Thread Number: 46487
So, Combo52 and I were talking the other day |
[Down to Last] |
Post# 678231   5/8/2013 at 20:59 (3,977 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
We were discussing lint removal in washing machines. He conjectured that all lint removal systems were gimmicks and probably didn't really do anything. In fact he speculated that in the GE Filter Flo system if you were to actually take lint from a dryer and put it in the filter pan and then do a load of clothes ,-there would be less lint at the end of the cycle. He said the pan would probably loose the dryer lint into the wash and it most of it would go down the drain.
Well, I got thinking , especially after growing up with one of these Filter Flos. So I decided to put that conjecture to the test. Here documented are the results.
We start with lint from the Speed Queen dryer - I have assayed it with the scale I use for creating detergent formulas, yes its accurate enough for our purposes. We find I swiped 1.8 grams of lint.
|
|
Post# 678232 , Reply# 1   5/8/2013 at 21:01 (3,977 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678233 , Reply# 2   5/8/2013 at 21:02 (3,977 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678235 , Reply# 3   5/8/2013 at 21:05 (3,977 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678236 , Reply# 4   5/8/2013 at 21:06 (3,977 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678237 , Reply# 5   5/8/2013 at 21:26 (3,977 days old) by whirlcool (Just North Of Houston, Texas)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I think you will have more lint in the GE lint catcher than you started with. Especially if you are washing a dog bed. When my parents had a GE Filterflow after washing dog beds the filter basket was always full of hair. |
Post# 678238 , Reply# 6   5/8/2013 at 21:30 (3,977 days old) by toploader55 (Massachusetts Sand Bar, Cape Cod)   |   | |
This post has been removed by the member who posted it. |
Post# 678239 , Reply# 7   5/8/2013 at 21:33 (3,977 days old) by rberryiii3 (Palm Springs, California)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Wow.......I love this site......there will be more lint
|
Post# 678245 , Reply# 8   5/8/2013 at 21:50 (3,977 days old) by Unimatic1140 (Minneapolis)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678246 , Reply# 9   5/8/2013 at 21:50 (3,977 days old) by ovrphil (N.Atlanta / Georgia )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Not to suggest this isn't a fun test, but wouldn't it be a little more "scientific" or challenging to compare how two different machines will extract lint, since lint removers actually work? I know ours does, on our humble Maytags. Technically, if you're not adding clothes to a lint-filter that captured (or had placed in it) balls of lint...water and soap will dissipate the lint. Water can cut through anything, as you know - esp. applied to cutting tools. Anyways - if a GE Filter-Flo is known to lose some of the lint in some cycle of wash, what are you really doing, other than using a very sensitive(electronic) scale to measure the miniscule loss of threads, etc. in a lint-ball captured in that filter? I have no idea, on the other hand, if a left-in-place lint ball(after a normal wash of clothes) will simply ride over the top and be extracted into the wash again. If that's the case, I'd say GE needed to insure that the lint balls could withstand two, three or more daily washes, without advising to remove them. Guessing only - I'll say, given that it was designed to hold the lint balls and you're not adding more wash/texitles to increase the size or number of lint balls in the filter, they'll remain with some immeasurable (unless you have a great scale)amount of textile/crud/whatever is in those lint-balls. !
Funny, prior to coming to this thread, I just watched an old GE Fjlter Flo ad that Technopolis posted around Feb.2013 when he bought that Filter-Flo and Ronald Regan did the lead-in for the commercial. The ad was expounding upon the virtues and effectiveness of the filter-flo lint-capturing ability. :-) Phil PS -I've entered a new level of decrepitation here..since lint-balls strike me as funny and is it lint basket or lint filter? I mean basket,but isn't it a filter? It's late, zzzz my head is full of lint This post was last edited 05/08/2013 at 22:43 |
Post# 678254 , Reply# 10   5/8/2013 at 22:40 (3,977 days old) by mickeyd (Hamburg NY)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678313 , Reply# 13   5/9/2013 at 07:07 (3,977 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678326 , Reply# 14   5/9/2013 at 07:57 (3,977 days old) by Yogitunes (New Jersey)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
By company orders......We set down on LV426(filter pan) to get this hostile organism(lint), which destroyed my crew(clothing) and your expensive ship(machine), said Ripley!
