# Time for the ET intelligence test......



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

You're -- we're -- looking at a total corruption of the NEC -- turning it into a design manifesto.

In many ways, the NEC revision committees have run out of tweaks.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

I dunno. I guess I fail the test.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

99cents said:


> I dunno. I guess I fail the test.



I'll count that for you as the first failure. Next?


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

telsa said:


> You're -- we're -- looking at a total corruption of the NEC -- turning it into a design manifesto.
> 
> In many ways, the NEC revision committees have run out of tweaks.



Wrong answer , failure number 2.


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

At least I was first  .


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

I bet it would help if I tell you the question is rhetorical.


----------



## telsa (May 22, 2015)

macmikeman said:


> Wrong answer , failure number 2.


You just dropped a dozen notches in my esteem.

Down right arrogant and... slow. 

Do I have to use Ebonics ?


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

Wow, telsa's opinion of you dropped, mac. I don't know what to say...


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

macmikeman said:


> Why in the F** is there a code requirement to put tamper resistant GFI receptacle outlets into dwellings?


Hey Mac.,,

let trade hawaii coconunts with Philippines coconuts to see which one taste better .,,,, 

Anyway Mac .,,

Just shake at one of our European system why we do have shutters on the power points ( receptales ) alot of them do have some type of shutters included nows days. 

and I think somewhere along the line I feel there were some dorky lawyers try to cover up some items. ( that is my option on this matter but I have a hunch but nothing confirmed yet )

We dont have any tamper resistants device on most common receptales over here in Philippines but we will end up follow the americian way pretty soon due some of the TR items start slowly pop up over here.


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

Ohh yuh .,, I was not done with my coconut/coffee brew.,,


anyway now something click in my mind .,, there is a reason why the TR was in the first place because some dimwitted parents dont teach the children about dangers on recepetales .,, that something I am aware of that.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

frenchelectrican said:


> Ohh yuh .,, I was not done with my coconut/coffee brew.,,
> 
> 
> anyway now something click in my mind .,, there is a reason why the TR was in the first place because some dimwitted parents dont teach the children about dangers on recepetales .,, that something I am aware of that.



I hate to do this to you French Man but ..... failure #3........


My son Ryan who is a 2nd yr as of March got this question right instantly, and then he laughed out loud right after that cause it is so ridiculous.


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

macmikeman said:


> I hate to do this to you French Man but ..... failure #3........
> 
> 
> My son Ryan who is a 2nd yr as of March got this question right instantly, and then he laughed out loud right after that cause it is so ridiculous.


Maybe so but did ya ever see the TR guts ?? I took it apart couple time but I allready knew the answer way before that. 

Do you want me spill the beans yet ???


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

frenchelectrican said:


> Maybe so but did ya ever see the TR guts ?? I took it apart couple time but I allready knew the answer way before that.
> 
> Do you want me spill the beans yet ???


Do your best!


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

I bet BBQ would have got this already. Maybe Peter D too........


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

It's all part of the _new world order_ ......:shifty:~CS~:shifty:


----------



## joebanana (Dec 21, 2010)

Why does the code require GFI protection for a dishwasher, but not a water heater?


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Why does 680.21(C) not require GFCI protection for 3ph pool motors? 

~CS~


----------



## socket2ya (Oct 27, 2016)

I guess the GFCI should trip when a "grounded" child sticks a butter knife into the hot slot of the receptacle. The only problem is that you're depending on the electronics in the GFCI to do its job and things fail over time. We've all seen the old GFCI plug that won't trip when you hit the test button


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

I'd say just because TR GFCIs being required is just one more way of making money through a code requirement....




But that's just me!


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

macmikeman said:


> Why in the F** is there a code requirement to put tamper resistant GFI receptacle outlets into dwellings?


Because a child could put 2 knives in the GFCI (hot and neut) , and would have to wait for the ocpd to trip


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Because George Soros coerced the CMP into mandating an outlet nobody can use, so they'd go invest in his alt energy pyramid hats......~CS~


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

socket2ya said:


> I guess the GFCI should trip when a "grounded" child sticks a butter knife into the hot slot of the receptacle. The only problem is that you're depending on the electronics in the GFCI to do its job and things fail over time. We've all seen the old GFCI plug that won't trip when you hit the test button



BADA BOOM! PROBLEM SOLVED . 1st right answer! Sorry troops, I fell asleep.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

emtnut said:


> Because a child could put 2 knives in the GFCI (hot and neut) , and would have to wait for the ocpd to trip



The same child could put two knives into tamper resistant gfi outlet also, and it won't trip till the breaker does in that case......


