On 26-Apr-22 18:40, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 26/04/2022 4:48 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 06:40:25 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
>> <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 7:19:30 AM UTC-4, CDB wrote:
>>>> On 4/25/2022 12:49 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>
>>>>> That's the second question in this subthread that will doubtless go
>>>> unanswered.
>>>>
>>>> Tony may have found a new way to madden you.
>>>
>>> Eh? He's not even n  this subthread.
>>>
>>> But he's been ignoring questions about fact for years.
>>
>> I never know  if I should answer your questions.  You often pose a
>> question, I reply with the answer to the question, and you indignently
>> respond that your question was rhetorical and obviously wasn't a
>> question.
>>
>> As far as I can tell, one of the unanswered questions in this
>> subthread is "So it goes on flushing every N minutes, whether it's ben
>> used in between or not?"
>>
>> I don't have an answer to that.  I have plumbed my knowledge base on
>> the workings of urinals and come up dry.
>>
>> The other still-unanswered question seems to be "Don't you flush the
>> urinal? (Or step away from the sensor so it flushes itself as you
>> leave?)"
>>
>> The "you" in that case was Richard Heathfield.  I declined to answer
>> that one on the basis of not being in a position to know Richard's
>> urinal habits.
>
> Quite why it matters I really don't wish to enquire but, if you must
> know, in the UK urinals are self-flushing, and have been for as far back
> as I can remember. In that respect, they're rather like killfiles; they
> dispense of superfluous nonsense such as PTD outpourings without any
> need to give them any further thought.
>
Only someone like PTD would assume/demand that _all_ urinals in a given
country should rigidly adhere to one exact method of operation.

Indeed he seems to take a similar approach on a wide range of other
topics.
I suspect it is groundwork which will then permit him to issue a
sweeping condemnation of everyone and everything in that country.
(If there is any other purpose, I haven't spotted it.)

Is it a good idea to encourage him?

--
Sam Plusnet

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:23:24 -0600
lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

> On 2022-04-26 12:55, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
> > On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:44:30 -0400
> > Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
> >
> >> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 10:17:46 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
> >>
> >>>> Another important question would be abut pre-flush habits. I unzip my
> >>>> fly with my right hand and pull out and hold my penis with my left
> >>>> hand. Is this because I'm left-handed, and do right-handed people do
> >>>> it opposite?
> >>>
> >>> Unzipping the fly with the right hand is (I think) pretty much universal
> >>> in North America, and perhaps elsewhere, because of the position of the
> >>> flap that covers the fly.
> >>>
> >>> I hold the hose with my right hand. I am right handed.
> >
> > Gosh. I've been doing it Wrong all these years.
>
> I thought at first you were referring to the holding of the spout. Were
> you referring to the opening ov the cover?
>
> > Let's celebrate our differences, eh?
> > (Y-fronts and underpants are up next)
>
> I had to look y-fronts up. I don't think I have ever worn them, and

Oh I assumed it was one of those Xpondian cultural differences we'd already discussed here. Sorry, perhaps it was Another Group. Or my memory's going (going where?). I definitely remember sandwiches and "English" muffins.

> possibly have never seen them. I currently wear either briefs or
> boxer-briefs.
>
>

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:23:24 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

>On 2022-04-26 12:55, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:44:30 -0400
>> Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 10:17:46 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>>> Another important question would be abut pre-flush habits. I unzip my
>>>>> fly with my right hand and pull out and hold my penis with my left
>>>>> hand. Is this because I'm left-handed, and do right-handed people do
>>>>> it opposite?
>>>>
>>>> Unzipping the fly with the right hand is (I think) pretty much universal
>>>> in North America, and perhaps elsewhere, because of the position of the
>>>> flap that covers the fly.
>>>>
>>>> I hold the hose with my right hand. I am right handed.
>>
>> Gosh. I've been doing it Wrong all these years.
>
>I thought at first you were referring to the holding of the spout. Were
>you referring to the opening ov the cover?
>
>> Let's celebrate our differences, eh?
>> (Y-fronts and underpants are up next)
>
>I had to look y-fronts up. I don't think I have ever worn them, and
>possibly have never seen them. I currently wear either briefs or
>boxer-briefs.
>

But briefs and boxer-briefs *are* Y-fronts!

