My lawnmower burned up

But you have to admit that warning labels that say to the effect that:

"This label was place here, not for your safety, but to cover our butts, just in case you are dumber than a rock, in which case you probably won't read the label anyway. So when you fall and land on your head (which couldn't possibly do any harm), and decide to sue us because you attempted to climb to the top of the chair, which was on top the the ladder, which only had 3 of it legs balanced on two of your second story stairs (with 24 comic books wedged under the 4th leg), we can show the jury that we anticipated this use of our product and warned you not to do this.";

have gone overboard. There only purpose is "cover their ass". In many cases, over-warning is worse than no warning at all. Too much input is ignored and becomes no input in reality.

Companies do it because too many juries have taken the position that you have to be protected against yourself, no matter how stupid you are.

Reply to
Ernie Klein
Loading thread data ...

From: Subject: Problem with my Electric Balls Rotator Date: Thursday, January 15, 2004 11:44 AM

I recently bought the "Ronco" electric balls rotator. The manufacturer said this thing will rotate my balls 20 times every minute at the slow speed, and 180 times every minute at fast speed. I thought this would be a worthwhile investment, since my balls were just hanging there getting no use.

I clamped it to my shaft as directed. I connected it to the outlet, and it began rotating. I adjusted it for a medium rotation speed and it worked well for the first couple minutes. Suddenly it began increasing in speed and within a few minutes it was operating at over

1200 rotations per minute, and the rotation meter was pegged and the word "OVERLOAD" was flashing on the digital readout. That's when the whole thing went crazy. My balls became entangled around each other, and the left ball ended up on the right and the right on the left. What a mess, and quite painful too. I pulled the plug and called customer service.

I spoke with the main man, (Ron Ronco - company president). He told me to push the button labelled "info", which I did. Then he asked me to give him the code numbers, which I did. He said that the numbers indicate that my balls are too large and too heavy for normal use, and that considering this, it is normal for the machanics in the machine to over compensate and increase speed. He told me that my balls do not fit in the "normal range" for size and weight, and that there is nothing he can do for me, and I will just have to use the machine as is. I asked for a refund, and was told that they will not give refunds due to personal physical abnormalities. I am really angry about this, but it appears there is little I can do other than sue the company and/or file a complaint with the Better Business Bureau.

I am asking if anyone might offer a means to change the mechanics in this device by possibly modifying the voltage or power consumption to compensate for my supposed abnormality. I'd also like to know if any of you men who are using one of these devices are having any problems with it?

Jerry Atrick

Reply to
Stormin Mormon

From: "David S. Rubin" Subject: NJJF: NJJF: Top 10 Stupid Inventions Date: Thursday, January 01, 2004 11:57 PM

[No, I don't know if these are real or not. If they are, I'd assume that they were invented as gags]

Top 10 Stupid Inventions

  1. Black Highlighter
  2. Braille Driver's Manual
  3. Clear Correction Fluid
  4. Fake Rhinestones
  5. Inflatable Dart Board
  6. Mesh Umbrella
  7. Motorcycle Air Conditioner
  8. Sugar-Coated Toothpaste
  9. Super-glue Post-it Notes

AND THE NUMBER ONE STUPID INVENTION?

  1. The system that allows you to report power failures via the Internet
Reply to
Stormin Mormon

I did manage to light up a lawn mower, one time. Wouldn't start, so I drained some water out of the carb. Then took the spark plug out, and give it a pull to see if it was sparking. It was. And there was gasoline in the water.

Reply to
Stormin Mormon

From: "Arroyo" Subject: Re: toilet flush Date: Thursday, October 16, 2003 10:05 AM

**** A fairly long post, but worth it!**** Found this on a mssg board somewhere, thought it was barely relevent!

Austin American Statesman, Sun June 10, 2001 by Dave Barry, Miami Herald.

TASTEFULNESS ADVISORY: Do not read this if you are eating, or plan to eat ever again. Thank You. Recently I watched as a professional engineer attempted to flush fermented bean curd down a toilet.

This was not some fun engineer prank. This was a laboratory test conducted at the research center of the National Association of Home Builders, which is trying to develope a laboratory test for toilet performance that simulates the challenges faced by toilets in the real world.

This research is necessary because Americans are unhappy with the wimpy toilets we are now required to buy. We yearn for the glory years when our toilets we among the most powerful on Earth---when the Standard American household commode could, in a single flush, as proven in actual tests, suck down a mature sheep.

(Before I get alot of mail from angry animal-rights activists, let me stress these tests did NOT use an actual sheep.That would be barbaric. They used two goats tied together.)

But then in 1992, the U.S. Congress---instead of passing a law that would actually benefit ordinary Americans, such as mandatory death penalty for telemarketers---decided to cripple our toilets. Specifically, Congress passed a law limiting new toilets to 1.6 gallons of water per flush, less than half of what the old toilets used. In terms of power and studliness, out toilets went from being the Baltimore Ravens to Barry Manilow.