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

This thread is dumb.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Socketoya is able to think and the regular's are unable . It's just that simple. 

So, kids the next time you come across an electrical inspector who starts getting all official about tamper resistant gfi outlets, just punch him in the mouth as hard as you can. He needs to be reset. ss


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

macmikeman said:


> Socketoya is able to think and the regular's are unable . It's just that simple.
> 
> So, kids the next time you come across an electrical inspector who starts getting all official about tamper resistant gfi outlets, just punch him in the mouth as hard as you can. He needs to be reset. ss


That circuit should be AFCI'd as well ... In the interests of our childrens safety !


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

It's not whether the electronics in the GFCI do their job or not as much as their job isn't limiting the intensity of the shock.

A GFCI will trip when there is more than 5mA straying away to ground, but that doesn't mean that it is limiting the flow to 5mA. 100mA could have flowed for many cycles thru a kid, enough to send his heart into fibrillation and possibly kill him. 

I don't see any correlation between GFCI and tamper-resistant receptacles and don't expect GFCI's to be exceptions to tamper-resistant requirements.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

HackWork said:


> It's not whether the electronics in the GFCI do their job or not as much as their job isn't limiting the intensity of the shock.
> 
> A GFCI will trip when there is more than 5mA straying away to ground, but that doesn't mean that it is limiting the flow to 5mA. 100mA could have flowed for many cycles thru a kid, enough to send his heart into fibrillation and possibly kill him.
> 
> I don't see any correlation between GFCI and tamper-resistant receptacles and don't expect GFCI's to be exceptions to tamper-resistant requirements.



The logic of this kind of negates the whole gfi protection theory in the first place now don't it. Any properly working gfi shuts off fast enough little junior hax wouldn't even know anything happened to him at all. Tamper resistant gfi outlets is stupid and is a fine example of the lack of thinking being applied to requirements by the tards in charge.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> The logic of this kind of negates the whole gfi protection theory in the first place now don't it.


 Nope. Not everything is perfect. Even if we can make it perfect, would the cost be worth it? 



> Any properly working gfi shuts off fast enough little junior hax wouldn't even know anything happened to him at all.


 Can you substantiate that? I don't believe that you can. I am interested in learning something new though.



> Tamper resistant gfi outlets is stupid and is a fine example of the lack of thinking being applied to requirements by the tards in charge.


I see no reason not to require a receptacle to be tamper-resistant just because it is also required to be GFCI protected.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

HackWork said:


> Nope. Not everything is perfect. Even if we can make it perfect, would the cost be worth it?
> 
> Can you substantiate that? I don't believe that you can. I am interested in learning something new though.



https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/construction/electrical_incidents/gfci.html


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> https://www.osha.gov/SLTC/etools/construction/electrical_incidents/gfci.html


I am not going to read all of that.

Please quote the part that says a kid won't feel a shock that will trip a GFCI. Everything else I have ever read on the subject says the opposite.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

HackWork said:


> I am not going to read all of that.
> 
> Please quote the part that says a kid won't feel a shock that will trip a GFCI. Everything else I have ever read on the subject says the opposite.


I tried to make the good parts of it bold and colored but the forum software wasn't tolerating my foolishness. It's not really all that long of a document, and you should read it to see the 1/40 of a second of response time and the part where it says it will shut down before any type of harm will happen.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> I tried to make the good parts of it bold and colored but the forum software wasn't tolerating my foolishness. It's not really all that long of a document, and you should read it to see the 1/40 of a second of response time and the part where it says it will shut down before any type of harm will happen.


Then that document doesn't apply to this discussion. The question at hand is this:



> Any properly working gfi shuts off fast enough little junior hax wouldn't even know anything happened to him at all.


 Can you substantiate this? As I mentioned, it goes against everything I have ever learned/heard/or saw with my own eyes.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Are you trying to Byte me?


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> Are you trying to Byte me?