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 12:33:49 -0700
Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:

> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 19:55:20 +0100, "Kerr-Mudd, John"
> <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
[]
> >Let's celebrate our differences, eh?
> >(Y-fronts and underpants are up next)
>
> Isn't the term "y-front" used to refer to a type of underpants?

Only in some quarters. Maybe not NJ.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Briefs#Terminology

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On 26/04/2022 9:00 pm, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> On 26-Apr-22 18:40, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 26/04/2022 4:48 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 06:40:25 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
>>> <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 7:19:30 AM UTC-4, CDB wrote:
>>>>> On 4/25/2022 12:49 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> That's the second question in this subthread that will doubtless go
>>>>> unanswered.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tony may have found a new way to madden you.
>>>>
>>>> Eh? He's not even n  this subthread.
>>>>
>>>> But he's been ignoring questions about fact for years.
>>>
>>> I never know  if I should answer your questions.  You often pose a
>>> question, I reply with the answer to the question, and you indignently
>>> respond that your question was rhetorical and obviously wasn't a
>>> question.
>>>
>>> As far as I can tell, one of the unanswered questions in this
>>> subthread is "So it goes on flushing every N minutes, whether it's ben
>>> used in between or not?"
>>>
>>> I don't have an answer to that.  I have plumbed my knowledge base on
>>> the workings of urinals and come up dry.
>>>
>>> The other still-unanswered question seems to be "Don't you flush the
>>> urinal? (Or step away from the sensor so it flushes itself as you
>>> leave?)"
>>>
>>> The "you" in that case was Richard Heathfield.  I declined to answer
>>> that one on the basis of not being in a position to know Richard's
>>> urinal habits.
>>
>> Quite why it matters I really don't wish to enquire but, if you must
>> know, in the UK urinals are self-flushing, and have been for as far
>> back as I can remember. In that respect, they're rather like
>> killfiles; they dispense of superfluous nonsense such as PTD
>> outpourings without any need to give them any further thought.
>>
> Only someone like PTD would assume/demand that _all_ urinals in a given
> country should rigidly adhere to one exact method of operation.

When it comes to urinals he might even be right. I can't swear to it, of
course, but in <cough> decades of living here and having worked and
lived in many parts of the country, I have never once encountered a
manually flushed urinal. Is your experience different?

> Indeed he seems to take a similar approach on a wide range of other topics.
> I suspect it is groundwork which will then permit him to issue a
> sweeping condemnation of everyone and everything in that country.
> (If there is any other purpose, I haven't spotted it.)

Who cares?

> Is it a good idea to encourage him?

To avoid encouraging him, we'd all have to stop posting... which may
even be his goal.

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 12:33:49 -0700, Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com>
wrote:

>On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 19:55:20 +0100, "Kerr-Mudd, John"
><admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>
>>On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:44:30 -0400
>>Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 10:17:46 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>> >> Another important question would be abut pre-flush habits. I unzip my
>>> >> fly with my right hand and pull out and hold my penis with my left
>>> >> hand. Is this because I'm left-handed, and do right-handed people do
>>> >> it opposite?
>>> >
>>> >Unzipping the fly with the right hand is (I think) pretty much universal
>>> >in North America, and perhaps elsewhere, because of the position of the
>>> >flap that covers the fly.
>>> >
>>> >I hold the hose with my right hand. I am right handed.
>>
>>Gosh. I've been doing it Wrong all these years.
>>
>>Let's celebrate our differences, eh?
>>(Y-fronts and underpants are up next)
>
>Isn't the term "y-front" used to refer to a type of underpants?

Depends. To me, "underpants" are something young females wore. Young
females of the age where a young male would sing out: I see London, I
see France. I see (name's) underpants."

Also very young males, although underpants for very young males are
often just smaller Y-fronts. They don't really need the opening
because most young males lower their underware to pee, but it's
probably one of those gender identification things.