(Before i get a lot of mail from angry Barry Manilow fans, let me stress that, as a musician and performer, HE sounds like two goats tied together.)

The new toilets were supposed to save water. And they work OK when it comes to disposing of what is euphemistically referred to as "No 1." The problem is that, when it comes to what is euphemistically referred to as "Geraldo." They tend to clog and must be flushed repeatedly, which actually wastes water.

(Before I get alot of mail from angry Geraldo fans, let me stress that ther ARE no Geraldo fans.)

So anyway, the plumbing and home-building industries have gotten many complaints about the new toilets. That's why the National Association of Homebuilders has been trying to come up with a real-world toilet test, so we'll know which, if any, toilets actually work, so consumers can buy these and get rid of the bad toilets, which will then be dropped from bombers onto the U.S. Capitol.

OK, that last part is a fantasy (for now). But the builder's group really is doing serious toilet research, as i learned when I was given a tour of its Maryland research facility by Larry Zarker, Chuck Arnold and Tom Kenney. They showed me a laboratory where test toilets are mounted on a frame; the procedure is, you put your test material into the bowl, flush, then see how much makes it through to a collection basket underneath.

(Kids:This would be a GREAT science fair project!)

Kenney first showed me the current test standard in which the toilet is supposed to flush 100 little plastic balls. There are two problems with this test. One is that anyone who emits anything like 100 little plastic balls does'nt need a better toilet, he needs immediate medical care. The other problem is that the test is WAY too easy. "Any toilet in the world can pass it," said Kenney.

He then showed me some of the tougher, more-realistic tests being concidered. These involve various materials, including wads of paper and sponges, both weighted and un-weighted, to simulate what the NAHB refers to as "sinkers" and "floaters."

But the most impressive test by far is the fermented bean curd, which Kenney said is made, using a secret recipe, by the Toto toilet company of japan, a world leader in commode innovation. I mean, this stuff looks EXACTLY like the real Geraldo. I myself would not touch it. I watched in fascinated horror as Kenney boldly grasped a mass of it and, with his bare hands, formed 10 incredibly lifelike Puff Daddies. Needless to say, these clogged the test toilet.

I was deeply moved by this experience . I came away convinced that these engineers will, someday, develope a test that will enable us, as a nation, to once again have faith in our commodes. When that day comes, I want to shake the hands of the courageous researchers who made it possible. But first they have to wash up.

Reply to
Stormin Mormon

You need a UPS. I can run for almost an hour with my router and modem plugged in to one. With a laptop, obviously. Whopping $25 investment.

Reply to
Mark

Reply to
Chris

Darwin award candidate.

Nicely done.

Reply to
snapperhead

You might get lucky trying, but it depends on the tort laws in Canada.

Reply to
sleepdog

Hmmm, Fool's way of learning a lesson. Or poor troll. Better call a lawyer who has same IQ as yours, LOL!

Reply to
Tony Hwang

Kerosene burns. Gasoline explodes. Read the warning labels.

Reply to
Bert Byfield

Most likely troll. People who know, know that gasoline does not explode. Also that you need a higher temperature than a match to get it to burn at all.

Reply to
richard

Only in Hollywood. On the tv show "mythbusters" they proved this. A standard propane blow torch wasn't enough to cause gasoline to explode. They also shot at a car's gas tank that was full, with a high powered rifle and all it did was puncture a pair of holes in it.

Reply to
richard

richard wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

Almost surely.

Wrong. As usual. Liquid gasoline burns; gasoline vapor mixed with air explodes. If the latter weren't true, then internal combustion engines couldn't use gasoline.

Wrong. As usual. A match flame is surprisingly hot, certainly higher than the temperature at which paper burns, which as we all know is 451F. Matches don't give off much heat since they're so small, but gasoline is highly flammable in the presence of oxygen. Please don't try to confirm this on your own.

Reply to
Deadrat

richard wrote in news: snipped-for-privacy@4ax.com:

That's because the tank was full -- not much oxygen in the closed tank. They should have tried it with an "empty" gas tank.

Reply to
Deadrat

snipped-for-privacy@yahoo.com wrote in news:r9mhc19f1rmnb1psnv0g0jfr6nlvbnad7k@

4ax.com:

That's too bad.......you didn't too.

Reply to
Red Green

Hmmm, I wonder how car engines work????????

Reply to
Tony Hwang

Darn, I wish all products were manufactured to be as dangerous and deadly as possible. That way all the stupid animals in the heard would succumb to natural selection, hopefully before they can breed.

TDD

Reply to
The Daring Dufas

even an air/fuel mixture of gasoline does NOT explode. It burns rapidly. This is the reason the internal combustion engines runs and does not explode. you are wrong.

steve

Reply to
Steve Barker

HomeOwnersHub website is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here. All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.