We both know that you could feel a pretty bad shock from a GFCI before it trips. I don't know why you are lying about it. This is almost as bad as you lying about winning the boogie board competition. Yeah, I saw it. This is your comeuppance


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

HackWork said:


> I am not going to read all of that.
> 
> Please quote the part that says a kid won't feel a shock that will trip a GFCI. Everything else I have ever read on the subject says the opposite.


I am think seriously of testing this theory on my dog right now.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

sbrn33 said:


> I am think seriously of testing this theory on my dog right now.


It would be nice to see the results on you tube. Don't worry about snowflakes, this is in the interest of science and learning.


----------



## Barjack (Mar 28, 2010)

Hey, Mac, welcome to the New World Order. It just gets better and better!


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

I just read this thread, and I feel a little bit dumber from having done so.

I will add my anecdotal experience with GFCI shocks. I once plugged in a saw with a two-prong replacement cord cap with a metal shroud. As I plugged it in, I had one hand on a metal door frame and I think I felt a tingle but the GFI popped instantly. I wasn't sure I did feel anything but I wasn't going to try to repeat it.

Another time, I reached for a light switch to turn on some floods on a dock. I was barefooted and the switch had a metal flip cover. I know I felt the tingle that time, but it was like a 9 volt battery on the tongue tingle, and the GFI Breaker in the panel tripped. So, in my limited shock experience, GFCIs have caught the leakage so quickly that there was almost no sensation.


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

Right or not the Insurance industry with the CPSC behind them drive these requirements into the NEC. AFCI's, GFCI's and tamper resistant receptacles.

And why would manufacturers complain?

"An analysis of U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) data over a 10 year period from 1991 to 2001 revealed that over 24,000 children under the age of 10 years old were treated in emergency rooms as the result of receptacle-related incidents. That’s an average of almost 7 children a day! These injuries ranged from minor electrical shocks and burns to more serious conditions. The injuries are caused mostly due to children sticking everyday household items into electrical outlets (receptacles).
These items include paperclips, keys, hairpins, screws/nails, or even their fingers. Children are less resistant to electrical shock than adults as they have thinner skin and, among younger children, saliva is often present which promotes conductivity."


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

I was a hair pin toddler.....~CS~


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

RePhase277 said:


> I just read this thread, and I feel a little bit dumber from having done so.
> 
> I will add my anecdotal experience with GFCI shocks. I once plugged in a saw with a two-prong replacement cord cap with a metal shroud. As I plugged it in, I had one hand on a metal door frame and I think I felt a tingle but the GFI popped instantly. I wasn't sure I did feel anything but I wasn't going to try to repeat it.
> 
> Another time, I reached for a light switch to turn on some floods on a dock. I was barefooted and the switch had a metal flip cover. I know I felt the tingle that time, but it was like a 9 volt battery on the tongue tingle, and the GFI Breaker in the panel tripped. So, in my limited shock experience, GFCIs have caught the leakage so quickly that there was almost no sensation.


Oh sh1t, look at that. Solid evidence if I've ever seen it. Let's amend the code to not require tamper-resistant receptacles here because Daisy didn't feel much of a shock


----------



## MechanicalDVR (Dec 29, 2007)

macmikeman said:


> It would be nice to see the results on you tube. *Don't worry about snowflakes*, this is in the interest of science and learning.


Yeah I agree, use a snowflake instead of an innocent dog.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

HackWork said:


> Oh sh1t, look at that. Solid evidence if I've ever seen it. Let's amend the code to not require tamper-resistant receptacles here because Daisy didn't feel much of a shock


Bitch, I said it was anecdotal


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

RePhase277 said:


> Bitch, I said it was anecdotal


You called me dumb. Some things you just can't come back from


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

macmikeman said:


> The same child could put two knives into tamper resistant gfi outlet also, and it won't trip till the breaker does in that case......


It would be much harder to do that with a TR ... I thought this thread was about TR on gfci's ... are you saying that TR's on any receptacle don't help ?


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

HackWork said:


> You called me dumb. Some things you just can't come back from


I've called you worse


----------



## pudge565 (Dec 8, 2007)

macmikeman said:


> Socketoya is able to think and the regular's are unable . It's just that simple.
> 
> So, kids the next time you come across an electrical inspector who starts getting all official about tamper resistant gfi outlets, just punch him in the mouth as hard as you can. He needs to be reset. ss


You'll do as I say and you'll like it. Oh wait that's right, you, Hackwork, SBRN33, Dennis, Etc are behind the times. I am now an electrical inspector!


