeanB posts all the time and the avatar is everywhere. I did send DeanB a private message before my posting, but he ignored me completely, so I wanted to state my complaint in public.
3) If this were in the business world, his photos could be considered sexual harassment of an environmental nature. If it were whole bodies of women it might be different, say photos of his lovely wife or daughters or friends or even attractive strangers, but it is anonymous ass, anonymous ass, repeat. That focus makes the difference.
4) I saw Ted Nugent in concert three times, bought a ticket for just one of them, about 1977. In recent years I have found that I disagree with his politics so strongly that I will only attend free concerts. I do not wish to contribute to his income. Have one album and one CD from long ago, and just have to hope it never scratches.
5) There is no oppression or lack of freedom here. Yes, Deam can use photos that he likes, and I can say he is an insensitive jerk if I like. And you can tell me I am ugly if you like. See what lovely freedom we all have. Be advised to worry more about your president and the Patriot Act and the holding of prisoners without charges pressed against them and our government sponsoring torture and so on as threats to your freedom. Saying people have the freedom to offend but no one has the freedom to complain makes no sense whatsoever.
6) Mike, you drooler you! Yes, you like the photos. But is there no line which you would draw over the type of photos that should be posted here? Totally naked women? How about a Nazi symbol over dead Jewish concentration camp victims and some words about how great the Holocaust was? What if it was someone raping a child? Surely there are some standards of politeness and decency that even you and the other droolers and 'freedom lovers' would recognize as being violated.
7) I find only one of those butts actually to be particularly attractive. The hot red number, that is a real woman's butt. The other ones are skinny, practically boy butts or child butts. One of them is rounder than the rest, but looks funny because of the angle, or maybe just those stupid low cut pants that almost no one looks good in. Guess y'all haven't seen good butts enough to know any better, or you are just keen on any young women you can safely ogle, or you have fallen for the recent "thinner is better" fashion trends. Women's butts are supposed to be curvy and rounded, that is what distinguishes them from men's butts.
8) I don't like Guiness, too heavy, please send me a Leinenkugel Berry Weiss beer.
1) It is very typical that when women complain about displays of a sexual nature they are personally insulted, to try to deflect the nature of the complaint. It is suggested they are unattractive, jealous, whatever. For the record, in my youth I was tall and thin and had an excellent (and not scrawny) butt, and hubby is very fond of it to this day. Men found me attractive enough that it was sometimes frightening. Been there, done that, no jealousy issue. Relieved to be past it. Oddly enough, it is not that great to have strange men grab you on the street, and pinch you in clubs, and holler rude things at you as you're walking or riding your bike. But, if I was incredibly hideous or misshapen, my point would still be the same.
2) I am mostly concerned about the "BOYS CLUB - Girls keep out (or shut up)" nature of the avatar. It is saying "Look at this woman's ass." "Look at this woman's ass." "Look at this woman's ass." Repeat many times. This is NOT conducive to making women comfortable in this forum, since DeanB posts all the time and the avatar is everywhere. I did send DeanB a private message before my posting, but he ignored me completely, so I wanted to state my complaint in public.
3) If this were in the business world, his photos could be considered sexual harassment of an environmental nature. If it were whole bodies of women it might be different, say photos of his lovely wife or daughters or friends or even attractive strangers, but it is anonymous ass, anonymous ass, repeat. That focus makes the difference.
4) I saw Ted Nugent in concert three times, bought a ticket for just one of them, about 1977. In recent years I have found that I disagree with his politics so strongly that I will only attend free concerts. I do not wish to contribute to his income. Have one album and one CD from long ago, and just have to hope it never scratches.
5) There is no oppression or lack of freedom here. Yes, Deam can use photos that he likes, and I can say he is an insensitive jerk if I like. And you can tell me I am ugly if you like. See what lovely freedom we all have. Be advised to worry more about your president and the Patriot Act and the holding of prisoners without charges pressed against them and our government sponsoring torture and so on as threats to your freedom. Saying people have the freedom to offend but no one has the freedom to complain makes no sense whatsoever.
6) Mike, you drooler you! Yes, you like the photos. But is there no line which you would draw over the type of photos that should be posted here? Totally naked women? How about a Nazi symbol over dead Jewish concentration camp victims and some words about how great the Holocaust was? What if it was someone raping a child? Surely there are some standards of politeness and decency that even you and the other droolers and 'freedom lovers' would recognize as being violated.
7) I find only one of those butts actually to be particularly attractive. The hot red number, that is a real woman's butt. The other ones are skinny, practically boy butts or child butts. One of them is rounder than the rest, but looks funny because of the angle, or maybe just those stupid low cut pants that almost no one looks good in. Guess y'all haven't seen good butts enough to know any better, or you are just keen on any young women you can safely ogle, or you have fallen for the recent "thinner is better" fashion trends. Women's butts are supposed to be curvy and rounded, that is what distinguishes them from men's butts.