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 20:45:29 +0100
Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

> On 26-Apr-22 4:06, Peter Moylan wrote:
>
> > When I wash my hands at home, I adjust the tap for the smallest possible
> > stream of water. That lets me add water only gradually as needed. A
> > side benefit is that I need far less soap that way. Many people fail to
> > understand the logic here, so they wash away the soap before it's had a
> > chance to do its job.
>
> We have soft water so a very little soap goes a long way.
> My wife turns the tap full on, leaves it running, gets a huge squirt of
> (liquid) soap and puts her hands into the flow - thus washing off 95% of
> the soap she just collected - and then washes her hands.
> >
> > I agree that the sensor-controlled taps are faulty in that respect.
> > However, the trend for the last many years has been to avoid the need
> > for anyone to touch the equipment in public facilities, because user
> > controls are a common way of transmitting disease. That's why
> > user-operated flushing controls on urinals were abandoned (at least in
> > this country) decades ago.

Rarely implemented in the UK; mechanical "flush when full and refill" tanks originally were replaced by/supplemented with on-demand sensor systems. This would be for a wall of urinals
OK I need a picture, gosh quite a price:

https://www.washwareessentials.co.uk/stainless-steel-urinals/trough-urinal

Earlier ones were ceramic full wall, or maybe just a wall with a gutter in some basic boozers.

> >
> Taps need a more controllable controller - something akin to a Theramin.
>
(Like)

"Turn that bl**dy tap down!"

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:47:00 -0600
lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

> On 2022-04-26 10:02, lar3ryca wrote:
> > On 2022-04-26 08:13, CDB wrote:
> >> On 4/26/2022 9:31 AM, lar3ryca wrote:
> >>
> >> [perving]
> >>
> >>>>>> Why did the non-practice of "bra-burning" attract so much
> >>>>>> attention back when it didn't happen? Because it threatened the
> >>>>>> male libido!
> >>
> >>>> My eyes are up here, Buster.
> >>
> >>> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q7DniRWRA7s
> >>
> >> A cameraman's lot.
> >>
> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tL4z-nKmTgI
> >>
> >> [...]

Poor Quality Video

> >>
> >> But my favourite is
> >>
> >> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KFQmw-A3bDo
> >>
> >> And now I'm asking myself if "tasted all the Summer's pride" is a
> >> presentiment of the coming Fall.
> >
> > I had most of their albums. I do remember that version, but they also
> > had a faster version. Can't remember what album it was on. I know they
> > made several versions of their first album, and perhaps I had one of them.
>
> Found it.
>
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cMrNaH7Lxpc
>
> I think it may have been in an earlier release of the album.
> The version you posted is definitely better.
>

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:10:06 +0100
Richard Heathfield <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:

> On 26/04/2022 9:00 pm, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> > On 26-Apr-22 18:40, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> >> On 26/04/2022 4:48 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
> >>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 06:40:25 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
> >>> <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 7:19:30 AM UTC-4, CDB wrote:
> >>>>> On 4/25/2022 12:49 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>>>> That's the second question in this subthread that will doubtless go
> >>>>> unanswered.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Tony may have found a new way to madden you.
> >>>>
> >>>> Eh? He's not even n  this subthread.
> >>>>
> >>>> But he's been ignoring questions about fact for years.
> >>>
> >>> I never know  if I should answer your questions.  You often pose a
> >>> question, I reply with the answer to the question, and you indignently
> >>> respond that your question was rhetorical and obviously wasn't a
> >>> question.
> >>>
> >>> As far as I can tell, one of the unanswered questions in this
> >>> subthread is "So it goes on flushing every N minutes, whether it's ben
> >>> used in between or not?"
> >>>
> >>> I don't have an answer to that.  I have plumbed my knowledge base on
> >>> the workings of urinals and come up dry.
> >>>
> >>> The other still-unanswered question seems to be "Don't you flush the
> >>> urinal? (Or step away from the sensor so it flushes itself as you
> >>> leave?)"
> >>>
> >>> The "you" in that case was Richard Heathfield.  I declined to answer
> >>> that one on the basis of not being in a position to know Richard's
> >>> urinal habits.
> >>
> >> Quite why it matters I really don't wish to enquire but, if you must
> >> know, in the UK urinals are self-flushing, and have been for as far
> >> back as I can remember. In that respect, they're rather like
> >> killfiles; they dispense of superfluous nonsense such as PTD
> >> outpourings without any need to give them any further thought.
> >>
> > Only someone like PTD would assume/demand that _all_ urinals in a given
> > country should rigidly adhere to one exact method of operation.
>
> When it comes to urinals he might even be right. I can't swear to it, of
> course, but in <cough> decades of living here and having worked and
> lived in many parts of the country, I have never once encountered a
> manually flushed urinal. Is your experience different?
>
I may have seen one somewhere - a down pipe with a silver circle push button with a red centre, I took a while wondering what it was for. I did use it after some contemplation.