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

HackWork said:


> Oh sh1t, look at that. Solid evidence if I've ever seen it. Let's amend the code to not require tamper-resistant receptacles here because Daisy didn't feel much of a shock


Hey tardboy, the subject is tamper resistant *gfi *receptacle outlets..


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

FaultCurrent said:


> Right or not the Insurance industry with the CPSC behind them drive these requirements into the NEC. AFCI's, GFCI's and tamper resistant receptacles.
> 
> And why would manufacturers complain?
> 
> ...



GFI receptacle outlets!!!! Get with the subject.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

emtnut said:


> It would be much harder to do that with a TR ... I thought this thread was about TR on gfci's ... are you saying that TR's on any receptacle don't help ?


I am not. Tr's on non gfi protected outlets make perfect sense in household usage. On gfi's though, it's like saying out loud that we don't trust this here gfi thingamajig any so we're tossing in an extra layer of never going to happen into the mix. And it is not hard at all to stick a thing into both sides of an outlet, no harder than doing it to a regular outlet. I don't think infants and toddlers do that much at all though. We need to put all children in helmets that are protective against meteor strikes. Meanwhile these same kids in this thread are daily subjected to the mom driving them around while she is checking her twitter and Facebook at the same time as she is operating the vehicle.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> Hey tardboy, the subject is tamper resistant *gfi *receptacle outlets..


My post that you quote was speaking about the GFCI receptacles that RePhase brought up.

I expect my apology for this outburst to be a good one.

I also expect to see you apologize for lying about little Hax not feeling a shock from a GFCI receptacle.

Thanks.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> I am not. Tr's on non gfi protected outlets make perfect sense in household usage. *On gfi's though, it's like saying out loud that we don't trust this here gfi thingamajig any so we're tossing in an extra layer of never going to happen into the mix.* And it is not hard at all to stick a thing into both sides of an outlet, no harder than doing it to a regular outlet. I don't think infants and toddlers do that much at all though. We need to put all children in helmets that are protective against meteor strikes. Meanwhile these same kids in this thread are daily subjected to the mom driving them around while she is checking her twitter and Facebook at the same time as she is operating the vehicle.


That's not true. As I mentioned earlier, you will receive the same voltage/amperage shock thru a GFCI as any other receptacle. A GFCI does not limit the intensity of the shock, only the duration.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

1/40th of a second interrupting response time. Of course this spec naturally excludes Leviton brand, they probably take a half hour or more.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> 1/40th of a second interrupting response time. Of course this spec naturally excludes Leviton brand, they probably take a half hour or more.


I fail to see 2 apologies as well as anything that could be considered substantiation.


----------



## frenchelectrican (Mar 15, 2007)

macmikeman said:


> 1/40th of a second interrupting response time. Of course this spec naturally excludes Leviton brand, they probably take a half hour or more.


1/40 th of seconds ?? at what setting ( in mA setting) for that speed ??


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

frenchelectrican said:


> 1/40 th of seconds ?? at what setting ( in mA setting) for that speed ??


He's talking out his behind. 

The required specs are so crappy that they will allow a trip in 7 seconds or less at 5mA.

T = (20 / I)^1.43


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

HackWork said:


> I fail to see 2 apologies as well as anything that could be considered substantiation.


I gave you substantiation but you didn't want to read it. Micro time levels you are correct full blast , but after 1/40th of a second- nothing. Little Hax hasn't developed as nicely as his daddy and so he cannot detect 1/40th of a second of something different than 1/40th of a second earlier. And he doesn't get burnt like the other guy who can't read said.


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Properly insulated from ground, one could hold the load side of a gfci _(N & H in respective hands_) indefinitely flappin' like a flounder....~CS~


----------



## pudge565 (Dec 8, 2007)

macmikeman said:


> I gave you substantiation but you didn't want to read it. Micro time levels you are correct full blast , but after 1/40th of a second- nothing. Little Hax hasn't developed as nicely as his daddy and so he cannot detect 1/40th of a second of something different than 1/40th of a second earlier. And he doesn't get burnt like the other guy who can't read said.