We had families without dryers for years on LV426, and they never complained about any hostile organism.........little planet engineers, who pick the lint off the clothing while its washing!........It's what we call a Shake N' Bake colony! (duck and run Scotty!) |
Post# 678342 , Reply# 15   5/9/2013 at 09:37 (3,977 days old) by ovrphil (N.Atlanta / Georgia )   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678350 , Reply# 16   5/9/2013 at 11:05 (3,976 days old) by kb0nes (Burnsville, MN)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I think the outcome will be interesting but I don't get the point of the test. I think its invalid.
The idea is that weight of the starting lint in the filter pan will reduce due to loss from potentially ineffective filtering seems to be the premise. But then an undetermined amount of weight of lint and hair is added into the cycle. So its anybodies guess. To me this invalidates the test, unless I am missing the initial point. My assumption is that the finer lint from the dryer will indeed slip through the filter and go down the drain. The composition of the accumulated lint after the load will change. Purely a guess but I think it will weight more after. With only 1.8 grams of very dry lint initially, it will be important that the post weighing is done with equal dry lint. I'd be curious to see the results of this test with no additional lint/hair introduced into the cycle. I would guess you'd lose a fair bit of the dryer lint, but I'm not sure its a fair test as I am assuming that this lint is finer and less likely to be filtered out. My personal belief is different from my John's, I think lint filters in the wash help. Annette's family does their wash in a fairly late model Amana and they get LOTS of pilling on fleece etc. I have a feeling if they had washer with good lint filtering the pilling would be greatly reduced. Even in my belt drive WP I have never had pilling like that, granted we have many other variables that aren't normalized. |
Post# 678361 , Reply# 17   5/9/2013 at 12:10 (3,976 days old) by turquoisedude (.)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I think there will be more lint. The ol' Viking filter-flo that was my first 'big' automatic proved this a couple of times when someone was too out of it to remember to remove the lint from the filter pan from a previous load. It seems to me that there was always more lint after a new load was washed... Oh and the clothes washed in that new load were not 're-linted'.
Anxiously awaiting the outcome! |
Post# 678365 , Reply# 18   5/9/2013 at 12:36 (3,976 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678367 , Reply# 19   5/9/2013 at 12:38 (3,976 days old) by mrb627 (Buford, GA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678368 , Reply# 20   5/9/2013 at 12:39 (3,976 days old) by mrb627 (Buford, GA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
|
Post# 678432 , Reply# 21   5/9/2013 at 17:38 (3,976 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Interesting comments
Don't know what this means "With only 1.8 grams of very dry lint initially, it will be important that the post weighing is done with equal dry lint. " If I picked 1.8 grams to start and then picked 1.8 grams from the filter pan I'd have 1.8 grams. One needs to weigh ALL the lint left in the filter pan if this is to have meaning.
Very scientific , Louis, but not statistically meaningful. One would have to run this 1,000 times to get a baseline, then calculate the mean and standard deviation. Someone else can do that.
If you read the original premise it was surmised that lint taken from the dryer would not make it thru the wash cycle to the end, it would be drained out, and that the filtering system was so poor that it was a marketing gimmick, thus implying that of any lint in the clothing most of it would not be caught by the filtering system. So simply if the lint is loaded from the dryer THEN at the end there will either be less or more lint in the pan. If less than the speculation was correct , if more then the speculation does not match real world FF washing.
This post was last edited 05/09/2013 at 21:02 |
Post# 678439 , Reply# 22   5/9/2013 at 18:16 (3,976 days old) by mickeyd (Hamburg NY)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Your films are becoming Rorschach Tests for us, with all the things we read into them. I'm way out on a limb, thinking of Jamie Gumb of "The Silence of the Lambs," whose frantic ravings, "It puts the lotion on its skin," etc. have become the stuff of comedy.
I would love to see you load up the GE with lint and see what the filter does with it. |
Post# 678444 , Reply# 23   5/9/2013 at 18:35 (3,976 days old) by barcoboy (Canada)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678446 , Reply# 24   5/9/2013 at 18:54 (3,976 days old) by bajaespuma (Connecticut)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
As much as I want to confirm the efficacy of the GE Filter-Flo system (I am as prejudiced PRO as Combo is prejudiced CON) I think I remember that Consumer's Reports measured "linting", the generation of lint from the washload, by different agitation systems in all the tested brands. It is possible that Filter-Flo's create at least as much lint as they trap. I also remember their snippy and niggardly observation that "loads washed in the General Electric machine somewhat more lint-free than most".
