(nt)

[Otis]

(nt)

[jerry]

Oh Roundel table is much but and more feasible than my "circquare" table, which will go down as brillantly failed idea. I do like the if it can be DIY clause, because I know there are cases where either the sheer time or fact that what i would do would be terrible or wrong need to be redone. Resulting in a lack of 02 enjoyment time.

ok, i'm having a fair bit of difficulty deciphering what exactly you are intending to convey with your post. i'm thinking a couple strategically placed commas, an article or two and a sentence subject would help.

i'm thinking your typing fingers couldn't keep up with your train of thought.

anyhow, if laws are to be determined, they must be clear. we do NOT want to invite litigation in the future... (although that might be a source of income for some FAQ members and we'd all hope that any such income stream would be duly spent on 02 efforts). perhaps this could be a sub-section rule.

[jp02ti]

The only appropriate table is a "double kidney" shaped table. With leather Recarro chairs and alpina castor wheels with Yokahama skid resistant rubber.

The table will be finished in Alpine weiB and each member will have memo pad in their original 02 color of choice (no aftermarket colors allowed).

Proposal for rule # whatever we are up to now: thou shalt not badge an 02 with tii,ti or turbo (or automatic, although why one would want to do this is beyond me…) unless it was produced as such.

[jp02ti]

The only appropriate table is a "double kidney" shaped table. With leather Recarro chairs and alpina castor wheels with Yokahama skid resistant rubber.

The table will be finished in Alpine weiB and each member will have memo pad in their original 02 color of choice (no aftermarket colors allowed).

Proposal for rule # whatever we are up to now: thou shalt not badge an 02 with tii,ti or turbo (or automatic, although why one would want to do this is beyond me…) unless it was produced as such.

[H_Krix]

(no aftermarket colors allowed)

Ouch man, ouch.

thou shalt not badge an 02 with tii,ti or turbo (or automatic, although why one would want to do this is beyond me…) unless it was produced as such.

What about an Auto to 5-spd conversion? Do you have to keep the "Automatic" tag?

[Guest Anonymous]

I was going to let this thread go, but the bit about DIY jobs got me.

We need to have this law go to a sub-committe to discuss the finer points of the law. There should be some exclusions and conditions provided for.

Situation #1- a FAQer does not posess the tools for the job, and the availability of the tools is such that it would seriously detract from actual 02 driving time. (to be known as the "just drive it" clause)

Situation #B- a FAQer does not posess the skills nor the tools for the task, but is willing to watch and learn in hopes of being confident enough in the future to perform the task him or herself. (to be known as the "learning curve" or "Damn, I coulda done that" clause)

Situation #III- a FAQer that has to choose between two car related projects at the same time shall be allowed to outsource one of the tasks in order to keep both projects progressing at an acceptable rate. This is provided that provisions of both of the above clauses have been already met. Letting neither the 02 or the wife's(or other SO) car sit while the other gets worked on is the ultimate objective of this clause. (to be known as "keep the wife happy" clause)

[Otis]

What say ye to our Guest, 02ers of the Roundel Table? Shall we allow the exclusions and conditions -- perticularly considering that the "Keep the wife happy" has a certain viceral appeal? Or will the hard-liners prevail, deny the modifications and/or additive clauses, and redirect our Guest to another web page -- say, www.Honda.com? Vox populi, I say. Your collective wills must prevail.

[H_Krix]

a FAQer does not posess the skills nor the tools for the task, but is willing to watch and learn in hopes of being confident enough in the future to perform the task him or herself. (to be known as the "learning curve" or "Damn, I coulda done that" clause)

Hmmmm.... Wouldn't a true FAQ'er ask the FAQ for help first?

I've never rebuilt a front end before and (i think) neither had Esty. With many questions, inquities, and pleas for help, daunting projects can become nearly commonplace. I was planning on having a shop rebuild my suspension for me. After looking at many others' cars (BLUNT, BillWilliams) and the proper steps to undertake, I'm proud to be doing the work myself... which will take considerably longer, but cost considerably less.

I think that the above should only apply in extreme cases where all other avenues have been exhausted. Unfortunately, I see this as being somewhat of a "Loophole" - allowing pocketbook mechanics an aside due to general apathy, or lack of desire to split one's knuckles removing frozen bolts.

[2002Targa]

I have to vote no with this one. I am currently using a plastic Q-tip with one end snipped off to jam the button on my hazard flasher switch. (temp fix of course)

[SteveJ]

I think there is a loophole for all of these FAQ LAWS that states "as long as the item is not used for it's intended purpose, but instead for that of a kluge or even as a parody, that the use of said banned item does not fall under the enforcement of the FAQ LAW."

So, go ahead and jam broken Q-tips under the leading edge trim to quiet that whistling noise because you have dog hearing. (Although I think the whistling should be protected under it's own FAQ LAW.)

[Otis]

Ah, 'tis a classic legislator's dilemma. One often needs to draft a law broadly, in order to capture all sins and abuses (whether actual or perceived), while sufficiently anticipating future attempts to circumvent the statute (i.e., to "exploit a loophole"). Yet, if the law is drafted too broadly, the law becomes equally useless or unenforceable, since it is "overbroad" -- the so-called "dolphins in a tuna net" problem. So, what to do?

In this instance, the Q-Tip law was proposed in order to address Concours applications (see, e.g., this month's Roundel). But I see now that the law is indeed, overly broad, and therefore would be ripe for judicial challenge -- and likely would be ruled to be unenforceable. Clearly, redrafting is necessary.

Yet, before we attempt to perfect the language, aren't we missing the bigger point here? Many judicial challenges to laws come in the form of assertions that a particular law is "unconstitutional." Which brings this thread to a full loop. Isn't it true, that what we really are missing here is a basic FAQ Constitution, pursuant to which laws may be drafted and enacted thereunder? Without a basic constitution, we will be left to debate endlessly, which laws are overly broad, which are enforceable or unenforceable, etc., etc. And that will lead to chaos, and/or anarchy -- soon, Bostonian FAQers will be dumping tea into the harbor, and riding through the New England countryside -- one headlight if by land, two if by sea. Indeed, I submit that we are in dire need of a Constitution. Drafting volunteers needed -- Whom among us shall step forward to be the Jeffersonnian Forefather of the FAQ Constitution?

[SteveJ]

Draft the 2002FAQ constitution, yea.

We the FAQers, in order to form a more perfect union between car and driver...

Just don't let johny sign it. (Remember what happened with Hancock.)

[TMK-001]

2. No 02 Owner shall be permitted to take his or her car in "for maintenance." The only permitted course of action, is DIY -- which after all, is the point of owning an 02.

I hung my doors today and I can tell you there was a lot of ****, ****, ****'s hahaha... I was thinking the whole time "I SHOULD PAY SOMEONE TO DO THIS!!!"

[70roundtail02]

Oh they are a huge pain in the ass, mine was a combination of friend, jackstand and swearing.

[RandyMolson]

Bahh. Just rewrite Law 3:

3. No 02 Owner shall be permitted to use a Q-Tip to clean anything other than his or her own ear.

There, problem solved.