Today's Hint - Don't do things like this

[Dave in Fairfax]

Nope. Buddy of mine was on a date with a state beauty queen and tried that with Ben-gay. She was NOT amused.

Dave in Fairfax

[Andy Dingley]

Sounds like Pterry Pratchett

[Dave in Fairfax]

My daughter has it on a bumper sticker on her truck. You can get them at most Ren Faires.

Dave in Fairfax

[Robert Bonomi]

That phrase has been a 'classic' in role-playing game circles, for a *long* time.

The 'ancestor' of the phrase *is* from J.R.R. Tolkien's "The Two Towers" (part of the Lord of the Rings Trilogy) in which 'Meriadoc" says: "Do not meddle in the affairs of wizards, for they are subtle and quick to anger."

And _somebody_ decided dragons deserved 'equal time'.

Google for "dragon ketchup", to get an idea of how ubiquitous the phrase is. (over 40,000 hits, the first 10 pages or so -- as far as I looked -- are _all_ hits on minor variations of the wording *or* derivatives/expansions of the concept; e.g. a dragon having a ketchup mine :)

One source attributes it to a Dilbert comic. I wouldn't be at all surprised that Scott Adams used it, but it is *not* original to the strip -- since it was in common use 10 years _before_ the strip got started.

I know it was in vogue -- in the late '70s -- among the "Dungeons & Dragons" crowd, but imported from 'somewhere else'.

I wouldn't be surprised if it was from "Bored of the Rings", the Tolkein parody.

[George]

[Lawrence Wasserman]

Don't use a nail gun to work on a chicken coop without removing the chickes first.

[Australopithecus scobis]

nope.

[Joe Gorman]

Be glad it went by your head. the little cutoff I didn't move hit my right lens. I'm assuming this as I don't recall the impact but that's the one that was broken. Quick trip to a nearby eye doctor got all but the glass/plastic dust out. Joe romover off all offcuts

[Robert Bonomi]

O.K. That leaves Anon., Ibid, and Op Cit. as possible authors. *snicker*

[Dave in Fairfax]

Didn't ask, can't tell

She wasn't happy though, apparently more than a gentle warming sensation. Having wiped my eyes and scratched other parts with that stuff on my hands, though, it couldn't have been good.

Dave in Fairfax

[Doug Miller]

Was that the lens of your safety glasses, or the lens of your prescription eyeglasses?

-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

[Joe Gorman]

Prescription. They were supposed to be safety lenses, according to the optometrist who sold them. I don't go there anymore. Joe

[anonymous]

Just thought I'd mention that it is umwise to feed short lengths of wood (prunings from cutting bowl blanks that had a very rough de-horning prior to planing) into the planer if they have a deep dish in the top side. Not even if they have absolutely gorgeous grain that it would be criminal to waste.

They start to feed in, then halt because they are past the first feed roller but not yet to the second.

Then they make a large BANG! sound when you push them into the blades with a push stick. If you keep trying, it is possible for them to get small enough to fly out backwards at speeds approaching the speed of light ... well, I never saw it move, but my knuckle recorded the fact.

DAMHIKT

Bills 5th Law of Woodworking: Wood entering the electric planer must already be flat.

[Doug Miller]

Sounds like you might want to talk to a lawyer. At the minimum, if I were in your shoes, I'd be looking for the optometrist to pay for the medical treatment and a replacement pair of glasses.

Keep in mind, also, that even safety prescription glasses don't afford as much protection as safety goggles do, because the lenses are smaller. Like you, I also wear prescription eyeglasses, and goggles are often a PITA (for those who don't wear eyeglasses, if you do, goggles often make your glasses fog up, and it's easy to knock your eyeglasses askew when taking the goggles on and off).

About five years ago, I switched to using a face shield, and I'll never go back to goggles. The face shield never fogs up, and I've never bumped my eyeglasses with it, even once. It's so easy, and so quick, to put on, that I use it *far* more than I ever used goggles, which increases the safety factor that much more. Another bonus: there are other things on your face, besides your eyes, that deserve protection: how'd you like to have a table saw or a lathe throw a chunk of wood into your teeth?

The only disadvantage I've seen to the face shield so far is that you have to remember to flip it up when you feel a sneeze coming on....

-- Regards, Doug Miller (alphageek-at-milmac-dot-com)

Get a copy of my NEW AND IMPROVED TrollFilter for NewsProxy/Nfilter by sending email to autoresponder at filterinfo-at-milmac-dot-com You must use your REAL email address to get a response.

[Ralph]

[Maxprop]

I tuned into this thread a bit late, but perhaps I can be of some help. As an optometrist, I can at least shed some light on the problem with the lens--which appears to have broken due to impact, if I'm extrapolating correctly--or at least with why it didn't protect the eye. Please feel free to inquire.

As to seeking legal help, that should be a last resort effort. As soon as you retain an attorney, any cooperation between the doctor and the patient evaporates, by instruction from the doctor's lawyer. Most problems can be worked out without dragging the issue into a legal environment.

Contrary to popular belief, safety glasses really provide very little protection against impacts of significant velocity and/or mass. At best they will keep flying particles and tiny objects out of the wearer's eyes, but are limited in effect with respect to heavy objects flying at significant velocities. Crown glass safety lenses are really no better than CR-39 hard resin (plastic) lenses made for non-safety glasses, and most likely worse. The best lenses are polycarbonate, but their ability to resist significant impact is limited by the ability of the frame to hold the lens in place without releasing the lens or collapsing under the impact. Polycarbonate generally won't break or shatter. And you are correct w/r/t goggles--they offer superior eye protection. So do polycarbonate face shields.

Fine advice.

Max

[Greg Millen]

That was a good read Maxprop, thanks.

[Joe Gorman]

Well, it was a few years ago so the lawyer is out. I had been clearing the chunks at the beginning. I was trimming a bunch of poplar 2x2's and got tired of moving the scraps off the table. After all they were just sitting there. Then one jiggled just far enough for the rear tooth of the blade to toss it at me. I tend to have a little retroactive amnesia whenever something like this happens so the next thing I remember was holding one hand over the damaged eye and looking for the glasses with the other eye. Found the glasses, picked up the lens pieces and went for a ride. Joe

[Mark Jerde]

As I read in a library table saw book, use compressed air to blow those babies off the back of the saw. It's fast & easy.

This is the primary reason I find myself looking at the HF compressors each Sunday on my way home after church. ;-)

-- Mark

[Maxprop]

What material were the lenses, Joe?

As I mentioned earlier, polycarbonate is the only true safety lens. For future reference, insist on polycarb for any pair of glasses you wish to use with activities that have the potential for flying objects. And no rimless or semi-rimless frames, either. A good, solid plastic or metal eyewire surrounding the lens is an absolute necessity for holding the lens in place.

Max