> > Indeed he seems to take a similar approach on a wide range of other topics.
> > I suspect it is groundwork which will then permit him to issue a
> > sweeping condemnation of everyone and everything in that country.
> > (If there is any other purpose, I haven't spotted it.)
>
> Who cares?
>
> > Is it a good idea to encourage him?
>
> To avoid encouraging him, we'd all have to stop posting... which may
> even be his goal.
>
Nah, he thrives on posting stuff he hopes we'll correct him on, then he can claim the fight was started by the person trying to help him!

--
Bah, and indeed Humbug.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:56:44 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

>On 2022-04-26 13:45, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> On 26-Apr-22 4:06, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>
>>> When I wash my hands at home, I adjust the tap for the smallest possible
>>> stream of water. That lets me add water only gradually as needed. A
>>> side benefit is that I need far less soap that way. Many people fail to
>>> understand the logic here, so they wash away the soap before it's had a
>>> chance to do its job.
>>
>> We have soft water so a very little soap goes a long way.
>> My wife turns the tap full on, leaves it running, gets a huge squirt of
>> (liquid) soap and puts her hands into the flow - thus washing off 95% of
>> the soap she just collected - and then washes her hands.
>>>
>>> I agree that the sensor-controlled taps are faulty in that respect.
>>> However, the trend for the last many years has been to avoid the need
>>> for anyone to touch the equipment in public facilities, because user
>>> controls are a common way of transmitting disease. That's why
>>> user-operated flushing controls on urinals were abandoned (at least in
>>> this country) decades ago.

They should have used foot pedals instead of sensor-controlled taps
..

>> Taps need a more controllable controller - something akin to a Theramin.
>
>
>Did you ever get that feeling that you have invented something, only to
>find out that someone else has already invented it?
>
>You should have that feeling right now, but I have no idea if it's
>already patented and/or in production. That's a GREAT idea!
>

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:07:56 +0100, "Kerr-Mudd, John"
<admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:

>On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 12:33:49 -0700
>Ken Blake <Ken@invalid.news.com> wrote:
>
>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 19:55:20 +0100, "Kerr-Mudd, John"
>> <admin@127.0.0.1> wrote:
>>
>[]
>> >Let's celebrate our differences, eh?
>> >(Y-fronts and underpants are up next)
>>
>> Isn't the term "y-front" used to refer to a type of underpants?
>
>Only in some quarters. Maybe not NJ.

Yes, I was talking about the UK, and commenting that the "and" in
"Y-fronts and underpants" seemed inappropriate.

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:00:16 +0100, Sam Plusnet <not@home.com> wrote:

>On 26-Apr-22 18:40, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>> On 26/04/2022 4:48 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 06:40:25 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
>>> <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 7:19:30 AM UTC-4, CDB wrote:
>>>>> On 4/25/2022 12:49 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> That's the second question in this subthread that will doubtless go
>>>>> unanswered.
>>>>>
>>>>> Tony may have found a new way to madden you.
>>>>
>>>> Eh? He's not even n  this subthread.
>>>>
>>>> But he's been ignoring questions about fact for years.
>>>
>>> I never know  if I should answer your questions.  You often pose a
>>> question, I reply with the answer to the question, and you indignently
>>> respond that your question was rhetorical and obviously wasn't a
>>> question.
>>>
>>> As far as I can tell, one of the unanswered questions in this
>>> subthread is "So it goes on flushing every N minutes, whether it's ben
>>> used in between or not?"
>>>
>>> I don't have an answer to that.  I have plumbed my knowledge base on
>>> the workings of urinals and come up dry.
>>>
>>> The other still-unanswered question seems to be "Don't you flush the
>>> urinal? (Or step away from the sensor so it flushes itself as you
>>> leave?)"
>>>
>>> The "you" in that case was Richard Heathfield.  I declined to answer
>>> that one on the basis of not being in a position to know Richard's
>>> urinal habits.
>>
>> Quite why it matters I really don't wish to enquire but, if you must
>> know, in the UK urinals are self-flushing, and have been for as far back
>> as I can remember. In that respect, they're rather like killfiles; they
>> dispense of superfluous nonsense such as PTD outpourings without any
>> need to give them any further thought.
>>
>Only someone like PTD would assume/demand that _all_ urinals in a given
>country should rigidly adhere to one exact method of operation.

I use a urinal in the same way regardless of what country it's in.

>Indeed he seems to take a similar approach on a wide range of other
>topics.
>I suspect it is groundwork which will then permit him to issue a
>sweeping condemnation of everyone and everything in that country.
>(If there is any other purpose, I haven't spotted it.)
>
>Is it a good idea to encourage him?

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:10:06 +0100, Richard Heathfield
<rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:

>On 26/04/2022 9:00 pm, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> On 26-Apr-22 18:40, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>> On 26/04/2022 4:48 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 06:40:25 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
>>>> <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 7:19:30 AM UTC-4, CDB wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/25/2022 12:49 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's the second question in this subthread that will doubtless go
>>>>>> unanswered.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tony may have found a new way to madden you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Eh? He's not even n  this subthread.
>>>>>
>>>>> But he's been ignoring questions about fact for years.
>>>>
>>>> I never know  if I should answer your questions.  You often pose a
>>>> question, I reply with the answer to the question, and you indignently
>>>> respond that your question was rhetorical and obviously wasn't a
>>>> question.
>>>>
>>>> As far as I can tell, one of the unanswered questions in this
>>>> subthread is "So it goes on flushing every N minutes, whether it's ben
>>>> used in between or not?"
>>>>
>>>> I don't have an answer to that.  I have plumbed my knowledge base on
>>>> the workings of urinals and come up dry.
>>>>
>>>> The other still-unanswered question seems to be "Don't you flush the
>>>> urinal? (Or step away from the sensor so it flushes itself as you
>>>> leave?)"
>>>>
>>>> The "you" in that case was Richard Heathfield.  I declined to answer
>>>> that one on the basis of not being in a position to know Richard's
>>>> urinal habits.
>>>
>>> Quite why it matters I really don't wish to enquire but, if you must
>>> know, in the UK urinals are self-flushing, and have been for as far
>>> back as I can remember. In that respect, they're rather like
>>> killfiles; they dispense of superfluous nonsense such as PTD
>>> outpourings without any need to give them any further thought.
>>>
>> Only someone like PTD would assume/demand that _all_ urinals in a given
>> country should rigidly adhere to one exact method of operation.
>
>When it comes to urinals he might even be right. I can't swear to it, of
>course, but in <cough> decades of living here and having worked and
>lived in many parts of the country, I have never once encountered a
>manually flushed urinal. Is your experience different?

Here in the US, I see manually flushed urinals less frequently than I
used to, but some are still around.

>> Indeed he seems to take a similar approach on a wide range of other topics.
>> I suspect it is groundwork which will then permit him to issue a
>> sweeping condemnation of everyone and everything in that country.
>> (If there is any other purpose, I haven't spotted it.)
>
>Who cares?
>
>> Is it a good idea to encourage him?
>
>To avoid encouraging him, we'd all have to stop posting...

No, we should all stop replying to him. Killfile him and he'll
eventually get bored and go away.

> which may
>even be his goal.

