A fond farewell to the hard-wired phone

[Beloved Leader]

http://www.salon.com/2011/12/05/a_fond_farewell_to_the_hard_wired_phone/

Not radios, but I suspect more than a few members of this group have
some of these sitting around too.

[Engineer]

On Dec 9, 11:44 am, Beloved Leader <Kim_Jong...@volcanomail.com>
wrote:

> http://www.salon.com/2011/12/05/a_fond_farewell_to_the_hard_wired_phone/
>
> Not radios, but I suspect more than a few members of this group have
> some of these sitting around too.

We still use two... one in the bedroom and one in the workshop. OK,
they are not pulse dial, rather PB tone dial... and there are several
spares in a cupboard!
Other house phones are wireless to a hard-wired base station, then out
on cable via a modem (so-called Roger Home phone.)
Merry Christmas to all!
Cheers,
Roger

[Buck Frobisher]

You have to have at least one in the house. Otherwise, what happens when
there is a power outage? No phone, oh boohoohoo!



"Beloved Leader" <Kim_J...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:1d1e8653-35f9-4c21...@q16g2000yqn.googlegroups.com...

[spsffan]

Actually, one is sitting on the counter next to the stove. It rarely
gets used, as we tend to use the cordless (which is attached to the
landline) but sometimes, when cooking and it rings, I answer it.

Also, at the office, there is a model 500 hooked up to the fax since the
fax lines don't go through the switchboard and still work in a power or
computer server outage.

I went without a cell phone most of 2011. It was mostly an annoyance,
but circumstances have made me get one again. Mostly, being out at night
more. I really don't care to have or pay for a phone with "aps".

Someday, a phone and computer, small enough to really fit in a pocket
comfortably and tough enough not to break if run over by an F-150, will
serve as phone, internet connection, camera, newspaper, book and
magazine repository, and so forth.

Until then, I stick with a cheap phone and laptop and desktop computers,
and (mostly) paper books, magazines and newspapers.

DAve

[Bill]

On 12/9/2011 10:16 PM, spsffan wrote:
> On 12/9/2011 8:44 AM, Beloved Leader wrote:
>> http://www.salon.com/2011/12/05/a_fond_farewell_to_the_hard_wired_phone/
>>
>> Not radios, but I suspect more than a few members of this group have
>> some of these sitting around too.
>

there are several good reasons to have a hard wired phone

1. security - it does not transmit radio waves that normal technology
can intercept, tapping into it is a crime absent a wiretap order

2. clarity - no interference (on a decent circuit), no drop out

3. reliability, particularly in a power outage situation

4. longevity

[Bill M]

I recently got a Sprint Phone Connect. Its a device that you plug your
wired phone into and it works on the cellular network.
I'm very happy with it. I've had about 3 weeks of service from the
local telco since April. Basically they can't fix whatever problem
exits here. Many of the LL phones in this area are in the same boat.

I would like to have a working landline but that concept seems to be a
thing of the past here.

-Bill

[Steve]

I realize I'm in the minority but I don't have (or want) a cell
phone or one of the crappy wireless phones. The quality
is horrible (physical and audio quality).

Steve

[Roger Blake]

On 2011-12-10, spsffan <sps...@hotmail.com> wrote:
> Actually, one is sitting on the counter next to the stove.

All of our phones are hard-wired. Most are Western Electric rotary dial.

--
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Roger Blake (Change "invalid" to "com" for email. Google Groups killfiled.)

"Climate policy has almost nothing to do anymore with environmental
protection... the next world climate summit in Cancun is actually
an economy summit during which the distribution of the world's
resources will be negotiated." -- Ottmar Edenhofer, IPCC
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------

[Paul P]

We still use two... one in the bedroom and one in the workshop. OK,
they are not pulse dial, rather PB tone dial... and there are several
spares in a cupboard!
Other house phones are wireless to a hard-wired base station, then out
on cable via a modem (so-called Roger Home phone.)
Merry Christmas to all!
Cheers,
Roger

I believe the phone companies are still charging for a DTMF
conversion/converter. It used to be a separate line item. But it is buried
in the main charge. So I keep a rotary phone on the wall and make a call
from it once in a while.

PP.

