What's Penofin?

"Martin Frankel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Frank Nakashima wrote:
> > Give a man a fish or teach a man to fish and all that.
>
>
> "There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
> idiot." -- Steven Wright
>
> Martin
>

"Fishing with Dynamite is a fun and relaxing hobby." --C.S.Strowbridge

> "Silvan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >. Especially when people only add one line and don't even separate

"CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:Sarbb.402238$cF.125021@rwcrnsc53...
> Damn sight better than the bottom posters that force you to scroll past
all
> the stuff you have already read to get to the message. You're walking down
> the street. Someone comes up to you and asks "do you know how to get to
> Elmwood Road"? You respond "do you know how to get to Elmwood Road? Yes.
> it is to blocks over. Their attention quickly turns from trying to find
> Elmwood Road to trying to determine where the loony bin is you escaped
from.

That's why I do the best of both. I bottom post but will snip long
postings. That way you can read it the way English is meant to be read, top
to bottom, but don't have to wade through loads of stuff. I suppose when
you read the newspaper you start at the end and work your way up.

todd

Sure is. More and more all the time. Things change, deal with it. BTW, I
have been around for some time.
"jbacke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 06:10:31 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Top posting is normal in every group I frequent. It is the new
standard.
>
> It absolutely is not a new standard. DAGS to see why top posting is
> and always will be frowned upon in newsgroups. It's only done by
> ignorant/lazy people and the only reason we see more and more of it is
> simply because there are more newbies discovering usenet every day.
>
> Assuming you're not a newbie, you should know better and you should
> not encourage others to forgo basic rules of netiquette.
>
>
> Jeff
> ____________________________________________
> You won't notice the splinters in the ladder of success,
> unless you are sliding down.

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 03:37:33 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Sure is. More and more all the time. Things change, deal with it. BTW, I
>have been around for some time.

<yawn>

WTMKF

Jamie Jackson wrote:
>
> Goonair,
>
> Welcome to Usenet. You'll be surprised to know that in addition to
> subject lines, you can also read "message bodies," which usually
> explain the matter in more detail. In most news readers, you'll find
> that if you click the subject line, it will open a window containing
> all kinds of great information.
>
> Henceforth, I'm sure you'll find your Usenet experience very much
> enriched!
>
> Glad to help,
> Jamie Jackson
>
> On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:24:31 GMT, "goonair" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> >hey, try this www.yahoo.com
> >
> >you will be freaking amazed.
> >
> >
> >"Jamie Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:[email protected]...
> >> I picked up some Ultra Premium Wester Red Cedar colored Penofin for a
> >> douglas fir hammock stand I built. I wanted to read up (in the Flexner
> >> book) on whatever Penofin is, before I apply it. Is it an oil/varnish
> >> mix?
> >>
> >> Thanks,
> >> Jamie
> >

Hey Jamie

Welcome to Usenet, it runs on the same network that has this thing
called the Web on it, on the Web you can try www.google.com, it is
called a search engine, type in Penofin and press the search button, I
am sure that there will be lots to read.

Henceforth, try there before asking here.

Froz ...

btw. try not to top post it is kinda frowned upon in most groups.

Geez, real assholes around here. Hey search engine weenies, can you
actually answer Jamie's question? It certainly isn't answered on
Penofin's web site.

Martin


FrozenNorth wrote:
> Jamie Jackson wrote:
>
>>Goonair,
>>
>>Welcome to Usenet. You'll be surprised to know that in addition to
>>subject lines, you can also read "message bodies," which usually
>>explain the matter in more detail. In most news readers, you'll find
>>that if you click the subject line, it will open a window containing
>>all kinds of great information.
>>
>>Henceforth, I'm sure you'll find your Usenet experience very much
>>enriched!
>>
>>Glad to help,
>>Jamie Jackson
>>
>>On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:24:31 GMT, "goonair" <[email protected]>
>>wrote:
>>
>>
>>>hey, try this www.yahoo.com
>>>
>>>you will be freaking amazed.
>>>
>>>
>>>"Jamie Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>news:[email protected]...
>>>
>>>>I picked up some Ultra Premium Wester Red Cedar colored Penofin for a
>>>>douglas fir hammock stand I built. I wanted to read up (in the Flexner
>>>>book) on whatever Penofin is, before I apply it. Is it an oil/varnish
>>>>mix?
>>>>
>>>>Thanks,
>>>>Jamie
>>>
>
> Hey Jamie
>
> Welcome to Usenet, it runs on the same network that has this thing
> called the Web on it, on the Web you can try www.google.com, it is
> called a search engine, type in Penofin and press the search button, I
> am sure that there will be lots to read.
>
> Henceforth, try there before asking here.
>
> Froz ...
>
> btw. try not to top post it is kinda frowned upon in most groups.

Todd wrote:
> Hey, top-posting weenie.

And proud of it.

> The web site says that it's an oil-based product.

Yeah, that's f*#&ing useful.

> If the OP wants more info, the web site has a nice little form to fill out
> and ask them all the questions he wants.

Yeah, I'll bet their customer support folks have all read Flexner and
are able to clarify how their product relates with his taxonomy of oil
based finishes. That's probably question number one on their frequently
asked questions script.

Someone comes here asking a relatively subtle finishing question looking
for an expert answer. God knows that's not what rec.woodworking is for!
Shut them up quick so we can get back to discussing JOAT's sex life and
the latest closeout at the BORG.

Anyway, I've been curious about this question myself, and I haven't
found the answer. So let's hear from someone who actually knows something.

Martin

Jamie Jackson wrote:
>
<snip>

> Does everyone have to preface their post with, "I've searched on
> Google, but...?" It seems that would get awfully redundant. Also, if
> you can find the composition of Penofin from Google search without
> undue effort, I'd be happy to learn your search techniques, but I
> coudn't find much more information than application tips, marketing
> copy, general information, etc.
>

www.google.com, enter "+penofin +ingredients" without quotes, plus sign
means both words must be on the returned page.

