Jim Katen

Looks like a motor controller.

I'm very familiar with post frame construction and been accepted as an expert witness in that construction style. I've also inspected a couple of dozen local vineyard properties that use that construction technique. You can certainly build a very energy efficient residence with it - no doubt there. I question the cheaper and faster part, especially since this is your first construction project. It reminds me of all my friends who built geodesic dome houses in the '70s . . . (Ok, it's not as bad as that.) That said, I'll be very interested to hear about your progress and see how the cost and time work out, and I'll be happy to be proved wrong.

I question your premise. If your final product will be cheaper, more energy efficient, and quicker to build, then why do you suppose that the vast majority of builders use stick frame construction in North America?

Not me. I detest Vegas. I will be attending InspectionWorld in San Diego in January, however.

If the risers are too high, then that would be wrong. Likewise, if the top and bottom steps are the wrong heights, that would be wrong, just like they are in 99% of the stairs that I look at. But these have nothing to do with the product. They have to do with misuse of the product. These are not a "technique," they're an approved, manufactured product and part of a flooring system. The manufacturer directs you to install them this way. I'm not a fan of the product either (I'm not a fan of most crappy building products out there), but I don't see them as a significant hazard. Heck, when I walk up & down stairs that are covered with plastic laminate, the little raised edges are annoying, but they do help to prevent my feet from slipping off the edge. Personally, I'd rather have them than not have them. (By the way, the lips are nowhere near 3/8", they're more like 1/8".) If you all want to orchestrate a unified rebellion against something, make it something that's truly horrid like sunken living rooms, boob lights, or, heaven forbid, stenciled inspirational quotations on walls.

It's not a requirement of the NEC unless the wire manufacturer or the panel manufacturer require it.

I didn't know that McDonald was still manufacturing cats.

Or the undersupervised . . .

I traced it back to the 1975 edition of the NEC. I couldn't find it in the 1971 edition. Seems odd, though. It was so common that there must have been a requirement before that, but it was probably in another article.

I remember that issue.

Hey Jimmy, great idea. The first thing that comes to my mind is section 1.3 of the *old* A.I.I. Code of Ethics (of all things): Just to be clear and fair, A.I.I. no longer prohibits "overly scrutinizing" and they finally gave up on validating purchase decisions.

Why do you think it was originally steam and not hot water?

I think it's the opposite. You should see no more than the bottom half - preferably no more than the bottom third. I'm fine with the side-laps completely covering the sides of the flashings. As for the mastic, yes, it shouldn't be used on plastic flashings or on the top-side of asphalt shingles.

Not if its fed with 240 volts. The NEC only requires AFCI protection on 120-volt single phase 15- and 20-amp circuits.

Whoever did this has no future in the NHL . . .