On 2022-04-26 14:03, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:23:24 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2022-04-26 12:55, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:44:30 -0400
>>> Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 10:17:46 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>> Another important question would be abut pre-flush habits. I unzip my
>>>>>> fly with my right hand and pull out and hold my penis with my left
>>>>>> hand. Is this because I'm left-handed, and do right-handed people do
>>>>>> it opposite?
>>>>>
>>>>> Unzipping the fly with the right hand is (I think) pretty much universal
>>>>> in North America, and perhaps elsewhere, because of the position of the
>>>>> flap that covers the fly.
>>>>>
>>>>> I hold the hose with my right hand. I am right handed.
>>>
>>> Gosh. I've been doing it Wrong all these years.
>>
>> I thought at first you were referring to the holding of the spout. Were
>> you referring to the opening ov the cover?
>>
>>> Let's celebrate our differences, eh?
>>> (Y-fronts and underpants are up next)
>>
>> I had to look y-fronts up. I don't think I have ever worn them, and
>> possibly have never seen them. I currently wear either briefs or
>> boxer-briefs.

> But briefs and boxer-briefs *are* Y-fronts!

I would call Y-fronts a subset of briefs and boxer-briefs.

https://www.complex.com/style/how-to-buy-mens-underwear/boxers-or-briefs

Cruise down to the heading "Boxers, Briefs, or Boxer Briefs?"

No sign of a Y there. These are the only style of briefs or boxer-briefs
I have ever worn.

I said I may never have seen Y-fronts, but I'll check the next time I am
in front of the underwear shelves.

On 26/04/2022 9:41 pm, Ken Blake wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:10:06 +0100, Richard Heathfield
> <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
>
>> On 26/04/2022 9:00 pm, Sam Plusnet wrote:

<snip>

>>> Is it a good idea to encourage him?
>>
>> To avoid encouraging him, we'd all have to stop posting...
>
> No, we should all stop replying to him.

I have done so.

> Killfile him

I have done so.

> and he'll
> eventually get bored and go away.

Hasn't worked so far. We need to do some more work on that "all".

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

On 2022-04-26 14:10, Richard Heathfield wrote:
> On 26/04/2022 9:00 pm, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> On 26-Apr-22 18:40, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>> On 26/04/2022 4:48 pm, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 06:40:25 -0700 (PDT), "Peter T. Daniels"
>>>> <grammatim@verizon.net> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tuesday, April 26, 2022 at 7:19:30 AM UTC-4, CDB wrote:
>>>>>> On 4/25/2022 12:49 PM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> That's the second question in this subthread that will doubtless go
>>>>>> unanswered.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Tony may have found a new way to madden you.
>>>>>
>>>>> Eh? He's not even n  this subthread.
>>>>>
>>>>> But he's been ignoring questions about fact for years.
>>>>
>>>> I never know  if I should answer your questions.  You often pose a
>>>> question, I reply with the answer to the question, and you indignently
>>>> respond that your question was rhetorical and obviously wasn't a
>>>> question.
>>>>
>>>> As far as I can tell, one of the unanswered questions in this
>>>> subthread is "So it goes on flushing every N minutes, whether it's ben
>>>> used in between or not?"
>>>>
>>>> I don't have an answer to that.  I have plumbed my knowledge base on
>>>> the workings of urinals and come up dry.
>>>>
>>>> The other still-unanswered question seems to be "Don't you flush the
>>>> urinal? (Or step away from the sensor so it flushes itself as you
>>>> leave?)"
>>>>
>>>> The "you" in that case was Richard Heathfield.  I declined to answer
>>>> that one on the basis of not being in a position to know Richard's
>>>> urinal habits.
>>>
>>> Quite why it matters I really don't wish to enquire but, if you must
>>> know, in the UK urinals are self-flushing, and have been for as far
>>> back as I can remember. In that respect, they're rather like
>>> killfiles; they dispense of superfluous nonsense such as PTD
>>> outpourings without any need to give them any further thought.
>>>
>> Only someone like PTD would assume/demand that _all_ urinals in a
>> given country should rigidly adhere to one exact method of operation.
>
> When it comes to urinals he might even be right. I can't swear to it, of
> course, but in <cough> decades of living here and having worked and
> lived in many parts of the country, I have never once encountered a
> manually flushed urinal. Is your experience different?

I have. They used to be quite common, but I can't remember the last time
I saw one.