8) I don't like Guiness, too heavy, please send me a Leinenkugel Berry Weiss beer.
In the words of the late populist democrat and vice-president:
"The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey (1911 - 1978)
"The right to be heard does not automatically include the right to be taken seriously." - Hubert H. Humphrey (1911 - 1978)
I believe the quote speaks for itself. It is what it is. I doubt most would find any further explanation necessary but if you do, siimply refer to my signature. I am pleased that you are pleased by Marcia's post. Have a happy new year.
I must say I found this one of the funniest threads I've ever read. And not so much for it's topic and off-topic stuff but because it was one of the weakest flames I've ever seen. This can only happen here at hearthnet. You guys are great. I've been in forums where stuff like this would have gotten extremely out of hand and if it were to be transfered to the real world would have resulted in a gun or knife fight and lots of arrests.
Personally, I HATE anything moving in my periferal vision while I am trying to read a post. I wish there was a way to shut off the movement. But, I think there is a way to shut off the avatars, isn't there? Craig?
Anyway, thanks for the entertainment.
Now, can we get back to the topic?
I think the word "damper" is too general. Seems there is confusion between the use of a flue damper and an air supply control, also sometimes called a damper. I think the original question is referring to a flue damper, right? In that case, there will be few here who can contribute since most flue dampers have been eliminated. The poster seems to have a furnace type appliance with a damper at the exit. This type of appliance is not as common here as most of us have the more modern wood stove with air controls being used to "dampen" the fire.
Dylans point seems to be appropriate when refering to restricting the draft, the usual meaning of damper. But there are many devices in use that are called dampers that really just re-direct the exit path and are more correctly termed a baffle. So, I guess I am trying to say - how should this question be answered? Are you asking about restricting the amount of combustion air supply at it's source or are you asking about baffling the flow and slowing it down at it's exit?
Personally, I HATE anything moving in my periferal vision while I am trying to read a post. I wish there was a way to shut off the movement. But, I think there is a way to shut off the avatars, isn't there? Craig?
Anyway, thanks for the entertainment.
Now, can we get back to the topic?
I think the word "damper" is too general. Seems there is confusion between the use of a flue damper and an air supply control, also sometimes called a damper. I think the original question is referring to a flue damper, right? In that case, there will be few here who can contribute since most flue dampers have been eliminated. The poster seems to have a furnace type appliance with a damper at the exit. This type of appliance is not as common here as most of us have the more modern wood stove with air controls being used to "dampen" the fire.
Dylans point seems to be appropriate when refering to restricting the draft, the usual meaning of damper. But there are many devices in use that are called dampers that really just re-direct the exit path and are more correctly termed a baffle. So, I guess I am trying to say - how should this question be answered? Are you asking about restricting the amount of combustion air supply at it's source or are you asking about baffling the flow and slowing it down at it's exit?
Some Like It Hot said:
You are absolutely correct. I would not draw any line of distinction on any of the above, and in my opinion, they should all be allowed to be posted equally, and with impunity. We should all be able to post naked women, a Swastika over dead Concentration camp victims, and photos of someone raping a child. I stick to my opinion, if you allow any of it, you have to allow all of it. To prove the point, I am going to do a google search to find a photo of someone being hanged, and post that as my new avatar here.
Okay, are you done with the ridiculous questions, because if you are, then I'm done with the ridiculous answers. Allow me to flip the question the other way... do you not see a difference in impact between photos of a few asses, and your aforementioned Swastika emblazoned holocaust victims, because apparently Dean and the rest of the right minded people around here do. It should go without saying that there are degrees of acceptability, and in my opinion, they are being followed here. My opinion differs from yours, or that of others, and that's okay. People complain, but there will always be complainers, people who take offense at what they deem is offensive. Fine, let them complain, its their right... just don't allow their right to complain to interfere with anyone else's right to reasonably express their opinions, in text or in photos.
That's all for my ranting today... I'll return the board to its usual dampened down existence (look, an On Topic reference, wow!)... I am off to the beach to go blast some clay pigeons... all in good fun, right...
-- Mike
PS - drool drool drool
Seaken, Marcia, and anyone else that might find this useful:seaken said:
1: Click the "Your Control Panel" link at the top of this page.
2: On the next page, click the "Edit Preferences" link.
3: The final page, uncheck "Display member avatars in entries" and click the "Update" button.
Voila! No more troublesome avatars!
quads said:
Thanks Quads. I knew there was a way. But it took me five minutes to read your post because your damn avatar was jumping up and down! Ha!
Sean
- Status
Similar threads