Hackwork is actually correct on this, the formula he posted is the time it will take for a GFCI to clear the fault. That is directly from the UL listing.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

pudge565 said:


> Hackwork is actually correct on this


"Actually"? You say it as if I have ever been wrong...


BTW, Mikey is trolling, it's the only way to explain his behavior in this thread.


----------



## FaultCurrent (May 13, 2014)

I'd bet that most of the guys here will admit that when they were a kid they stuck something like a nail file, bobby pin, or paper clip in the socket to see what would happen. We all found out. Don't do that again. Part of life's lessons. 

But if kid was killed because they did this and it could have been prevented if there was a barrier like a tamper proof receptacle would the extra expense be worth it? If a kid climbed on the bath vanity top and stuck a bobby pin in the GFCI would it trip before the kid got bit or is the tamper proof GFCI going too far? Hackwork gave the answer.

I guess some argument could made around the fact that some GFCI's have failed to trip so this is double protection, but this seems pretty weak.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

HackWork said:


> "Actually"? You say it as if I have ever been wrong...
> 
> 
> BTW, Mikey is trolling, it's the only way to explain his behavior in this thread.


Of course I am trolling, but so are you for salting the soup.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

chicken steve said:


> Properly insulated from ground, one could hold the load side of a gfci _(N & H in respective hands_) indefinitely flappin' like a flounder....~CS~



We all know that you ******, that was never questioned in this thread. By it's very design, a tr receptacle prevents a child from sticking in a conductive object into only one side of a tr outlet. If the little bastard uses two hands and sticks two objects in at the same time he gets shocked by either of the two types of receptacles , both tr and non tr. Shut the hell up if you cannot follow a thread.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

pudge565 said:


> Hackwork is actually correct on this, the formula he posted is the time it will take for a GFCI to clear the fault. That is directly from the UL listing.


I posted the OSHA documentation on the subject. UL is a private firm, OSHA is a government agency so they override your foolish and non enforceable UL silly math formula's.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> I posted the OSHA documentation on the subject. UL is a private firm, OSHA is a government agency so they override your foolish and non enforceable UL silly math formula's.


UL makes the standards that are required to be followed for the equipment we install.

OSHA is completely meaningless when it comes to any of this. I am not even going to go into detail because now you are just being a jerk. A big, poopie-headed jerk.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> We all know that you ******, that was never questioned in this thread. By it's very design, a tr receptacle prevents a child from sticking in a conductive object into only one side of a tr outlet. If the little bastard uses two hands and sticks two objects in at the same time he gets shocked by either of the two types of receptacles , both tr and non tr. Shut the hell up if you cannot follow a thread.


This is completely unnecessary. Steve was finally attempting to make a post that wasn't bashing Trump or Christians, and you attack him for it. It may have been a stupid post that had nothing to do with the topic, but at least it was about electric and not his whining about losing the election. 

I think you owe Steve an apology as well as the 4 that you owe me.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

HackWork said:


> This is completely unnecessary. Steve was finally attempting to make a post that wasn't bashing Trump or Christians, and you attack him for it. It may have been a stupid post that had nothing to do with the topic, but at least it was about electric and not his whining about losing the election.
> 
> I think you owe Steve an apology as well as the 4 that you owe me.



This ^ has forced me to post something quite nasty at Tradeworks . I am every bit as potent as Kim Jun Ill when it comes to intercontinental missile launching.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> This ^ has forced me to post something quite nasty at Tradeworks . I am every bit as potent as Kim Jun Ill when it comes to intercontinental missile launching.


It's too bad that I don't have an account at TradeJerks to see it. That place is a cesspool.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Whether you have an account or not, I will repeat that it was quite evil and nasty. Pudge will go confirm this pronto!


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

I think you need to post it here so more than 2 people can enjoy it.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

HackWork said:


> I think you need to post it here so more than 2 people can enjoy it.


Incorrect , there was six Russian bots reading it when I posted.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> Incorrect , there was six Russian bots reading it when I posted.


I once told you that your insolence is unacceptable.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)




----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

HackWork said:


> It's too bad that I don't have an account at TradeJerks to see it. That place is a cesspool.


On my way over


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

sbrn33 said:


> On my way over


PM me what the guy above posted.


