Vanguard News Network
VNN Media
VNN Digital Library
VNN Reader Mail
VNN Broadcasts

Old September 27th, 2008 #21
Kind Lampshade Maker
The paranormal silent type
 
Kind Lampshade Maker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where you least expect
Posts: 8,265
Default Here, a simple, lightweight design for the rear half

The dimension of the spring is exagerated and intended to be demonstrative. That the spring serves both the functions of a spring and control arm, I can't imagine a lighter form of construction. Sprung weight is also kept to a minimum, increasing handling quality and comfort. The shock absorber is anchored to already existing structures. The advantage being that additional structures are not necessary. The existing structures only need to be minorly strengthened, at concept

__________________

Last edited by Kind Lampshade Maker; September 27th, 2008 at 04:30 AM.
 
Old October 1st, 2008 #22
Kind Lampshade Maker
The paranormal silent type
 
Kind Lampshade Maker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where you least expect
Posts: 8,265
Default

Here, I will attempt to spoke a 40 holed (unusual, non-standard) Raleigh rim with a standard 38 holed French hub. I ended up drilling 1 additional hole, on each side of the hub (A):

__________________
 
Old October 4th, 2008 #23
N.B. Forrest
Senior Member
 
N.B. Forrest's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Virginia, CSA
Posts: 11,145
Default

I've looked into the possibility of raising tropical Discus fish: very large profits possible, but 50% of the water must be changed every day, it must be kept at the right temperature, disease management, special food, etc. I've also considered raising red wiggler worms for fishing and agriculture: again, good money possible, but headaches including maintaining proper temperature & PH balance of the beds.
 
Old October 4th, 2008 #24
Bassanio
Hath not a Goy eyes?
 
Bassanio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Venice
Posts: 4,287
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
He who owns English dogs should himself master the English language.
Repeat after me:
One of my AKC champion sired English bulldogs and I.
I believe that's a case of hypercorrection.

"One of my AKC champion sired English bulldogs and me."

is grammatically correct.


Why?

Well, this isn't even a sentence to begin with, and that's why it might confuse.


The full sentence would read:

"This is one of my AKC champion sired English bulldogs and me."

If you take "AKC chamion sired English bulldogs" out, then you're left with:

"This is me."

which is correct.


And not:

"This is I."

which is wrong.

I is a subjective pronoun, but the sentence already has a subject -- this. Therefore the objective me is needed.


Correct me if I'm wrong.
__________________
The Goy cries out in ecstasy as the Jew strikes him.
 
Old October 6th, 2008 #25
Kind Lampshade Maker
The paranormal silent type
 
Kind Lampshade Maker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where you least expect
Posts: 8,265
Default

Here, I was in the process of researching spoke length. Increasing the number of spokes by 4 radically changes length needs. So, as the estimated length exceeded my estimates, I added M5 nuts as spacers between the spoke heads and the rim, until the wheel ran round. I've gotten different measurements which fluctuated between 5 millimeters, due to the irregularity of adding 4 holes. I previously posted that 2 holes were neccessary. But, I forgot that the hub was a 36 holer. Not a 38er. Therefore, I ended up drilling 2 more holes, on the opposite side of the hub. The total number of spokes has to be divisible by 4. Or else, you'll have a Hell of a time getting it right.
Digital cameras with a flash option are instant. But, they suck. Often, if you think that you have enough light, you could cover the flash window and still get a decent pic. I forgot to do that and ended up including the halogen lamp into the photo. Or else, it wouldn't have turned out. This is what happens when you're in a hurry

__________________

Last edited by Kind Lampshade Maker; October 6th, 2008 at 03:31 PM.
 
Old October 6th, 2008 #26
Mike in Denver
Enkidu
 
Mike in Denver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Under the Panopticon.
Posts: 4,297
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassanio View Post
I believe that's a case of hypercorrection.

"One of my AKC champion sired English bulldogs and me."

is grammatically correct.


Why?

Well, this isn't even a sentence to begin with, and that's why it might confuse.


The full sentence would read:

"This is one of my AKC champion sired English bulldogs and me."

If you take "AKC chamion sired English bulldogs" out, then you're left with:

"This is me."

which is correct.


And not:

"This is I."

which is wrong.

I is a subjective pronoun, but the sentence already has a subject -- this. Therefore the objective me is needed.


Correct me if I'm wrong.
Well friend, since you asked. On the small technical point of "This is me/I", the word, "is" is a linking verb, sometimes called a copulative verb. Linking verbs never take objects or adverbs, but take nominatives and adjectives, these usually called predicate nominatives and predicate adjectives. In short, "This is I" is correct, never, "This is me". That the word, "me" is in a compound nominative doesn't change this. It should still be, "I".