6th link down

http://www.woodnewengland.com/penofin/penoblue.htm
-------------<cut n paste>--------------

PENOFIN exterior finishes were formulated to safeguard the natural
beauty of wood and to prevent discoloration from the sun's ultraviolent
rays. Penofin resists and retards the bleeding of nails. Two key
ingredients contribute to Penofin's exceptional abilities:

Brazilian Rosewood (Oiticica) Oil provides tough, deep-down moisture
protection while still allowing the wood to "breathe". There's no
surface film to trap moisture... or chip... or peel.


Microscopically fine, transparent oxide pigments inhibit ultraviolent
damage and darkening. They add deep, rich color without hiding the
natural beauty of the grain. Our semi-transparent mist tones mimic the
tones of weathered wood.

------------<end cut n paste>------------

I generally do not look beyond the 2nd page of links returned, will just
revise my search terms.

There endeth todays lesson.

Froz ...

Frank Nakashima wrote:
>
> >
> > www.google.com, enter "+penofin +ingredients" without quotes, plus
> sign
> > means both words must be on the returned page.
>
> Actually, you don't even need the plus signs.

It helps depending on the search

Froz ...

Frank Nakashima wrote:
>
> "FrozenNorth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Frank Nakashima wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > www.google.com, enter "+penofin +ingredients" without quotes, plus
> > > sign
> > > > means both words must be on the returned page.
> > >
> > > Actually, you don't even need the plus signs.
> >
> > It helps depending on the search
> >
> > Froz ...
>
> Only if it's a common word (and, of, etc.) that Google excludes. You
> also need to put a space between the plus sign and the word. Otherwise
> Google will only return results with all the words in typed in.

Check again:

http://www.google.ca/help/refinesearch.html

" + " Searches

Google ignores common words and characters such as "where" and "how", as
well as certain single digits and single letters, because they tend to
slow down your search without improving the results. Google will
indicate if a common word has been excluded by displaying details on the
results page below the search box.

If a common word is essential to getting the results you want, you can
include it by putting a "+" sign in front of it. (Be sure to include a
space before the "+" sign.)

Froz ...

Hey kids, seriously, thanks for the Google tips, but you still haven't
answered the OP's question. First of all he was asking about the red
label, not blue. Second you haven't found anything that says whether or
not Penofin contains varnish resins.

"By precisely combining these and the remaining ingredients, we created
a transparent oil wood finish of unmatched durability and beauty."

Mmmm, remaining ingredients.

Martin


FrozenNorth wrote:
> Frank Nakashima wrote:
>
>>>www.google.com, enter "+penofin +ingredients" without quotes, plus
>>
>>sign
>>
>>>means both words must be on the returned page.
>>
>>Actually, you don't even need the plus signs.
>
>
> It helps depending on the search
>
> Froz ...

Frank Nakashima wrote:
> Give a man a fish or teach a man to fish and all that.


"There's a fine line between fishing and standing on the shore like an
idiot." -- Steven Wright

Martin

Frank Nakashima wrote:
>
> "FrozenNorth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Frank Nakashima wrote:
> > >
> > > "FrozenNorth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > > news:[email protected]...
> > > > Frank Nakashima wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > > www.google.com, enter "+penofin +ingredients" without quotes,
> plus
> > > > > sign
> > > > > > means both words must be on the returned page.
> > > > >
> > > > > Actually, you don't even need the plus signs.
> > > >
> > > > It helps depending on the search
> > > >
> > > > Froz ...
> > >
> > > Only if it's a common word (and, of, etc.) that Google excludes.
> You
> > > also need to put a space between the plus sign and the word.
> Otherwise
> > > Google will only return results with all the words in typed in.
> >
> > Check again:
> >
> > http://www.google.ca/help/refinesearch.html
> >
> > " + " Searches
> >
> > Google ignores common words and characters such as "where" and "how",
> as
> > well as certain single digits and single letters, because they tend to
> > slow down your search without improving the results. Google will
> > indicate if a common word has been excluded by displaying details on
> the
> > results page below the search box.
> >
> > If a common word is essential to getting the results you want, you can
> > include it by putting a "+" sign in front of it. (Be sure to include a
> > space before the "+" sign.)
> >
> > Froz ...
>
> That's pretty much what I typed above. Slow day and looking for a
> pissing match or what?

You typed "put a space between the plus sign and the word" the page and
I said "Be sure to include a space before the "+" sign"

Game, set, match.

Froz ...

jbacke wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 06:10:31 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>> Top posting is normal in every group I frequent. It is the new standard.
>
> It absolutely is not a new standard. DAGS to see why top posting is
> and always will be frowned upon in newsgroups. It's only done by
> ignorant/lazy people and the only reason we see more and more of it is
> simply because there are more newbies discovering usenet every day.

I've been an active Usenet reader and poster since the 1980s and top
posting absolutely has its place. I do it from time to time. Please calm
down.

Martin

CW wrote:

> Why? Because we don't feel the need to force everyone to wade through the
> unnecessary crap before they read the relevant points?

<snip>

Personally, I don't care where a person posts their reply. I do wish
everyone would edit the original message to remove the irrelevant junk
though.

--
Jack Novak
Buffalo, NY - USA

--------------060206070308050900040802
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Paul,

You may have destroyed one of the best benefits of Penofin when you
put the Minwax on top. Penofin just sinks into the wood. In a few
fears you can just recoat it without sanding, stripping etc... I think
the Minwax will need to be stripped before you can add a new coat of
Penofin. I hope the minwax has a long exterior life!