[Paul P]

> there are several good reasons to have a hard wired phone
>
> 1. security - it does not transmit radio waves that normal technology can
> intercept, tapping into it is a crime absent a wiretap order
>
> 2. clarity - no interference (on a decent circuit), no drop out
>
> 3. reliability, particularly in a power outage situation
>
> 4. longevity
>
>
>

5) If you are in trouble dial 911 and drop the receiver. You need not say
anything. They will find you (unless there is no address display at your
EOC).

Paul Pinyot.

[JimCo]

I guess I'm in the minority too. (Just an old fart.) We have 2 land
line phones, both are tone dialing: one on the wall in the kitchen,
and one on the desk in my study. The bedroom phone is cordless (but
still land line) just to give us the flexibility of going to another
room with a call. We have unused outlets in other rooms. I must have a
land line available for my routine occasional heart pacemaker checkup.
My cardiologist provides me with a device that plugs into a land line
outlet. It records the condition of my pacemaker and transmits the
data to his office for analysis. Just a routine checkup and not for
emergencies. Nevertheless the instructions are very specific about
using a land line connection an not a cordless or wireless setup. Also
I do have a Trac Phone (you know, one of those that you buy minutes of
time for ahead of the game). I seldom use it, and generally just have
it to take with me when I go somewhere, in case I need to make a
call. (After all, you sure can't find phone booths anymore.)
JimCo

[J. D. Leach]

Have a wireless station type phone in the house, with the main section in my
den, and the other station in the livingroom.

My prized phone though, is a Western Electric model 302 from about 1938 that
also sits in the livingroom. It resides atop the Silvertone R-111 console
radio along with some of my Revere 8mm cameras. Phone works very well, and
has better clarity than the wireless jobs. Certainly not for use if you
plan on gabbing for hours, as the handset can feel like a barbell after a
time. Those brass bells also will wake the dead when someone calls.

We keep it hooked up, but rarely use it. Has been a boon when storms have
knocked out the power, as it is the only phone that will still work. Had
one storm here this past summer that not only took out the power lines, but
also screwed up the local cell phone network. The old 302 was the only
phone that was still in operation.

--
J. D. Leach
Columbus, Indiana USA
Ploughing my Jingle into Clough-Brengle
http://thermionicemission.zxq.net

[Terry S]

We have two -- one corded pushbutton in the garage, and in the
basement man-cave, a 1960 rotary dial Automatic Electric payphone. No
ringer on that one, so as to not interrupt poker games.

It's truly amazing to learn how many of today's young people have
never seen, much less used, a rotary dial phone. Many have never known
a house with a land line.

Terry

[JimCo]

Also on the way out are analog clocks and watches. Everything's
digital. A few years ago I was appalled to learn that my grandson,
who graduated from high school a few years ago, couldn't tell time by
an analog clock! We had to instruct him about it.
JimCo

[John Stone]

On 12/10/11 5:21 PM, in article
cc26b4f1-2b6f-4afb...@a17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com, "JimCo"

<chem...@ksu.edu> wrote:

> Also on the way out are analog clocks and watches. Everything's
> digital. A few years ago I was appalled to learn that my grandson,
> who graduated from high school a few years ago, couldn't tell time by
> an analog clock! We had to instruct him about it.
> JimCo

Not sure I agree with that. Analog watches have enjoyed quite a resurgence
and digital ones are nowhere near as popular as they once were. Thing is,
younger people don't wear watches. They just use their cell phones to get
the time.

[spsffan]

Next up, cursive writing. They have actually stopped teaching it in some
places!

Ah, well. A new category of illiterate to add to the already swelling
numbers!

Regards,

DAve

[spsffan]

Yes. And though I went without a cell phone for a long time, I would do
that from time to time. But, I don't feel dressed without a wristwatch.
Heck, I look at it while sitting in my office, with a wall clock, clock
display on the phone, and the omnipresent display on the computer. Habit!

Regards,

DAve

[William Sommerwerck]

> Also on the way out are analog clocks and watches.

Go to any watch display and you'll see dozens of watches with conventional
hands.

[dave]

On Fri, 09 Dec 2011 22:16:09 -0500, Buck Frobisher wrote:

> You have to have at least one in the house. Otherwise, what happens
> when there is a power outage? No phone, oh boohoohoo!
>
>

I have a twisted pair, on measured service. It is 8 dollars a month
(before the cornucopia of "fees" that get attached to LEC bills). I also
have a hardware dialup modem for my laptop, so I can use that route to
the internet. If the internet is seized by DHS my friends and I will
still form ad-hoc networks. Plus the 9-1-1 knows for sure where the old
man is when consciously incapacitated.