However, it is a pedagogical nit-pick, and no ordinary person would commonly say, "It is I", correct or not. It is one of a few cases where the grammatically correct form is not the preferred form. Of course, that is only my opinion. There are those who would argue for the formal usage.

On the whole sentence above, it is so clumsy, it should be completely re-written. I would write it thus: "In this picture I am holding one of my AKC champion sired English bulldogs".

I just got back from lunch and I've been drinking.

Mike
__________________
Hunter S. Thompson, "Big dark, coming soon"

Last edited by Mike in Denver; October 6th, 2008 at 03:58 PM.
 
Old October 6th, 2008 #27
Bassanio
Hath not a Goy eyes?
 
Bassanio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Venice
Posts: 4,287
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Well friend, since you asked. On the small technical point of "This is me/I", the word, "is" is a linking verb, sometimes called a copulative verb. Linking verbs never take objects or adverbs, but take nominatives and adjectives, these usually called predicate nominatives and predicate adjectives. In short, "This is I" is correct, never, "This is me". That the word, "me" is in a compound nominative doesn't change this. It should still be, "I".
Much obliged, Mike. Your post prompted me to do an in-depth study of the verb "to be" and I'm beginning to grasp its various intricacies.

There's a lot of conflicting material out there regarding the proper use of "me" and "I". But after some searching and reading, I did finally find a text that confirms what you've written:


Quote:
The rule for what he and others consider technically right is
*not* (as is commonly misstated) that the nominative should *always*
be used after "to be". Rather, it is that "to be" should link two
noun phrases of the same case, whether this be nominative or
accusative:

I believe that he is I. Who do you believe that he is?
I believe him to be me. Whom do you believe him to be?

According to the traditional grammar being used here, "to be" is not
a transitive verb, but a *copulative* verb. When you say that A is
B, you don't imply that A, by being B, is doing something to B.
(After all, B is also doing it to A.) Other verbs considered
copulative are "to become", "to remain", "to seem", and "to look".

http://alt-usage-english.org/excerpts/fxitsmev.html
However, these newly discovered rules leave me stumped by the sentences: "It's just you and me" and "Looks like it's you and me."

I recall watching an episode of Frasier many years ago where Frasier's father says to him after everybody leaves the apartment: "Well, looks like it's just you and I."

Frasier then quickly corrects him: "You and me, Dad."


And what about standalone photo captions, then, such as "Bill and I" or "My dog and I" -- these are gramatically correct?
__________________
The Goy cries out in ecstasy as the Jew strikes him.
 
Old October 6th, 2008 #28
cillian
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,377
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassanio View Post
However, these newly discovered rules leave me stumped by the sentences: "It's just you and me" and "Looks like it's you and me."

I recall watching an episode of Frasier many years ago where Frasier's father says to him after everybody leaves the apartment: "Well, looks like it's just you and I."

Frasier then quickly corrects him: "You and me, Dad."


And what about standalone photo captions, then, such as "Bill and I" or "My dog and I" -- these are gramatically correct?
Quote:
Consider the following sentence: You and I should have lunch.

Is the correct form of this sentence "You and I ..." or "You and me ..."? This is a common source of confusion in English.

Fortunately, there's an easy way to decide whether to use "I" or "me" in such sentences. All you have to do is discard the word "you" then try the sentence with "I" and "me" one at a time. For example:

* I should have lunch.
* Me should have lunch.

Clearly the preferred form in this case is "I"; thus, the original sentence was correct as written. Here's another example: He'll blame you and I.

Discard the word "you" then try the sentence with "I" and "me" one at a time: so:

* He'll blame I.
* He'll blame me.

You can see that the second of these is correct. This means that the original sentence should have been: He'll blame you and me.

See how easy that was!

On a related note, when using phrases such as "you and me", "you and I" or "them and us", it is courteous to place the reference to yourself last. For example, we prefer:

* He'll ask you and me later.

over:

* He'll ask me and you later.
http://www.betterwritingskills.com/tip-w026.html
 
Old October 6th, 2008 #29
Bassanio
Hath not a Goy eyes?
 
Bassanio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Venice
Posts: 4,287
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Cilian,

I've no problem understanding what you pasted.

My confusion stems from the verb to be and its "copulative" properties.


Ah!

It just dawned on me why a photo caption that reads "Bill and I" is incorrect.

Because in the full sentence: "This is a photo of Bill and I."

is is linking This and photo, and not This and Bill and I.