Len
---------------

Paul wrote:

>>I picked up some Ultra Premium Wester Red Cedar colored Penofin for a
>>douglas fir hammock stand I built. I wanted to read up (in the Flexner
>>
>>
>
>Jamie - I wouldn't have minded seeing more information in this thread from
>folks who have had experience with Penofin. It does seem popular for
>outdoor applications like decks - one of the better non-opaque options. I
>used some Western Red Cedar Penofin (90% UV protection) on an outdoor table
>(western red cedar) I made last spring - it seems to "bring out" the red in
>the cedar in contrast to the Sikkens Cetol Natural I've used which looked
>more yellow on another of my western red cedar projects.
>So far so good with the table, but not really long enough to tell much. Is
>the Ultra Premium 99% UV protection?
>
>I was concerned about any of the Penofin coming off when we were eating on
>the new table so I added several coats of wax to the top surface a month
>after the Penofin was applied. - Comments anyone?
>
>Paul
>
>
>
>


--------------060206070308050900040802
Content-Type: text/html; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body>
Paul,<br>
<br>
&nbsp; &nbsp; &nbsp;You may have destroyed one of the best benefits of Penofin when you
put the Minwax on top. &nbsp;Penofin just sinks into the wood. &nbsp;In a few fears
you can just recoat it without sanding, stripping etc... &nbsp; I think the Minwax
will need to be stripped before you can add &nbsp;a new coat of Penofin. &nbsp;I hope
the minwax has a long exterior life!<br>
<br>
Len<br>
---------------<br>
<br>
Paul wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite" cite="midamOgb.710585$uu5.116534@sccrnsc04">
<blockquote type="cite">
<pre wrap="">I picked up some Ultra Premium Wester Red Cedar colored Penofin for a
douglas fir hammock stand I built. I wanted to read up (in the Flexner
</pre>
</blockquote>
<pre wrap=""><!---->
Jamie - I wouldn't have minded seeing more information in this thread from
folks who have had experience with Penofin. It does seem popular for
outdoor applications like decks - one of the better non-opaque options. I
used some Western Red Cedar Penofin (90% UV protection) on an outdoor table
(western red cedar) I made last spring - it seems to "bring out" the red in
the cedar in contrast to the Sikkens Cetol Natural I've used which looked
more yellow on another of my western red cedar projects.
So far so good with the table, but not really long enough to tell much. Is
the Ultra Premium 99% UV protection?

I was concerned about any of the Penofin coming off when we were eating on
the new table so I added several coats of wax to the top surface a month
after the Penofin was applied. - Comments anyone?

Paul


</pre>
</blockquote>
<br>
</body>
</html>

--------------060206070308050900040802--

Plonk (on top of course, the way it should be).


"todd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> "Martin Frankel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> >
> >
> > Todd wrote:
> > > Hey, top-posting weenie.
> >
> > And proud of it.
> >
> > > The web site says that it's an oil-based product.
> >
> > Yeah, that's f*#&ing useful.
> >
> > > If the OP wants more info, the web site has a nice little form to fill
> out
> > > and ask them all the questions he wants.
> >
> > Yeah, I'll bet their customer support folks have all read Flexner and
> > are able to clarify how their product relates with his taxonomy of oil
> > based finishes. That's probably question number one on their frequently
> > asked questions script.
>
> > Someone comes here asking a relatively subtle finishing question looking
> > for an expert answer. God knows that's not what rec.woodworking is for!
> > Shut them up quick so we can get back to discussing JOAT's sex life and
> > the latest closeout at the BORG.
> >
> > Anyway, I've been curious about this question myself, and I haven't
> > found the answer. So let's hear from someone who actually knows
something.
> >
> > Martin
> >
>
> Well, you tell me, genius...if someone at Penofin doesn't know, who does?
> Do you think someone here has done a chemical analysis of the product and
> can give us the breakdown? Yeah, i was trying to shut the OP up by
> suggesting that rather than elicit a bunch of opinions, he contact the
> manufacturer. I know, they probably don't know what's in it either.
>
> By the way, the only thing worse than a top-poster is replying in-line.
>
> todd
>
>

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 16:11:19 -0400, FrozenNorth <[email protected]>
wrote:

>Jamie Jackson wrote:
>>
><snip>
>
>> Does everyone have to preface their post with, "I've searched on
>> Google, but...?" It seems that would get awfully redundant. Also, if
>> you can find the composition of Penofin from Google search without
>> undue effort, I'd be happy to learn your search techniques, but I
>> coudn't find much more information than application tips, marketing
>> copy, general information, etc.
>>
>
>www.google.com, enter "+penofin +ingredients" without quotes, plus sign
>means both words must be on the returned page.
>
>6th link down
>
>http://www.woodnewengland.com/penofin/penoblue.htm
>-------------<cut n paste>--------------
<snip>
>------------<end cut n paste>------------
>
>I generally do not look beyond the 2nd page of links returned, will just
>revise my search terms.
>
>There endeth todays lesson.
>
>Froz ...

Thanks, Froz. I had done that very same search, and saw the very same
links, but the descriptions weren't definitive enough. (Something
like, "100% Brazilian Rosewood Oil" would do it for me.) For instance,
even though both blue and red penofins are BRO-based, obviously,
there's a difference between the two: That's proof in itself that
they're both not just BRO.

Anyway, forget I brought this up. It was a simple little point of
curiousity that I thought someone might be able to settle, since
wreckers tend to do way more research than might be necessary (me
included). If nobody had known it, I thought the thread would die a
lonely little death, and I'd dumbly and happily go out to the garage
and slather the stuff on my hammock stand.

I may call the manufacturer tomorrow and find out if there's varnish
in them thar cans, just to justify the 38 heated replies this simple
little question generated. If I call them, I'll let you know what I
find out.

Thanks,
Jamie

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 16:17:36 -0400, Tom Watson <[email protected]>
wrote:

>On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:54:08 -0400, Jamie Jackson
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>>> >"Jamie Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>>> >news:[email protected]...
>>
>>Does everyone have to preface their post with, "I've searched on
>>Google, but...?" It seems that would get awfully redundant.
>
>This is why Larry Jaques (Bubba, er, buddha bless him) proposed the
>IDAGS acronym some time back.

Thanks, I like that. Looks like I'll be needing that around here.

Jamie

Short version - IDAGS (I did a....)
Credit goes to Larry (C-Less) I believe.

Renata

On 22 Sep 2003 10:21:52 -0700, [email protected] (Chris)
wrote:

>Jamie Jackson <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> Does everyone have to preface their post with, "I've searched on
>> Google, but...?" It seems that would get awfully redundant.
>
>
>Apparently the answer is YES unless you want to suffer the
>consequences. I am thinking of adding it as my .SIG line.
>
>-Chris

Seems like you should improve yourself and not hang around with such
riff-raff.