You would have to measure a load washed in a FF without the filter-pan in place and then wash an almost identical load with the filter pan in place. And then I'm afraid we would be dealing with the same phenomenon that the door-to-door vacuum salesman benefitted from; lint can always be gleaned from most cloth.
Now that I'm using a horizontal axis machine without a lint filter, I can't say I notice any difference whatsoever. Especially with loads that get the benefit of being dried in a machine. And isn't it true that the dryer filtration systems are more about keeping all the ducts lint-free and preventing lint build-up outside of the machine where it creates a significant fire hazard than preening lint off of the laundry? |
Post# 678447 , Reply# 25   5/9/2013 at 19:06 (3,976 days old) by PhilR (Quebec Canada)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
That's an interesting test! I think lint removal in the washer is important for those who wash things that shouldn't washed together and line dry them! I like to mix loads of things that shouldn't be washed together and when I wash gray stockings with dark t-shirts, I always get gray lint on my t-shirts and need to send them in the dryer for a while as lint will remain very visible if I just line dry them! I guess the "lint away" overflow rinse of solid tub Frigidaire washers didn't do too good! |
Post# 678461 , Reply# 26   5/9/2013 at 20:59 (3,976 days old) by jmirawm (Barling Arkansas)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
I think combo52 is jealous of Filter Flo's sexy pan :) |
Post# 678462 , Reply# 27   5/9/2013 at 20:59 (3,976 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Barcoboy, very good idea about the trap on the drain. That could be another type of test.
Ken, you bring up a good point, I never worry about lint out of the Speed Queen's nor the Duomatics, they just don't generate any appreciable lint and any they do the dryer takes away.
The lint is dry, it will be weighed tomorrow and the number posted!!!! Tick tick tick...
|
Post# 678464 , Reply# 28   5/9/2013 at 21:46 (3,976 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Jon if you want to do this test you have to run the washer empty, otherwise your test depends on the type of load that you are washing with the added lint. dud
We all know that FF washers do collect SOME lint, [ even the almost useless filter in MT Power-fin agitators collect some lint ] but the amount of lint collected would never make any real difference in the laundries outcome. And I never said that all automatic washers lint filters were useless, their were actually a few that really pretty worked very well. I would say from experience that the first GEs from the late 1940s with their Self-Cleaning filter were very effective as well as the first KM machines with the manual clean filters from 1956-around1966 and all the WP and KM SC filters on belt drive washers were highly effective. GEs first FF washers with the metal pans were also very effective as well as the first MTs with the SS filter with the rubber gasket at the bottom. I am sure I missed a few washers with effective filters, but most filters on washers other than the above were not effective enough to make any real difference. |
Post# 678473 , Reply# 31   5/10/2013 at 00:00 (3,976 days old) by kb0nes (Burnsville, MN)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Jon,
Sorry I poorly worded my earlier comments, allow me to clarify: >>Don't know what this means "With only 1.8 grams of very dry lint initially, it will be important that the post weighing is done with equal dry lint. " What I meant was to insure the dryness at both pre and post weighing. With only 1.8 grams a small amount of moisture will skew the numbers. >>If you read the original premise it was surmised that lint taken from the dryer would not make it thru the wash cycle to the end, it would be drained out, and that the filtering system was so poor that it was a marketing gimmick, thus implying that of any lint in the clothing most of it would not be caught by the filtering system. So simply if the lint is loaded from the dryer THEN at the end there will either be less or more lint in the pan. If less than the speculation was correct , if more then the speculation does not match real world FF washing. Testing the effectiveness of the filter is a great test. My point is that doing a weigh in before with the added lint, then a weigh in after running a cycle with an undefined amount of lint and hair added in the load really tells nothing. We have no idea how much lint was missed. Or how much of the added lint from the load was caught to alter the final weight. To me a more interesting test would be to run a load empty. When the wash cycle starts introduce a known weight of lint into the tub. Allow the cycle to run for the desired wash time. Dry and weigh the lint caught in the pan. Then you'd have an idea of what was caught without any unnormalized variables distorting the results. I'm not sure that the lint from the dryer is a fair test for the washer though. A lot of dryer lint is pretty fine dusty stuff. I think the fines will wash right through the FilterFlo pan... I am curious to hear what you come up with. My suspicion is that the post wash weight will be higher due to added weight from the load. |
Post# 678506 , Reply# 32   5/10/2013 at 07:38 (3,976 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
that is an interesting idea. We should explore that next!!