Therefore the rule that a nominative should always be used after "to be" doesn't apply.


But I'm still stumped by this:

Quote:
"It's just you and me" and "Looks like it's you and me."

I recall watching an episode of Frasier many years ago where Frasier's father says to him after everybody leaves the apartment: "Well, looks like it's just you and I."

Frasier then quickly corrects him: "You and me, Dad."
__________________
The Goy cries out in ecstasy as the Jew strikes him.
 
Old October 6th, 2008 #30
Mike in Denver
Enkidu
 
Mike in Denver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Under the Panopticon.
Posts: 4,297
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassanio View Post

...
And what about standalone photo captions, then, such as "Bill and I" or "My dog and I" -- these are gramatically correct?
In disconnected phrases, such as these, one would have to infer the missing parts of the sentence to know which is correct, "I" or "me".

"After Bill and I posed for this picture, we decapitated a negro".

"Our friend, John, decapitated a negro and brought the head to Bill and me".

The truth is, I doubt I would ever say, "It's I" or "It is I". Correct or not, I'd say, "Hi, it's me". In writing, I'd find a way to avoid it.

Mike
__________________
Hunter S. Thompson, "Big dark, coming soon"

Last edited by Mike in Denver; October 6th, 2008 at 05:36 PM.
 
Old October 6th, 2008 #31
cillian
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Oct 2007
Posts: 6,377
Default

Quote:
"It's just you and me" and "Looks like it's you and me."

I recall watching an episode of Frasier many years ago where Frasier's father says to him after everybody leaves the apartment: "Well, looks like it's just you and I."

Frasier then quickly corrects him: "You and me, Dad."
Well using the guideline, of removing you.

It's just I.
It's just me. <--This one sounds correct, so it must be 'It's just you and me'.

I subject.
Me object.

It's (subject) just you (object) and me (object).

Just like
He threw the ball to me (object), but I (subject) dropped it.
 
Old October 6th, 2008 #32
Bassanio
Hath not a Goy eyes?
 
Bassanio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Venice
Posts: 4,287
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Well using the guideline, of removing you.

It's just I.
It's just me. <--This one sounds correct, so it must be 'It's just you and me'.

I subject.
Me object.

It's (subject) just you (object) and me (object).

Just like
He threw the ball to me (object), but I (subject) dropped it.
Right. That was my understanding when I corrected KLS, but then Mike came along and introduced to me the "copulative" properties of the verb to be.

And everything I knew went out the window. Just take a look at his post to see what I'm talking about.


Quote:
In disconnected phrases, such as these, one would have to infer the missing parts of the sentence to know which is correct, "I" or "me".

"After Bill and I posed for this picture, we decapitated a negro".

"Our friend, John, decapitated a negro and brought the head to Bill and me".
That's assuming the photos are telling a story.

Normally, however, "Bill and I" simply means "This is a photo of a Bill and I", and that would be incorrect. However, "This is Bill and I" would be technically correct because nominatives must follow "to be".

So that means both "Bill and I" and "Bill and me" would be correct.

Therefore I didn't have to go and correct KLS, but KLS didn't necessarily have to go and correct Rounder, either.


But you're leaving me hanging, Mike!

It's the Frasier question I'm dying to have answered. Were the Frasier writers (and Frasier himself) actually hypercorrecting themselves when they were mocking the hypercorrection of Frasier's father?

Or am I failing to comprehend something about the "copulative" properties of "to be"?
__________________
The Goy cries out in ecstasy as the Jew strikes him.
 
Old October 6th, 2008 #33
Mike in Denver
Enkidu
 
Mike in Denver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2003
Location: Under the Panopticon.
Posts: 4,297
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bassanio View Post
Right. That was my understanding when I corrected KLS, but then Mike came along and introduced to me the "copulative" properties of the verb to be.

And everything I knew went out the window. Just take a look at his post to see what I'm talking about.




That's assuming the photos are telling a story.

Normally, however, "Bill and I" simply means "This is a photo of a Bill and I", and that would be incorrect. However, "This is Bill and I" would be technically correct because nominatives must follow "to be".

So that means both "Bill and I" and "Bill and me" would be correct.

Therefore I didn't have to go and correct KLS, but KLS didn't necessarily have to go and correct Rounder, either.


But you're leaving me hanging, Mike!

It's the Frasier question I'm dying to have answered. Were the Frasier writers (and Frasier himself) actually hypercorrecting themselves when they were mocking the hypercorrection of Frasier's father?