Ta ta

Renata

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 05:34:46 GMT, jbacke <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:33:12 -0700, Martin Frankel
><[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>I've been an active Usenet reader and poster since the 1980s and top
>>posting absolutely has its place. I do it from time to time. Please calm
>>down.
>>
>>Martin
>
>I've been involved with Usenet since 1990 and all the groups I've hung
>out in have taught proper usenet etiquette through the years to anyone
>who would listen. The only place top posting is ok is with email.
>
>I'm sure I just frequented a better class of groups though.
>
>
>Jeff
>____________________________________________
>You won't notice the splinters in the ladder of success,
>unless you are sliding down.

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 15:54:08 -0400, Jamie Jackson
<[email protected]> wrote:

>>> >"Jamie Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>>> >news:[email protected]...
>
>Does everyone have to preface their post with, "I've searched on
>Google, but...?" It seems that would get awfully redundant.

This is why Larry Jaques (Bubba, er, buddha bless him) proposed the
IDAGS acronym some time back.


Regards, Tom
Tom Watson - Woodworker
Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson

New InstaPlonk(tmLJ) posters like Jeffy are
immediately recognizable, wot?


On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 12:06:33 GMT, [email protected] (Renata)
pixelated:

>Seems like you should improve yourself and not hang around with such
>riff-raff.
>
>Ta ta
>
>Renata
>
>On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 05:34:46 GMT, jbacke <[email protected]> wrote:


--
Music washes away from the soul the dust of everyday life.
---- --Unknown

> "Michael Daly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > Most of us have learned to read English from left to right and top to
> > bottom and consider top-to-bottom to be a logical sequence in time.

"CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:KOwbb.541631$YN5.366175@sccrnsc01...
> Most of us can catch it the first time. We don't need to red it twice.
> Bottom posters must have Alzheimer's.

So why do you quote the previous thread at all? You don't seem to be very
consistent.

todd

Au contraire...

Renata

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 04:47:54 GMT, "ChairMan" <[email protected]> wrote:

>
>The more is only people using OE with out using OEquotefix. All other
>newsreaders, by default, post to the bottom. Deal with it.
>

(no stain for email)

You're absolutly right.
"Renata" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I just opened and read Silvan's reply, then I opened and read CW's
> reply, then i opened and read your reply. All in the span of say 30
> seconds. I have no desire to reread what I just a few seconds ago
> read in each of the previous articles, nor scroll past the sentences
> you choose to include as pertinent to your reply.
>
> OTOH, when I go to read tomorrow morning, say, and continue in an
> established thread, I may or may not remember all the pertinent
> details from the poster who's article with which I start. So, I can
> easily skim the included text, BELOW the new reply. It's there if I
> need it and not in my way if I don't (which, being non real time, I
> prolly won't, cause my memory usually lasts longer than 12-24 hours
> :-)
>
> What bottom posters seem to not understand, is that this is not a real
> time conversation. Do any of you read an article, wait so long that
> you've forgotten the gist of the article and need to reread it before
> reading a reply?
>
> Why force everyone to scroll thru however many lines of text to get to
> the part in which you're interested in?
>
> Seems somewhere along the line someone decided this has something to
> do w/Microsoft so we'll all be anti establishement and bottom post.
> Technology changes and one has to adapt. Clinging to this bottom
> posting cause it's the way it's always been done is silly.
>
> I really don't understand how you folks traverse unsenet articles that
> you're so enamored of bottom posting and all the hassle of scrolling
> past previous replies time and again. Please explain.
>
> Renata

On Thu, 25 Sep 2003 14:42:53 GMT, Larry Jaques <jake@di\/ersify.com>
wrote:

>
>New InstaPlonk(tmLJ) posters like Jeffy are
>immediately recognizable, wot?
>
>

Jeffy?

Time to grow up Larry, you're not in grade school anymore.

Once you mature a bit more, you'll learn how to post too.


Jeff

Why? Because we don't feel the need to force everyone to wade through the
unnecessary crap before they read the relevant points? Efficiency is
obviously a concept that you are not familiar with.


>"jbacke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
Top posters are lazy.

"CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:c09bb.395297$Oz4.183287@rwcrnsc54...
> Nope, just the way it is. Get used to it.
> "Silvan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
> > CW wrote:
> >
> > > Top posting is normal in every group I frequent. It is the new
> > > standard.
> >
> > It's not standard, it's just *lazy*.
> >
> > I don't care how many people do it, it's still wrong. End of
discussion.

Well, I certainly learned something from this thread.

1) Bottom-posting does seem to be preferred by most NG users; at least those
who have taken time to write an article or web page about it (Google +top
+posting).

2) rec.woodworking is the first NG I've seen where people get seriously
upset about top-posting. I'm not a newbie to the net (although I'll admit I
don't take the time to read or learn what is proper etiquette), and I've yet
to see, on any other NG I read, anyone get bent out of shape over
top-posting.

Even though I don't see what the big deal is, I have no complaints. If I'm
at someone's house, and I know they don't appreciate curse words, I'll watch
my tongue to accomodate my hosts. As with many NG's, the "wreck" has a core
group of folks who post frequently, are knowledgeable about the subject
matter, and set the tone of the discussions. If these "hosts" feel
top-posting doesn't belong here, that's good enough for me. (Please don't
jump down my throat if I forget sometime, though! I have Outlook Express,
and when replying, the insertion cursor goes right to the top of the
message).

"Keith Carlson" <[email protected]> wrote in message

>
> 2) rec.woodworking is the first NG I've seen where people get seriously
> upset about top-posting.

Try it on alt.food.barbecue The guys here are very mild by comparison.


>
> Even though I don't see what the big deal is, I have no complaints.

Top posting would be OK to make one reply to one message and end of thread.
When you have a group of replies, chronoligical order just makes sense.


> I have Outlook Express,
> and when replying, the insertion cursor goes right to the top of the
> message).