[kim.h...@sbcglobal.net]

Hey Gang!!

> there are several good reasons to have a hard wired phone
>
> 1. security - it does not transmit radio waves that normal technology
> can intercept, tapping into it is a crime absent a wiretap order
>
> 2. clarity - no interference (on a decent circuit), no drop out
>
> 3. reliability, particularly in a power outage situation
>
> 4. longevity

Add to the list that in many parts of the country, they can't find
you on a cell with 911,(they are SUPPOSED to be able to--good luck!) but
that is not a problem with the Plain Old Telephone. That's why I'll
NEVER dump the POT.

--
Kim Herron
W8ZV

[Carter]

On 12/10/2011 6:21 PM, JimCo wrote:

> Also on the way out are analog clocks and watches. Everything's
> digital.

Granted, this goes back a few years, but the clock in my wife's '06 Ford
Fusion is analog. I was really surprised to see that it wasn't just
another digital display on the face of the radio.

Carter K8VT

[JimCo]

On Dec 10, 8:59 pm, John Stone <jmse...@comcast.net> wrote:
> On 12/10/11 5:21 PM, in article

> cc26b4f1-2b6f-4afb-a680-f3b14a61e...@a17g2000yqj.googlegroups.com, "JimCo"

>
> <chemc...@ksu.edu> wrote:
> > Also on the way out are analog clocks and watches. Everything's
> > digital. A few years ago I was appalled  to learn that my grandson,
> > who graduated from high school a few years ago, couldn't tell time by
> > an analog clock! We had to instruct him about it.
> > JimCo
>
> Not sure I agree with that. Analog watches have enjoyed quite a resurgence
> and digital ones are nowhere near as popular as they once were. Thing is,
> younger people don't wear watches. They just use their cell phones to get
> the time.

You're right, of course. I have 2 analog wristwatches, and my wife has
several. And sure, the stores are full of analog watches and clocks. I
guess I sometimes tend to go off half-cocked about an issue when I am
surprised by some episode, such as the incident with my grandson not
being able to tell time by an analog clock. I have always preferred
analog clocks and watches from an esthetic viewpoint. When I see an
analog dial with hands, I not only see the present time, but from the
face of the dial I see the immediate past and future times. With
digital, I just see a thin slice of the NOW, present time.
JimCo

[D. Peter Maus]

That's actually an analog (pardon the pun) to the generational
cultural divide, today.

Today's culture isn't interested in the past or future contexts.
They're interested in NOW.

Where as, the older generations have learned that value of such
contexts.

[Bill]

perhaps you should talk to a wider spectrum of those on the other side
of the divide - this is a gross mischaracterization. Any young person,
in any era, throughout all of history, has less perspective than an
older person, but there are plenty of young folks from their teens on,
who care deeply about the future and are well aware of the past through
study, through discussions, through reading. You (or anyone who makes
broad generalizations) can do harm by believing these generalizations -
all stereotypes have some truth, but all universal truths have
exceptions. I think you will find that almost anyone over the age of 12
will be interested in both the past and the future, but exactly what
part of that past/future interests them will vary with personality,
temperament, and culture. I am teaching a much younger gentleman about
repairing older cars, he has a fine grasp of the restorer's ethos, and
is learning what to do and not do despite having no prior experience
using tools or working on mechanisms. One person at a time, we can all
pass on knowledge.

[Tim Mullen]

In <jc2qo9$vdg$1...@dont-email.me> "D. Peter Maus" <dpete...@att.net> writes:

> Today's culture isn't interested in the past or future contexts.
>They're interested in NOW.

That's an interesting observation. Were I coming of age in an
era where things change so gosh-darn rapidly, I might well feel
the same. You have a top-O-the-line CD player? What's a CD?
Learn perl? Everyone's moved on to python. DVD's? Extinct.
Why learn something that's soooo last year? Worry about tomorrow?
You have enough trouble keeping up with today.

> Where as, the older generations have learned that value of such
>contexts.

There is a lot to be said for learning fundamentals, but I'm
not so sure that's gone just because the surface keeps changing.
Everyone's aware of time, after all. Just because the meter
changes doesn't mean the concepts are forgotten.