----------



## pudge565 (Dec 8, 2007)

macmikeman said:


> Whether you have an account or not, I will repeat that it was quite evil and nasty. Pudge will go confirm this pronto!





sbrn33 said:


> On my way over


I don't even go there anymore, ever since that Hax guy left it's boring.


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

I don't remember my password at the cesspool.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

sbrn33 said:


> I don't remember my password at the cesspool.


:laughing:That hilarious. I tried logging in yesterday after reading this thread and couldn't remember mine either.


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

RePhase277 said:


> :laughing:That hilarious. I tried logging in yesterday after reading this thread and couldn't remember mine either.


I did see that mac finally got poster of the month...


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

sbrn33 said:


> I did see that mac finally got poster of the month...


At this rate, he'll be poster of the year.


----------



## pudge565 (Dec 8, 2007)

sbrn33 said:


> I don't remember my password at the cesspool.





RePhase277 said:


> :laughing:That hilarious. I tried logging in yesterday after reading this thread and couldn't remember mine either.



I can fix that for you if you'd like.


----------



## sbrn33 (Mar 15, 2007)

go ahead and fix it. It will give us a place to go to talk about the Canadians behind their backs.


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

sbrn33 said:


> go ahead and fix it. It will give us a place to go to talk about the Canadians behind their backs.


It's more fun watching them cry when it's said to their faces.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

I try to make a new account but I need an administrator to authorize it.


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

Pickin on canucks eh ! :boxing:

Navy on the way boys .... now yer gittin it !


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

I'm not happy that Pudge isn't fighting for his avatar.


----------



## pudge565 (Dec 8, 2007)

HackWork said:


> I try to make a new account but I need an administrator to authorize it.


I think I deleted the request from my email.



HackWork said:


> I'm not happy that Pudge isn't fighting for his avatar.


I did but it isn't the full GIF anyway


----------



## Majewski (Jan 8, 2016)

I'm late to the party but did I pass the test?


----------



## chicken steve (Mar 22, 2011)

Sorry Maj, we all flunked.....










~CS~


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

HackWork said:


> I'm not happy that Pudge isn't fighting for his avatar.


He confronted me about it. Then we spent an hour reminiscing about the good ol' days. Then I thanked him for finding the GIF in the first place, and he thanked me for keeping the spirit alive. So, GFY you, you... Playa hater.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

RePhase277 said:


> He confronted me about it. Then we spent an hour reminiscing about the good ol' days. Then I thanked him for finding the GIF in the first place, and he thanked me for keeping the spirit alive. So, GFY you, you... Playa hater.


This is not right, I demand to be part of this conversation.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

chicken steve said:


> Sorry Maj, we all flunked.....
> 
> 
> 
> ...


That's not true, some kid got it right away correct. That's the thing, the young kids are not ruined by stupid nec codes turning them into brainless robots yet. But give em time and they will all dumb down.


----------



## drewsserviceco (Aug 1, 2014)

Is it being dumbed down or just finally worn down to a point of not caring anymore??


----------



## lighterup (Jun 14, 2013)

abaahdee-abaahdee-abaahdee-abaahdeeah..that's all folks!


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

I'm standing by my principles. Tr on a gfi is redundant stupidity and only stubborn cows refuse to admit it. I am just going to have to go back to creating wonderful artworks in my spare time to resolve the hurt of having been backstabbed in the liver from hax and sabrina......


----------



## RePhase277 (Feb 5, 2008)

macmikeman said:


> I'm standing by my principles. Tr on a gfi is redundant stupidity and only stubborn cows refuse to admit it. I am just going to have to go back to creating wonderful artworks in my spare time to resolve the hurt of having been backstabbed in the liver from hax and sabrina......


It's better than the prostate stabbing they've been going at.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> I'm standing by my principles. Tr on a gfi is redundant stupidity and only stubborn cows refuse to admit it. I am just going to have to go back to creating wonderful artworks in my spare time to resolve the hurt of having been backstabbed in the liver from hax and sabrina......


You are being irresponsible now.

Someone can read this thread and think you are being serious and learn something wrong.

We all know that a child can receive a pretty bad shock from a GFCI before it trips, and (however unlikely) it may be enough to kill him.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Oh the pain from the knife............ twisting , twisting, .......


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

macmikeman said:


> Oh the pain from the knife............ twisting , twisting, .......