There is a program called "QuoteFix" that takes care of it.
Ed

"FrozenNorth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Frank Nakashima wrote:
> >
> > "FrozenNorth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > > Frank Nakashima wrote:
> > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > www.google.com, enter "+penofin +ingredients" without quotes,
plus
> > > > sign
> > > > > means both words must be on the returned page.
> > > >
> > > > Actually, you don't even need the plus signs.
> > >
> > > It helps depending on the search
> > >
> > > Froz ...
> >
> > Only if it's a common word (and, of, etc.) that Google excludes.
You
> > also need to put a space between the plus sign and the word.
Otherwise
> > Google will only return results with all the words in typed in.
>
> Check again:
>
> http://www.google.ca/help/refinesearch.html
>
> " + " Searches
>
> Google ignores common words and characters such as "where" and "how",
as
> well as certain single digits and single letters, because they tend to
> slow down your search without improving the results. Google will
> indicate if a common word has been excluded by displaying details on
the
> results page below the search box.
>
> If a common word is essential to getting the results you want, you can
> include it by putting a "+" sign in front of it. (Be sure to include a
> space before the "+" sign.)
>
> Froz ...

That's pretty much what I typed above. Slow day and looking for a
pissing match or what?

"Martin Frankel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Geez, real assholes around here. Hey search engine weenies, can you
> actually answer Jamie's question? It certainly isn't answered on
> Penofin's web site.
>
> Martin

Hey, top-posting weenie. The web site says that it's an oil-based product.
If the OP wants more info, the web site has a nice little form to fill out
and ask them all the questions he wants. My bet is that will be the most
accurate source of information. He can even call 1-800-PENOFIN if he's
looking for immediate gratification.

todd

>
> www.google.com, enter "+penofin +ingredients" without quotes, plus
sign
> means both words must be on the returned page.

Actually, you don't even need the plus signs.

No, but when I watch the second half of a two part television show I skip
the scenes from last week. Already seen them. Why would I want to see them
again?


"todd" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> > "Silvan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:[email protected]...
> > >. Especially when people only add one line and don't even separate
>
> "CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:Sarbb.402238$cF.125021@rwcrnsc53...
> > Damn sight better than the bottom posters that force you to scroll past
> all
> > the stuff you have already read to get to the message. You're walking
down
> > the street. Someone comes up to you and asks "do you know how to get to
> > Elmwood Road"? You respond "do you know how to get to Elmwood Road?
Yes.
> > it is to blocks over. Their attention quickly turns from trying to find
> > Elmwood Road to trying to determine where the loony bin is you escaped
> from.
>
> That's why I do the best of both. I bottom post but will snip long
> postings. That way you can read it the way English is meant to be read,
top
> to bottom, but don't have to wade through loads of stuff. I suppose when
> you read the newspaper you start at the end and work your way up.
>
> todd
>
>

Most of us can catch it the first time. We don't need to red it twice.
Bottom posters must have Alzheimer's.
"Michael Daly" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Most of us have learned to read English from left to right and top to
> bottom and consider top-to-bottom to be a logical sequence in time.

CW wrote:
> Plonk (on top of course, the way it should be).

If you don't have anything useful to add, you could just say so.

todd

Damn sight better than the bottom posters that force you to scroll past all
the stuff you have already read to get to the message. You're walking down
the street. Someone comes up to you and asks "do you know how to get to
Elmwood Road"? You respond "do you know how to get to Elmwood Road? Yes.
it is to blocks over. Their attention quickly turns from trying to find
Elmwood Road to trying to determine where the loony bin is you escaped from.


"Silvan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>. Especially when people only add one line and don't even separate

"Michael Daly" <[email protected]> wrote in
news:[email protected]:

> Not everyone obsessively follows every thread. Being able to follow
> a thread at any point is a useful feature. Since it's been done like
> this for years before top-posting became common, I don't see why it
> can't continue.
>
> Mike
>

The real problem with top posting is that usenet is not concurrent.( or
time synchronous, however you want to say it ...)

You may well see an answer before the question (that, in and of itself,
is why top posting is evil). If you've top posted, it's excruciating to
try and recreate the proper sequence of q first, then a.

OTOH, for email, top posting (or rather in that case, top replying) is
fine .. all I really care about is the answer. I *already* know the
question.

Now, back to Penofin. I've got no clue how to classify the stuff. I
have had really good success with it though. SWMBO, before she was
SWMBO, bought an unfinished bedroom set, and finished it with Penofin.
Still looks great >25 years on.

A couple of years ago, I refinished a work bench top with the stuff.
Great stuff, really like it.

Regards,
JT

> "jbacke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:[email protected]...
>> On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 06:10:31 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Top posting is normal in every group I frequent. It is the new
>>> standard.
>>
>> It absolutely is not a new standard. DAGS to see why top posting is
>> and always will be frowned upon in newsgroups. It's only done by
>> ignorant/lazy people and the only reason we see more and more of it
>> is simply because there are more newbies discovering usenet every
>> day.
>>
>> Assuming you're not a newbie, you should know better and you should
>> not encourage others to forgo basic rules of netiquette.
>>
>>

In news:129bb.395310$Oz4.183301@rwcrnsc54,
CW <[email protected]> spewed forth and said:
> Sure is. More and more all the time. Things change, deal with it.
> BTW, I have been around for some time.


The more is only people using OE with out using OEquotefix. All other
newsreaders, by default, post to the bottom. Deal with it.

> I picked up some Ultra Premium Wester Red Cedar colored Penofin for a
> douglas fir hammock stand I built. I wanted to read up (in the Flexner

Jamie - I wouldn't have minded seeing more information in this thread from
folks who have had experience with Penofin. It does seem popular for
outdoor applications like decks - one of the better non-opaque options. I
used some Western Red Cedar Penofin (90% UV protection) on an outdoor table
(western red cedar) I made last spring - it seems to "bring out" the red in
the cedar in contrast to the Sikkens Cetol Natural I've used which looked
more yellow on another of my western red cedar projects.
So far so good with the table, but not really long enough to tell much. Is
the Ultra Premium 99% UV protection?

I was concerned about any of the Penofin coming off when we were eating on
the new table so I added several coats of wax to the top surface a month
after the Penofin was applied. - Comments anyone?