Or am I failing to comprehend something about the "copulative" properties of "to be"?
Well, I may be wrong, but by everything I've ever learned about grammar and the verb, "to be" Frasier's father was correct and Frasier was incorrect. The word, "just" here is an adverb and would not change the case of the pronoun "I/me". "It is you and I" is correct. "It is just you and I" is correct. If someone can convince me that "just" is a preposition, then "It is just you and me" is correct.

I just did a little mini-research and I can't quite be persuaded that "just," used this way, is a preposition, though I'm not quite sure why.

Mike
__________________
Hunter S. Thompson, "Big dark, coming soon"
 
Old October 6th, 2008 #34
Bassanio
Hath not a Goy eyes?
 
Bassanio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Venice
Posts: 4,287
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Well, I may be wrong, but by everything I've ever learned about grammar and the verb, "to be" Frasier's father was correct and Frasier was incorrect. The word, "just" here is an adverb and would not change the case of the pronoun "I/me". "It is you and I" is correct. "It is just you and I" is correct. If someone can convince me that "just" is a preposition, then "It is just you and me" is correct.

I just did a little mini-research and I can't quite be persuaded that "just," used this way, is a preposition, though I'm not quite sure why.

Mike
Thanks, Mike.

I've yet to find a dictionary that lists "just" as a preposition. They all have entries only for adjective and adverb.

Looks like Frasier doesn't know about the "copulative" properties of "to be".


With that said, sorry for hijacking your thread, KLS! I'll bugger off now.
__________________
The Goy cries out in ecstasy as the Jew strikes him.
 
Old October 7th, 2008 #35
Kind Lampshade Maker
The paranormal silent type
 
Kind Lampshade Maker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where you least expect
Posts: 8,265
Default

Who's KLS? Kind Lamp Shade? I always thought Lampshade was one word. Maybe, I'll have to consult a dictionary
__________________
 
Old October 7th, 2008 #36
Bassanio
Hath not a Goy eyes?
 
Bassanio's Avatar
 
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Venice
Posts: 4,287
Blog Entries: 6
Default

Quote:
Who's KLS? Kind Lamp Shade? I always thought Lampshade was one word.
KLM.

By the way, are you really Bill?
__________________
The Goy cries out in ecstasy as the Jew strikes him.
 
Old October 7th, 2008 #37
Kind Lampshade Maker
The paranormal silent type
 
Kind Lampshade Maker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where you least expect
Posts: 8,265
Default

I don't think so. I'll have to check.

Here, is a better photo taken using sunlight:



Measuring a spoke:



The assembled hub, before individually replacing each spoke with one of correct length:

__________________

Last edited by Kind Lampshade Maker; October 7th, 2008 at 05:47 AM.
 
Old October 9th, 2008 #38
Kind Lampshade Maker
The paranormal silent type
 
Kind Lampshade Maker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where you least expect
Posts: 8,265
Default

Here is a homemade fixture used to align a wheel. Holes were drilled and tapped to accept M5 screws for adjusting spokes on 559 centimeter (typical mountainbike size) and 622 centimeter wheels. This one's a 590 centimeter. So, I have to do it by eye. Since, it's a front wheel, I can get away with a little tolerance. For the backwheels, I have a separate fixture which includes a caliper feature for 590 cm wheels.
I used a pulley from a washmashine for supporting the fork.
The arrows point to the adjusting caliper screws:

__________________

Last edited by Kind Lampshade Maker; October 9th, 2008 at 10:29 AM.
 
Old October 21st, 2008 #39
Kind Lampshade Maker
The paranormal silent type
 
Kind Lampshade Maker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where you least expect
Posts: 8,265
Default Here are a couple pics of some raw material I found:

The colors obviously show up poorly. The vehicle is red and black. But, not the red tone required to get the tri-color treatment. I am nearly finished with it, and should have some photos soon

__________________
 
Old November 4th, 2008 #40
Kind Lampshade Maker
The paranormal silent type
 
Kind Lampshade Maker's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Where you least expect
Posts: 8,265
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Kind Lampshade Maker View Post
Here, I will attempt to spoke a 40 holed (unusual, non-standard) Raleigh rim with a standard 38 holed French hub. I ended up drilling 2 additional holes, on each side of the hub (A):

Here is the finished front wheel. Note that because of the even number of spokes times 10, the reflectors can be mounted exactly opposite of each other. All other wheels are spoked with 36 spokes. Therefore, mounting relectors exactly opposite is impossible. I mount 3 reflectors, on these wheels, being that the number of spokes is evenly divisible by 3:

__________________
 
Reply

Share


Thread
Display Modes


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 02:49 PM.
Page generated in 0.13819 seconds.