Well people here is the result:
We started with 1.8 grams of dryer lint added to the pan, at the end of the cycle after 3 days of drying we wound up with:
|
Post# 678510 , Reply# 33   5/10/2013 at 07:53 (3,976 days old) by turquoisedude (.)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678512 , Reply# 34   5/10/2013 at 07:57 (3,976 days old) by gansky1 (Omaha, The Home of the TV Dinner!)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Interesting results.
We had a filter flo as a kid growing up and I would put dryer lint into the wash cycle to see how much I could get into the filter pan through the recirculating system. I was always amazed at how much it could retrieve from the wash & rinse water. Hmmmmmm. May have to do more experiments now that mom isn't looking! |
Post# 678513 , Reply# 35   5/10/2013 at 07:58 (3,976 days old) by Yogitunes (New Jersey)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
I think were on to something here....a little fine detailing of variables to make all parts equal.....
but seems the best would be to add the lint to a tub of water only, no clothes, how much lint would be caught by the filterpan, and using a screen colander or nylon sock, measure how much lint goes out the drain... even to wash a load of towels.....how much lint is the filtering system catching, versus how much lint is still in suspension, and going out the drain hose? it just seems though, as a marketing gimmick is suggested, that in the 60/70's, clothing gave off a large amount of lint, compared to todays materials..... the biggest thing was that lint for the most part floated, as in wringer washers, and then the solid tubs used an overflo to flush this top layer away.....perforated tubs had this lint mixed in, detergents held this in suspension, better than soap, to be flushed with the draining process.... filters do work, but at the same time, you could leave them out, and not see a difference....as long as you seperate clothing, and use proper detergent...I rarely have my filters in place |
Post# 678545 , Reply# 36   5/10/2013 at 11:10 (3,975 days old) by mickeyd (Hamburg NY)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678566 , Reply# 37   5/10/2013 at 14:09 (3,975 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
2    
|
Post# 678598 , Reply# 38   5/10/2013 at 17:20 (3,975 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678599 , Reply# 39   5/10/2013 at 17:23 (3,975 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
1    
|
Post# 678606 , Reply# 40   5/10/2013 at 18:41 (3,975 days old) by combo52 (50 Year Repair Tech Beltsville,Md)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Hi Jon, I assume that that lint from the FF washer was dried in an oven or at least 140 degrees before weighing so the moisture would be similar to the dryer lint used in your test. I also like Louis idea about using different color lint from the dryer supply vs the load being washed as I am sure that a lot of the dryer lint disappeared through the GE FF pan.
Neutral drain washers are like drip coffee makers vs spin drain washers? All I can say is ignorance is bliss, LOL. |
Post# 678608 , Reply# 41   5/10/2013 at 18:46 (3,975 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678614 , Reply# 42   5/10/2013 at 19:32 (3,975 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
We can try this : Dry red items and then extract the red lint for the filter pan. Then wash with no clothes in tub, see what is left behind. Next repeat and wash with white items and compare remainder lint in color and weight.
Filtering the drian hose is not practical for me as I use stand pipes.
Plus the force of water out the drain pipe is much higher than filterflo flumes , the drain side of the pump might force a lot of lint through and down the drain.
Hmmmmm |
Post# 678615 , Reply# 43   5/10/2013 at 19:33 (3,975 days old) by beekeyknee (Columbia, MO)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678637 , Reply# 45   5/10/2013 at 21:26 (3,975 days old) by kb0nes (Burnsville, MN)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
I still like the idea of simply adding a couple grams of collected lint to an empty load and seeing how much gets caught. Seems like the job of the filter is to pull the lint out of the water and starting with a known quantity and seeing the effectiveness of the filtration in this manner makes for an easy test. I'd love to test out the likely ineffective bed-o-nails in my belt drive WP this way. I don't have access to a scale that can split grams though. I've only ever weighed bicycle parts to the nearest gram...