Paul

Nope, just the way it is. Get used to it.
"Silvan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> CW wrote:
>
> > Top posting is normal in every group I frequent. It is the new
> > standard.
>
> It's not standard, it's just *lazy*.
>
> I don't care how many people do it, it's still wrong. End of discussion.
>
> --
> Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
> Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
> Confirmed post number: 17851 Approximate word count: 535530
> http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/
>

"Martin Frankel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>
> Todd wrote:
> > Hey, top-posting weenie.
>
> And proud of it.
>
> > The web site says that it's an oil-based product.
>
> Yeah, that's f*#&ing useful.
>
> > If the OP wants more info, the web site has a nice little form to fill
out
> > and ask them all the questions he wants.
>
> Yeah, I'll bet their customer support folks have all read Flexner and
> are able to clarify how their product relates with his taxonomy of oil
> based finishes. That's probably question number one on their frequently
> asked questions script.

> Someone comes here asking a relatively subtle finishing question looking
> for an expert answer. God knows that's not what rec.woodworking is for!
> Shut them up quick so we can get back to discussing JOAT's sex life and
> the latest closeout at the BORG.
>
> Anyway, I've been curious about this question myself, and I haven't
> found the answer. So let's hear from someone who actually knows something.
>
> Martin
>

Well, you tell me, genius...if someone at Penofin doesn't know, who does?
Do you think someone here has done a chemical analysis of the product and
can give us the breakdown? Yeah, i was trying to shut the OP up by
suggesting that rather than elicit a bunch of opinions, he contact the
manufacturer. I know, they probably don't know what's in it either.

By the way, the only thing worse than a top-poster is replying in-line.

todd

CW wrote:

> Top posting is normal in every group I frequent. It is the new
> standard.

It's not standard, it's just *lazy*.

I don't care how many people do it, it's still wrong. End of discussion.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
Confirmed post number: 17851 Approximate word count: 535530
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

I ran a BBS in the late 70's and throughout the 80's, and figured out tcp/ip
about '91. Top posting was around then as it is now ... the whole can of
worms is just something else to take sides on and bitch about. The way
things are going in this culture, someone will probably get killed over the
asinine issue one of these days. How f*cking stupid can we become?

--
www.e-woodshop.net
Last update: 9/21/03

"Michael Daly" wrote in message
> On 22-Sep-2003, "CW" <wrote:
>
> > Most of us can catch it the first time. We don't need to red it twice.
> > Bottom posters must have Alzheimer's.
>
> Not everyone obsessively follows every thread. Being able to follow
> a thread at any point is a useful feature. Since it's been done like
> this for years before top-posting became common, I don't see why it
> can't continue.
>

>> >"Jamie Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>> >news:[email protected]...
>> >> I picked up some Ultra Premium Wester Red Cedar colored Penofin for a
>> >> douglas fir hammock stand I built. I wanted to read up (in the Flexner
>> >> book) on whatever Penofin is, before I apply it. Is it an oil/varnish
>> >> mix?
>> >>
>> >> Thanks,
>> >> Jamie

>Hey Jamie
>
>Welcome to Usenet, it runs on the same network that has this thing
>called the Web on it, on the Web you can try www.google.com, it is
>called a search engine, type in Penofin and press the search button, I
>am sure that there will be lots to read.
>
>Henceforth, try there before asking here.
>
>Froz ...
>
>btw. try not to top post it is kinda frowned upon in most groups.

FrozenNorth,

I do Google searches before I post to Usenet. These are the things I
knew before posting:
* Penofin is a penetrating oil-based finish.
* The oil is Brazilian Rosewood.

I can find no further information on it which might tell me if it is
solely penetrating oil, or if it an oil/varnish blend, not to mention
finish manufacturers are less than forthcoming with regard to
ingredients. Maybe it *is* just penetrating oil, and maybe that should
be obvious, but I don't know. If it's a dumb question, it would
actually be helpful if someone responded with, "that's a dumb
question, it's just penetrating-oil, you should have known that
because...." Or maybe they'd respond with the opposite... I don't
know, that's why I asked.

I've learned that manufacturers call their finishes by all sorts of
contradictory/misleading names, and that it can be hard to know what
you're getting.

Does everyone have to preface their post with, "I've searched on
Google, but...?" It seems that would get awfully redundant. Also, if
you can find the composition of Penofin from Google search without
undue effort, I'd be happy to learn your search techniques, but I
coudn't find much more information than application tips, marketing
copy, general information, etc.

Thanks,
Jamie

P.S. As a rule of thumb, I top-post to top-posters, and bottom-post
bottom-posters because it helps to keep the thread consistent, but
that's just my preference -- not the golden rule.

Goonair,

Welcome to Usenet. You'll be surprised to know that in addition to
subject lines, you can also read "message bodies," which usually
explain the matter in more detail. In most news readers, you'll find
that if you click the subject line, it will open a window containing
all kinds of great information.

Henceforth, I'm sure you'll find your Usenet experience very much
enriched!

Glad to help,
Jamie Jackson

On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 17:24:31 GMT, "goonair" <[email protected]>
wrote:

>hey, try this www.yahoo.com
>
>you will be freaking amazed.
>
>
>"Jamie Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> I picked up some Ultra Premium Wester Red Cedar colored Penofin for a
>> douglas fir hammock stand I built. I wanted to read up (in the Flexner
>> book) on whatever Penofin is, before I apply it. Is it an oil/varnish
>> mix?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jamie
>

Jamie Jackson <[email protected]> wrote in message
> Does everyone have to preface their post with, "I've searched on
> Google, but...?" It seems that would get awfully redundant.


Apparently the answer is YES unless you want to suffer the
consequences. I am thinking of adding it as my .SIG line.

-Chris

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 22:03:18 -0400, Renata <[email protected]>
wrote:
>
>I really don't understand how you folks traverse unsenet articles that
>you're so enamored of bottom posting and all the hassle of scrolling
>past previous replies time and again. Please explain.
>
>Renata

Do your own google search on this subject so it doesn't have to be
repeated in a news group for the millionth time. There are countless
web sites where you can spend hours reading about this.

Good grief


Jeff
____________________________________________
You won't notice the splinters in the ladder of success,
unless you are sliding down.

I just opened and read Silvan's reply, then I opened and read CW's
reply, then i opened and read your reply. All in the span of say 30
seconds. I have no desire to reread what I just a few seconds ago
read in each of the previous articles, nor scroll past the sentences
you choose to include as pertinent to your reply.

