nursey I think I have wet myself...

[davefreer]

On the good (for certain values of good) news - Tasmania stands in with a good chance of winning its first Man-Booker Prize. This http://www.wst.tas.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0008/74951/owner_builder_kit.pdfRead more... )

Comments

[davefreer]

Gaah. I'll have to live with it, but don't expect me to like it ;-). You know, my present house is an 'owner build'. It's about 35 years old. It's now had all of it's pre-sell inspections - and sailed through every one of them, which, I have been informed by everyone from the termite and borer inspector to the electrician is abnormal. The reason is fairly simple: Murphy (who built the initial part) Martin and us who added to it, were all building for ourselves and for life. Murphy's beams are twice the required thickness. (and the guy was no idiot - the supports for them are over-engineered too.) He cut the timbers here on the farm, but otherwise yes the building would have cost far more than 'minimum-spec' by a professional builder. But if he'd got a professional to do exactly what he's done - it would have cost 3 times as much, I am sure. And Murphy was a craftsman (he was a cabinet-maker by trade) so the amount of love and care he put into the house is something you would struggle to buy.

And would someone PLEASE explain what the danger of incorrectly (if this is possible, let alone probable) connecting a water-tank to a downpipe?

[msss]

Unemployed plumbers might beat you up?

Well, I am a lawyer, so I'm good at thinking up improbable (but only just this side of impossible) scenarios. It's supposed to be something to do with drainage - apparently rainwater is VERY DANGEROUS if your tank overflows. Because it might undermine the foundations of your house or something. *shrug*

But seriously, you could deal with that by adding an overflow pipe leading back to stormwater. I think this one is just a little protectionist monopoly put in for the mates.

[ext_64262]

Come now, Dave. If you didn't have the occasional officious numb-skull around to throw coconuts at, you'd be bored out of your mind. :-D

Though, for every rugged, competent individualist who bristles at even the slightest whiff of nannyism, there's the incompetent bedwetter who wouldn't even dream of tying his shoes without running to Nanny to make sure he did it right. This is the kind of person who would file a building permit to hang up a picture. Naturally, this person serves to encourage Nanny further. After all, Nanny knows which side her bread is buttered on, and she's not about to pass up steady work. Nanny, by the way, is what Mary Poppins would be if she were "re-imagined" by H.P. Lovecraft ("A spoon-full of ichor makes the ftagn go down...").

Worse still is the bedwetter's evil cousin, the sue-happy idiot (or in many cases, his next of kin) who uses any lack of nannying as an excuse to cash in on his own stupidity: "How was I to know that a circular saw blade, covered with hundreds of razor sharp teeth, rotating at 5000 RPM was dangerous? Nanny NEVER TOLD ME! Give me money now!!!" Nanny has a soft spot in her black heart for sue-happy; he is the martyr to her cause.

But, nothing that can't be overcome with the proper application of rugged individualism... and a boat-load of high-velocity coconuts ;-)