My concern with using dryer lint is that I believe its consistency tends to be finer then what is typically pulled from a wash load. The lint screen in the dryer becomes more efficient (as do ALL barrier air filters) as lint loads the screen and reduces the effective aperture size. A good portion of the weight of dryer lint may be tiny dust like particles (the ones you see floating when you clean the screen) which I don't think any washer filter will trap. The FilterFlo pan has the drawback of oscillating while filtering. My suspicion is that this will reduce effectiveness as it allows some of the lint to work its way through the filter. Still they could be quite effective though, especially so on larger lint and hair. I have pondered adding an external lint filter to a machine before. I'd likely use a large area screen in a bag filter housing. Something with a number of square inches of filter area so that it could hold a lot without restricting flow. Perhaps someday I will get a round-tuit and try that although I have an ultrasonic cleaner idea that might come first ;) |
Post# 678666 , Reply# 46   5/11/2013 at 04:32 (3,975 days old) by foraloysius (Leeuwarden, Friesland, the Netherlands)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 678718 , Reply# 48   5/11/2013 at 11:34 (3,974 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
That pan does drain differently than the solid tub machines did, but I watched the whole load and did not see lint balls flung over the side, nor when it stopped on rinse fill did I see lint globs in the tub. But I could have missed something.
Yes Louis I could use the '67 Frigidaire beside it. Good idea.
|
Post# 679703 , Reply# 49   5/16/2013 at 17:38 (3,969 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
construct a new test. Proposal 1: I dry a whopping amount of clothes in the SQ, save a whopping amount of multicolored lint. DRY THE LINT AT 140 for 10 days! then Weigh the lint 5 times. Then throw it into a water full --no laundry-- tub in the GE. Run machine. collect lint in pan DRY THE LINT AT 140 DEGREES FOR 10 days! then weigh the lint
What say? |
Post# 679786 , Reply# 51   5/17/2013 at 11:20 (3,968 days old) by kb0nes (Burnsville, MN)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
Tom, your comments are spot on that the washer and dryer each are more effective at removing different kinds of lint. The combination of two appliances increases the overall lint removal from the fabric. Of course the story changes a bit if the clothing is being line dried...
Due to the different environments in each machine any attempt to compare lint capture between the washer and dryer is a bit silly. Also unless you are filtering the waste water from the waher and exhaust air from the dryer we have no idea how much was removed from the load but was missed from either appliance's filter. Although in the end as long as its gone it doesn't much matter too much where it went. Just as we compare extraction ability in washers, lint removal/filter performance is something that we could test to compare that aspect of different washers. Comparing washers to one another is a fair test, and might make a difference to pet owners and people that line dry their clothing. It would be interesting to develop a reasonably repeatable test and run it on a few washers just to see how they each compare to each other. |
Post# 679887 , Reply# 53   5/18/2013 at 06:55 (3,968 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
filter pans, Tom, I found watching the 1960 and 1956 GE FF's that the copper pan with the rounded edge makes nice round balls of lint, but the plastic sharp cornered 1960's pans create sort of flattened lint ovoids not balls. The 1970 machine oscillates so fast on regular wash that I get clumps of tiny seperate balls all lumped together, kind of like beebee's. Beebee ball lint!
On the Kenmore's with the flush lint system I wonder if how much lint stays in the lint filter and how much is backflushed out? John you should do a study on that.
|
Post# 679900 , Reply# 54   5/18/2013 at 08:46 (3,968 days old) by Tomturbomatic (Beltsville, MD)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
The GE FilterFlo ads did not show balls of lint. They had lint and loose strings spread out in the metal pans almost like water hyacinth on a Florida lake. |
Post# 680159 , Reply# 55   5/19/2013 at 20:54 (3,966 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 680253 , Reply# 56   5/20/2013 at 17:12 (3,965 days old) by PeterH770 (Marietta, GA)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|
Post# 681211 , Reply# 57   5/27/2013 at 10:45 (3,958 days old) by bwoods ()   |   | |
This post has been removed by the webmaster. |
Post# 681217 , Reply# 58   5/27/2013 at 12:10 (3,958 days old) by Unimatic1140 (Minneapolis)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
5    
I deleted the above post due to the fact that I consider that a personal attack. Guys please remember personal attacks are not allowed in the forums, especially the public forums. I don't catch all of them but when I do I will delete it as it's just not necessary.
Stating facts is a good thing, but making it personal is a really bad thing. In this particular case the it was directed against a good friend of the owner of this website (meaning Fred and I) but that doesn't make any difference, any personal attack is not allowed no matter who it is. Thanks to those who marked this as offensive to alert me. |
Post# 681326 , Reply# 59   5/28/2013 at 07:21 (3,958 days old) by Jetcone (Schenectady-Home of Calrods,Monitor Tops,Toroid Transformers)   |   | |
Checkrate/Likes
 
     
|