OTOH, when I go to read tomorrow morning, say, and continue in an
established thread, I may or may not remember all the pertinent
details from the poster who's article with which I start. So, I can
easily skim the included text, BELOW the new reply. It's there if I
need it and not in my way if I don't (which, being non real time, I
prolly won't, cause my memory usually lasts longer than 12-24 hours
:-)

What bottom posters seem to not understand, is that this is not a real
time conversation. Do any of you read an article, wait so long that
you've forgotten the gist of the article and need to reread it before
reading a reply?

Why force everyone to scroll thru however many lines of text to get to
the part in which you're interested in?

Seems somewhere along the line someone decided this has something to
do w/Microsoft so we'll all be anti establishement and bottom post.
Technology changes and one has to adapt. Clinging to this bottom
posting cause it's the way it's always been done is silly.

I really don't understand how you folks traverse unsenet articles that
you're so enamored of bottom posting and all the hassle of scrolling
past previous replies time and again. Please explain.

Renata


> "Silvan" <[email protected]> wrote in message
--snip--
>Someone comes up to you and asks "do you know how to get to
> Elmwood Road"? You respond "do you know how to get to Elmwood Road? Yes.
> it is to blocks over. Their attention quickly turns from trying to find
> Elmwood Road to trying to determine where the loony bin is you escaped
>from.

On Sun, 21 Sep 2003 20:19:55 -0500, "todd"
<[email protected]> wrote:
--snip--

>That's why I do the best of both. I bottom post but will snip long
>postings. That way you can read it the way English is meant to be read, top
>to bottom, but don't have to wade through loads of stuff. I suppose when
>you read the newspaper you start at the end and work your way up.

todd
(no stain for email)

"CW" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:kLMcb.579906$Ho3.108255@sccrnsc03...
> Top posting works anywhere you want to do it (and it should be done
> everywhere.Keeps people from having to waste there time.)

As I understand it, the benefit of top-posting is that the reader doesn't
have to read all the other stuff that came before. So, why quote any of the
other stuff at all? Because if you do need to read previous posts in a
thread, doing so in a top-posted thread is a PITA. Top-posters must be
*really* big fans of Memento. (ok, I am too, but they must be really,
really be big fans).

todd

On Mon, 22 Sep 2003 13:23:02 -0500, "todd"
<[email protected]> wrote:

>"Jamie Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>news:[email protected]...
>> I picked up some Ultra Premium Wester Red Cedar colored Penofin for a
>> douglas fir hammock stand I built. I wanted to read up (in the Flexner
>> book) on whatever Penofin is, before I apply it. Is it an oil/varnish
>> mix?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> Jamie
>
>I know it's much more fun to argue the point, and if the OP took my advice
>on calling the company, I didn't see it here. In any case, I just called
>the company. While they didn't provide a list of ingredients, they did
>confirm that the product does not contain varnish.
>
>todd
>

Hah, I'll bet we called at the same time... I wonder if she's
scratching her head.... I called about 15 minutes ago, and was about
to report back to the wreck. As you posted, they said there's no
varnish in Penofin.

Thanks,
Jamie

On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 06:10:31 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]>
wrote:

> Top posting is normal in every group I frequent. It is the new standard.

It absolutely is not a new standard. DAGS to see why top posting is
and always will be frowned upon in newsgroups. It's only done by
ignorant/lazy people and the only reason we see more and more of it is
simply because there are more newbies discovering usenet every day.

Assuming you're not a newbie, you should know better and you should
not encourage others to forgo basic rules of netiquette.


Jeff
____________________________________________
You won't notice the splinters in the ladder of success,
unless you are sliding down.

hey, try this www.yahoo.com

you will be freaking amazed.


"Jamie Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I picked up some Ultra Premium Wester Red Cedar colored Penofin for a
> douglas fir hammock stand I built. I wanted to read up (in the Flexner
> book) on whatever Penofin is, before I apply it. Is it an oil/varnish
> mix?
>
> Thanks,
> Jamie

"FrozenNorth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Frank Nakashima wrote:
> >
> > >
> > > www.google.com, enter "+penofin +ingredients" without quotes, plus
> > sign
> > > means both words must be on the returned page.
> >
> > Actually, you don't even need the plus signs.
>
> It helps depending on the search
>
> Froz ...


Only if it's a common word (and, of, etc.) that Google excludes. You
also need to put a space between the plus sign and the word. Otherwise
Google will only return results with all the words in typed in.

Top posting works anywhere you want to do it (and it should be done
everywhere.Keeps people from having to waste there time.)


"jbacke" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:33:12 -0700, Martin Frankel
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>
> >
> >I've been an active Usenet reader and poster since the 1980s and top
> >posting absolutely has its place. I do it from time to time. Please calm
> >down.
> >
> >Martin
>
> I've been involved with Usenet since 1990 and all the groups I've hung
> out in have taught proper usenet etiquette through the years to anyone
> who would listen. The only place top posting is ok is with email.
>
> I'm sure I just frequented a better class of groups though.
>
>
> Jeff
> ____________________________________________
> You won't notice the splinters in the ladder of success,
> unless you are sliding down.

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 16:21:42 -0400, Tom Watson
<[email protected]> wrote:

>People who worry about top and bottom posting should go out and find
>themselves a woman. Even if they are a woman.
>
>
>(tom-who just committed his first top post)
>
>
>Regards, Tom
>Thomas J. Watson-Cabinetmaker
>Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
>http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson


Tom, just because you've now stooped to a new low, doesn't mean
everyone else should. Top posters are lazy.

I have a woman already, and don't need your lame advice.


Jeff
____________________________________________
You won't notice the splinters in the ladder of success,
unless you are sliding down.

Keith Carlson wrote:

> 2) rec.woodworking is the first NG I've seen where people get seriously
> upset about top-posting. I'm not a newbie to the net (although I'll admit

You think this is bad, try alt.os.linux.mandrake... :)

I'm not a post nazi. I don't start these things. When someone else does, I
can't resist chipping in my two cents, because dammit, top posting is
hideous. Especially when people only add one line and don't even separate
that line from the 500 lines of reply text with a carriage return.

So is bottom posting. Scrolling through 500 lines to get to the one line
comment is no better.