The one thing today's culture does have going for it as a
result is flexbility. They can turn on a dime, and don't expect
the same-old-same-old year to year, let alone decade to decade.

[Yup, got a land-line myself, including phones dating back to
an Ericsson skeletal complete with lightning gap!]

--
--------------------------- Tim Mullen ---------------------------
Am I in your basement? Looking for antique televisions, fans, etc.
finger this account or call anytime: (212)-463-0552
----------- Living in the future, playing in the past ------------

[Kenneth Scharf]

How about an old style rotary desk phone converted to a cell phone?
http://www.sparkfun.com/categories/96

[Brenda Ann]

"JimCo" wrote in message
news:cbcdbc37-ca0b-48a8...@h18g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...

You're right, of course. I have 2 analog wristwatches, and my wife has
several. And sure, the stores are full of analog watches and clocks. I
guess I sometimes tend to go off half-cocked about an issue when I am
surprised by some episode, such as the incident with my grandson not
being able to tell time by an analog clock. I have always preferred
analog clocks and watches from an esthetic viewpoint. When I see an
analog dial with hands, I not only see the present time, but from the
face of the dial I see the immediate past and future times. With
digital, I just see a thin slice of the NOW, present time.
JimCo

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

When I was a kid, and "digital" clocks all had Telechron movements and nice
heavy plastic drums for the numbers, I thought that was way cool. When the
first LED watches came out, they were a novelty. Now that digital is
ubiquitous, it really doesn't "move" me, and I prefer the analog. I even
found an actual key wind alarm clock that is reminiscent of the old "Baby
Ben" by Westclox.

[hifi-tek]

"Brenda Ann" <newsg...@fullspectrumradio.org> wrote in message
news:z9OdnUS-S6AqknjT...@giganews.com...

Recently, I have been interested in the Jefferson Electric Golden Hour
analog clocks from the 50's. They are the ones with the 'floating hands.'
Talk about cool! Easy to restore, they keep perfect time and are
conversation starters. I buy them for 20 - 30 bucks and restore them. They
make great gifts for the over 35 y.o. crowd. The youngsters don't appreciate
them, probably because most of them cannot read them!

[Bill]

On 12/11/2011 2:24 PM, hifi-tek wrote:
> "Brenda Ann"<newsg...@fullspectrumradio.org> wrote in message
> news:z9OdnUS-S6AqknjT...@giganews.com...
>>
>>
>>
>> "JimCo" wrote in message
>> news:cbcdbc37-ca0b-48a8...@h18g2000yqg.googlegroups.com...

>

> Recently, I have been interested in the Jefferson Electric Golden Hour
> analog clocks from the 50's. They are the ones with the 'floating hands.'
> Talk about cool! Easy to restore, they keep perfect time and are
> conversation starters. I buy them for 20 - 30 bucks and restore them. They
> make great gifts for the over 35 y.o. crowd. The youngsters don't appreciate
> them, probably because most of them cannot read them!
>

nonsense - I have at least one "youngster" who very much appreciates
that exact and specific clock, and has one proudly displayed.

[dave]

On Sun, 11 Dec 2011 11:54:15 -0600, D. Peter Maus wrote:


>
> That's actually an analog (pardon the pun) to the generational
> cultural divide, today.
>
> Today's culture isn't interested in the past or future contexts.
> They're interested in NOW.
>
> Where as, the older generations have learned that value of such
> contexts.

Reality is analog. When I see a digital clock, I interpret the time by
visualizing clock hands. I compute time by visualizing clock hands. I
doubt most young people know how to visualize anything, period. Their
world of constant stimulation leaves no room for abstract exercises.

[William Sommerwerck]

"dave" <da...@dave.dave> wrote in message
news:CaSdnayDx5sTjnvT...@earthlink.com...

> Reality is analog. When I see a digital clock, I interpret the time by
> visualizing clock hands. I compute time by visualizing clock hands. I
> doubt most young people know how to visualize anything, period. Their
> world of constant stimulation leaves no room for abstract exercises.

The hour hand provides a visual analog of the Sun's daily "rotation" around
the Earth.