Give me your password to TradeJerks, I want to see what you have been saying about me.


----------



## Skipbayless (May 19, 2014)

macmikeman said:


> I'm standing by my principles. Tr on a gfi is redundant stupidity and only stubborn cows refuse to admit it. I am just going to have to go back to creating wonderful artworks in my spare time to resolve the hurt of having been backstabbed in the liver from hax and sabrina......


Well GFI are capable to fail, as with anything. Home owner Joe Schmo doesn't think like that. Once the protection on the outlet is compromised it's the same as any other outlet. So if you stop using TR on gfci, and an outlet is ever to lose its protection little Daisy will get more than 1/40 of a second from that shock. It's just an additional fail safe just in case the original fail safe fails.. 🤔

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Skipbayless said:


> Well GFI are capable to fail, as with anything. Home owner Joe Schmo doesn't think like that. Once the protection on the outlet is compromised it's the same as any other outlet. So if you stop using TR on gfci, and an outlet is ever to lose its protection little Daisy will get more than 1/40 of a second from that shock. It's just an additional fail safe just in case the original fail safe fails.. 🤔
> 
> Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk


Do tell Skip. Perhaps we as an enlightened modern country should be making it a three level protection plan for little Daisy by assigning a 24 hour a day playtime guide on the taxpayer dole to monitor Daisy's every move just in case the gfi which is capable of fail, and the tamper device which is capable of fail, fail. The 24 hour a day helper would be earning the new 15 dollar an hour minimum wage like a good liberal and we could be enlightened enough to make sure they would be lgbtmuslim types to ensure there was plenty of fairness to go around. That would be grand.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

Don't come in here and mess this up now Hax, I'm busy working on my 4th level backup plan in case the first three levels of protection fail. Give me a while, cause it's early yet. I'm thinking about Daisy's anti current suit she will be assigned to wear all day long, and how that is going to operate. 



Save the children!!!!!!!!!!!


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

You are being silly. This thread is supposed to be an intelligence test, let's try using a little.

Years ago I complained about tamper resistant receptacle requirements. BBQ put me in my place showing me proof of the huge amounts of children who went to the emergency room after being shocked or burned by sticking something into a receptacle.

We also know that a GFCI will still shock someone, since the intensity is not limited by the GFCI, and the ONLY way a GFCI can trip is if current flows.

So it makes sense to require tamper resistant GFCI's.

Out of all the stupid codes that should be fought, this is the silliest one. Your post is bad and you should feel bad.


----------



## macmikeman (Jan 23, 2007)

BBQ has never posted statistics on how many children have been injured by sticking a paper clip into a gfi receptacle outlet, since they can't even reach up there anyhow unless the stupid mother is trying to burn the little bastards by lifting them up to the countertops while she is busy with her crackpipe. 



You are being silly yourself.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

Alright, I am done with this. Let me know when you want to have a real discussion instead of acting like 99cents.


----------



## Skipbayless (May 19, 2014)

Not sure how protecting a child from an unknowing home owner is such a big deal. Take out the tamper because it's suppose to do a job, you are saying. As you know not everyone always does the job they are suppose to, it's unfortunate but true. Basic tamper protection is all to protect the people, no need for 3 or 4 step protection, just enough to protect at the basic level if the "electronic" portion of the GFI fails. 

Sent from my Pixel using Tapatalk


----------



## 99cents (Aug 20, 2012)

HackWork said:


> Alright, I am done with this. Let me know when you want to have a real discussion instead of acting like 99cents.


You don't know what a real conversation is.


----------



## HackWork (Oct 2, 2009)

99cents said:


> You don't know what a real conversation is.


Coming from a guy who is trolling in a technical thread...

Your other posts from this thread:



99cents said:


> I dunno. I guess I fail the test.





99cents said:


> At least I was first  .





99cents said:


> Wow, telsa's opinion of you dropped, mac. I don't know what to say...


Good job. Thank you for valuable discussion into GFCI's and tamper resistant code


----------



## emtnut (Mar 1, 2015)

Someone needs to update the internet :blink:

It thinks a troll is ...

trolling 
Being a prick on the internet because you can. Typically unleashing one or more cynical or sarcastic remarks on an innocent by-stander, because it's the internet and, hey, you can.

:yes:


----------