The biggest problem is that, somewhere along the way, (*cough* 1995) people
began to get the idea that reply text was supposed to be immutable. They
stopped clipping it, and started including layer after layer after layer of
it with every message. I think this is because early versions of M$'s
Outhouse didn't allow the reply text to be edited, but I had the good sense
never to use that pile of crap, so I can't say for sure. (I was using
Agent long before the Outhouse came out, and continued to use it long
after.)

The *best* style is the style I use, which I learned by example way back
when leg warmers were all the rage and Michael Jackson was black. Some
call it the "inline" method. It's neither top nor bottom posting, but
rather, it's the *correct* method (dammit!). It reads like a Q&A article
in a magazine:

>(Q:) How many planes do you have?

(A:) Not enough.

>(Q:) How do you get SWMBO to let you buy more planes?

(A:) I tell her that my old planes are broken, and can't be fixed.

> jump down my throat if I forget sometime, though! I have Outlook Express,
> and when replying, the insertion cursor goes right to the top of the
> message).

So what? I'm using KNode, and when replying, the insertion cursor goes
right to the top of the message. This encourages me to go through the
sometimes many-layered reply text as I go, clipping out the extra bits, and
leaving just enough of the previous post(s) to give my own comments some
context on a parragraph by parragraph basis.

But anyway, I'll shut up now. This has all been said 15 million times
before.

--
Michael McIntyre ---- Silvan <[email protected]>
Linux fanatic, and certified Geek; registered Linux user #243621
Confirmed post number: 17884 Approximate word count: 536520
http://www.geocities.com/Paris/Rue/5407/

On 21-Sep-2003, Renata <[email protected]> wrote:

> So, I can
> easily skim the included text, BELOW the new reply. It's there if I
> need it and not in my way if I don't (which, being non real time, I
> prolly won't, cause my memory usually lasts longer than 12-24 hours
> :-)

If you like doing things upside down, why not type backwards as well?

Most of us have learned to read English from left to right and top to
bottom and consider top-to-bottom to be a logical sequence in time.

> Why force everyone to scroll thru however many lines of text to get to
> the part in which you're interested in?

If there's so much text to skip, the problem isn't bottom posting, it's
that the person posting is including too much text from the previous
reply. I don't use a 24x80 screen anymore, so a reasonable message
usually fits without scrolling.

Mike

> FrozenNorth wrote:
> > Frank Nakashima wrote:
> >
> >>>www.google.com, enter "+penofin +ingredients" without quotes, plus
> >>
> >>sign
> >>
> >>>means both words must be on the returned page.
> >>
> >>Actually, you don't even need the plus signs.
> >
> >
> > It helps depending on the search
> >
> > Froz ...
>

"Martin Frankel" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> Hey kids, seriously, thanks for the Google tips, but you still haven't
> answered the OP's question. First of all he was asking about the red
> label, not blue. Second you haven't found anything that says whether
or
> not Penofin contains varnish resins.
>
> "By precisely combining these and the remaining ingredients, we
created
> a transparent oil wood finish of unmatched durability and beauty."
>
> Mmmm, remaining ingredients.
>
> Martin
>
>

Give a man a fish or teach a man to fish and all that.

Top posting is normal in every group I frequent. It is the new standard.
"FrozenNorth" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> btw. try not to top post it is kinda frowned upon in most groups.

On Wed, 24 Sep 2003 12:33:12 -0700, Martin Frankel
<[email protected]> wrote:

>
>I've been an active Usenet reader and poster since the 1980s and top
>posting absolutely has its place. I do it from time to time. Please calm
>down.
>
>Martin

I've been involved with Usenet since 1990 and all the groups I've hung
out in have taught proper usenet etiquette through the years to anyone
who would listen. The only place top posting is ok is with email.

I'm sure I just frequented a better class of groups though.


Jeff
____________________________________________
You won't notice the splinters in the ladder of success,
unless you are sliding down.

I'm not entirely sure what the "missing ingredient" in it is, but it
seems to work pretty well. Have had it on a cabin in northern NM now
for 3 years and still looks great.
Cheers,
cc


On Thu, 18 Sep 2003 12:31:56 -0400, Jamie Jackson
<[email protected]> wrote:

>I picked up some Ultra Premium Wester Red Cedar colored Penofin for a
>douglas fir hammock stand I built. I wanted to read up (in the Flexner
>book) on whatever Penofin is, before I apply it. Is it an oil/varnish
>mix?
>
>Thanks,
>Jamie

People who worry about top and bottom posting should go out and find
themselves a woman. Even if they are a woman.


On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 16:45:34 GMT, jbacke <[email protected]> wrote:

>On Sat, 20 Sep 2003 06:10:31 GMT, "CW" <[email protected]>
>wrote:
>
>> Top posting is normal in every group I frequent. It is the new standard.
>
>It absolutely is not a new standard. DAGS to see why top posting is
>and always will be frowned upon in newsgroups. It's only done by
>ignorant/lazy people and the only reason we see more and more of it is
>simply because there are more newbies discovering usenet every day.
>
>Assuming you're not a newbie, you should know better and you should
>not encourage others to forgo basic rules of netiquette.
>
>
>Jeff
>____________________________________________
>You won't notice the splinters in the ladder of success,
>unless you are sliding down.

(tom-who just committed his first top post)


Regards, Tom
Thomas J. Watson-Cabinetmaker
Gulph Mills, Pennsylvania
http://users.snip.net/~tjwatson

On 22-Sep-2003, "CW" <[email protected]> wrote:

> Most of us can catch it the first time. We don't need to red it twice.
> Bottom posters must have Alzheimer's.

Not everyone obsessively follows every thread. Being able to follow
a thread at any point is a useful feature. Since it's been done like
this for years before top-posting became common, I don't see why it
can't continue.

Mike

"Jamie Jackson" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> I picked up some Ultra Premium Wester Red Cedar colored Penofin for a
> douglas fir hammock stand I built. I wanted to read up (in the Flexner
> book) on whatever Penofin is, before I apply it. Is it an oil/varnish
> mix?
>
> Thanks,
> Jamie

I know it's much more fun to argue the point, and if the OP took my advice
on calling the company, I didn't see it here. In any case, I just called
the company. While they didn't provide a list of ingredients, they did
confirm that the product does not contain varnish.

todd