[Beloved Leader]

On Dec 12, 10:07 am, "William Sommerwerck"
<grizzledgee...@comcast.net> wrote:
> "dave" <d...@dave.dave> wrote in message

Then this is as good a time as any to note that those of us in the
northern hemisphere have just experienced the day with the latest
sunset. This occurs on December 7, not on December 21. Why is that?

http://myweb.tiscali.co.uk/moonkmft/Articles/EquationOfTime.html

This bothered me for years. I'd read Bob Ryan's Weather Almanac (Bob
Ryan was the longtime meterologist at DC's channel 4) and just could
not make sense of the seemingly incorrect sunset. I made a phone call
to the Naval Observatory, and the person there tried to explain things
to me. Now, due to the miracle of the Internets, the answer is easy to
find. Almost no one knows of this effect, but watchmakers have known
of it for quite some time.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_time

http://www.analemma.com/

Enjoy your sunsets, already getting later.

[William Sommerwerck]

"Beloved Leader" <Kim_J...@volcanomail.com> wrote in message
news:79aeb6bc-d2af-442c...@z25g2000vbs.googlegroups.com...

>> The hour hand provides a visual analog of the Sun's daily "rotation"
>> around the Earth.

> Then this is as good a time as any to note that those of us in the
> northern hemisphere have just experienced the day with the latest
> sunset. This occurs on December 7, not on December 21. Why is that?

Presumably, the solstice is the longest day, not necessarily the latest
sunset.

[Bill M]

I live in Puerto Rico, 18th parallel. We have two days a year where the
sun is directly overhead. They are not our longest days.

[Bill M]

Just a story...
A few years ago my goddaughter was here and something came up about
'what time is it? .' She was about 11 y/o and top of her class,
yadda-yadda. Smart girl.

My wife pointed her to a clock on the wall and she sheepishly admitted
that she didn't know how to read it. Jaws dropped. It took about one
minute of explanation and she said "Oh, I get it...the small hand is for
hours and the long hand is for minutes".

Her parents, or school, had never taught her that simple, basic
explanation. She's 17 now and its still a big laugh for all of us. She
visits and looks up at the same clock and says "It's 11:27 (or
whatever)" with a big grin.

If nobody bothers to explain a clock how are younger people to know?

-Bill

[John Stone]

On 12/12/11 6:03 PM, in article jc64o...@news6.newsguy.com, "Bill M"

<radio...@geeeemail.com> wrote:

> If nobody bothers to explain a clock how are younger people to know?

I'm pretty sure I figured it out by myself, like many other things I've
learned. Or maybe it was Romper Room or Ding Dong School.

[Tim Mullen]

In <CaSdnayDx5sTjnvT...@earthlink.com> dave <da...@dave.dave> writes:

>Reality is analog.

Reality's digital, with very fine quantization steps call "quantum".

[D. Peter Maus]

On 12/12/11 20:16 , Tim Mullen wrote:
> In<CaSdnayDx5sTjnvT...@earthlink.com> dave<da...@dave.dave> writes:
>
>> Reality is analog.
>
> Reality's digital, with very fine quantization steps call "quantum".
>

Quantum is singular.

> quantization steps called "quanta".
>>

[dave]

On Mon, 12 Dec 2011 20:03:19 -0400, Bill M wrote:

>
> If nobody bothers to explain a clock how are younger people to know?
>
> -Bill

One would hope the child could look at a clock face and a digital clock
(both displaying the correct time) and figure it out. Clue: "12"

[Tim Mullen]

In <jc6p6u$6ci$1...@dont-email.me> "D. Peter Maus" <dpete...@att.net> writes:

> Quantum is singular.

Right. Mea culpa!

[buzz]

JimCo wrote:
> On Dec 10, 2:09 pm, Terry S <tschw10...@aol.com> wrote:
>> We have two -- one corded pushbutton in the garage, and in the
>> basement man-cave, a 1960 rotary dial Automatic Electric payphone. No
>> ringer on that one, so as to not interrupt poker games.
>>
>> It's truly amazing to learn how many of today's young people have
>> never seen, much less used, a rotary dial phone. Many have never known
>> a house with a land line.
>>
>> Terry
>

> Also on the way out are analog clocks and watches. Everything's
> digital. A few years ago I was appalled to learn that my grandson,
> who graduated from high school a few years ago, couldn't tell time by
> an analog clock! We had to instruct him about it.
> JimCo

So how do you explain counter-clockwise to someone who has never see an
analog clock.

[dave]

I think somebody got pranked by his grandson. Analog clocks are
everywhere, even next to digital clocks. How many times do you have to
see the time expressed both ways before you figure it out?

I have analog and digital clocks and a hard wired POTS phone.

[Michael Black]

That's the way you turn things to unscrew something.

Michael

[gregz]

I have thought about people who might not ever see an analog dial, and how
they might perceive time. Every time I see digital, I convert it to analog.

Greg

[Chester Copperpot]

"Lefty Loosie, Righty Tighty"

[Brenda Ann]

"Chester Copperpot" wrote in message
news:uvcri7pgcook9g9fj...@4ax.com...

"Lefty Loosie, Righty Tighty"


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

... unless you've owned an old Chrysler product...

[Michael A. Terrell]

But only one one side. :)


--
You can't have a sense of humor, if you have no sense.

[Brenda Ann]

"Michael A. Terrell" wrote in message
news:KJydnfJR5Jr8QLDS...@earthlink.com...

Brenda Ann wrote:
>
> "Chester Copperpot" wrote in message
> news:uvcri7pgcook9g9fj...@4ax.com...
>
> "Lefty Loosie, Righty Tighty"
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> ... unless you've owned an old Chrysler product...


But only one one side. :)

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I remember when I bought my '62 Dart. I went stark staring crazy trying to
change a tire on that thing. I believe it was the right rear tire. There was
just no way those lugnuts were coming off. I found completely by accident
about the reverse threads.

[Michael A. Terrell]

I knew about them, but by the time I bought a Chrysler vehicle they
had done away with left hand threads. My dad had a '60 Valiant with the
pushbutton automatic, but I never had to change a tire for him. :)

My current vehicle is a dark green '97 Dakota.

[spsffan]

On 2/4/2012 5:37 PM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
>
> Brenda Ann wrote:
>>
>> "Chester Copperpot" wrote in message
>> news:uvcri7pgcook9g9fj...@4ax.com...
>>
>> "Lefty Loosie, Righty Tighty"
>>
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>>
>> ... unless you've owned an old Chrysler product...
>
>
> But only one one side. :)
>
>

Still, very simple. The lug nuts tighten as you turn them towards the
front of the car. That's all you need to know.

[Michael A. Terrell]

But only on certain vehicles.

[dave]

Or the set screw in a Switchcraft XLR

[HagstAr]

On 2/5/2012 3:39 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> ront of the car. That's all you need to know.
>
> But only on certain vehicles.
>

Yes old Mopars AND some early 60s GM products, my '63 Buick Special
ragtop had those left hand lugs.

John H.

[Michael A. Terrell]

Made for left handed studs, no doubt! ;-)

My '63 Pontiac Catalina convetible had all right hand studs.

[rrus...@hotmail.com]

On Feb 5, 10:34 pm, "Michael A. Terrell" <mike.terr...@earthlink.net>
wrote:

> HagstAr wrote:
>
> > On 2/5/2012 3:39 AM, Michael A. Terrell wrote:
> > > ront of the car. That's all you need to know.
>
> > >     But only on certain vehicles.
>
> > Yes old Mopars AND some early 60s GM products, my '63 Buick Special
> > ragtop had those left hand lugs.
>
>    Made for left handed studs, no doubt! ;-)
>
>    My '63 Pontiac Catalina convetible had all right hand studs.

Mopar was consistent. GM wasn't.

[Tim Mullen]

In <jgiirk$hhi$2...@dont-email.me> buzz <bu...@nowhere.com> writes:

>So how do you explain counter-clockwise to someone who has never see an
>analog clock.

As long as things rotate clockwise and counter-clockwise will be
useful directions. Heck, a lot of people don't know why clockwise
is, um, "clockwise", and that doesn't slow them down.

[Tim Mullen]

In <6_GdnUodN9MNCLPS...@earthlink.com> dave <da...@dave.dave> writes:

>On Sun, 05 Feb 2012 08:23:42 +0900, Brenda Ann wrote:

>> "Chester Copperpot" wrote in message
>> news:uvcri7pgcook9g9fj...@4ax.com...
>>
>> "Lefty Loosie, Righty Tighty"
>>

>> ... unless you've owned an old Chrysler product...

>Or the set screw in a Switchcraft XLR

Or the top nut on a bank teller's (radial) fan.
Do not ask how I know this...

[Michael A. Terrell]

And?