* CDB:

> On 4/26/2022 9:30 AM, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>> CDB wrote:
>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>>> CDB wrote:
>>>>> Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
>>>>>> Doubtless most people have observed (willy-nilly) the
>>>>>> different postures of male and female canines doing their
>>>>>> business on the sidewalk.
>>>>> Two of my male dogs stopped lifting the leg when they got old.
>>>>> Convenience again. My brother had a female great Pyrenees who
>>>>> did lift hers about half the time. A terrible bully she was,
>>>>> too.
>>>> A trans bitch, maybe?
>
>>> No, just a typical Great Pyrenees. they were bred to guard the
>>> flocks from wolves.
>
>> That explains both the alternating pose and the bullying?
>
> I suspect that it takes extra testosterone to face down a hungry wolf.
> In other respects, though, Sophie was a girly girl.
>
>>>> I thought "willy-nilly" was sort-of clever -- intended
>>>> etymologically, but also invoking the BrE "willy." (But not
>>>> intended in the current sense.)
>
>>> Yes; I missed it because I had started to wonder who would wish or
>>> nish to observe such a common canine habit.
>
>> It meant they would see it whether they wanted to or not
>
> Willy nilly, wish nish.

I nant to hear more.

--
Especially from the noke people

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 14:44:57 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:

>On 2022-04-26 14:03, Tony Cooper wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:23:24 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2022-04-26 12:55, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:44:30 -0400
>>>> Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 10:17:46 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>> Another important question would be abut pre-flush habits. I unzip my
>>>>>>> fly with my right hand and pull out and hold my penis with my left
>>>>>>> hand. Is this because I'm left-handed, and do right-handed people do
>>>>>>> it opposite?
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Unzipping the fly with the right hand is (I think) pretty much universal
>>>>>> in North America, and perhaps elsewhere, because of the position of the
>>>>>> flap that covers the fly.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I hold the hose with my right hand. I am right handed.
>>>>
>>>> Gosh. I've been doing it Wrong all these years.
>>>
>>> I thought at first you were referring to the holding of the spout. Were
>>> you referring to the opening ov the cover?
>>>
>>>> Let's celebrate our differences, eh?
>>>> (Y-fronts and underpants are up next)
>>>
>>> I had to look y-fronts up. I don't think I have ever worn them, and
>>> possibly have never seen them. I currently wear either briefs or
>>> boxer-briefs.
>
>> But briefs and boxer-briefs *are* Y-fronts!
>
>I would call Y-fronts a subset of briefs and boxer-briefs.
>
>https://www.complex.com/style/how-to-buy-mens-underwear/boxers-or-briefs
>
>Cruise down to the heading "Boxers, Briefs, or Boxer Briefs?"
>
>No sign of a Y there. These are the only style of briefs or boxer-briefs
>I have ever worn.
>
>I said I may never have seen Y-fronts, but I'll check the next time I am
>in front of the underwear shelves.
>
The Y in a Y-front has changed to a reversed C over the years by many
makers of the product, but the design concept has not changed: instead
the vertical opening that boxers have, there's a side opening that is
one of the stems of the Y.

This shows a Y-front with a curved stem on the Y.

https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/fashion-blog/2014/dec/03/why-i-hate-y-fronts

The wearer could adequately describe this item as a Y-front, a brief,
or a tighty-whitey.

A "boxer brief" is just a brief with longer legs.

--

Tony Cooper - Orlando Florida

I read and post to this group as a form of entertainment.

On 2022-04-26 15:49, Tony Cooper wrote:
> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 14:44:57 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>
>> On 2022-04-26 14:03, Tony Cooper wrote:
>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:23:24 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2022-04-26 12:55, Kerr-Mudd, John wrote:
>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 13:44:30 -0400
>>>>> Tony Cooper <tonycooper214@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 10:17:46 -0600, lar3ryca <larry@invalid.ca> wrote:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Another important question would be abut pre-flush habits. I unzip my
>>>>>>>> fly with my right hand and pull out and hold my penis with my left
>>>>>>>> hand. Is this because I'm left-handed, and do right-handed people do
>>>>>>>> it opposite?
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Unzipping the fly with the right hand is (I think) pretty much universal
>>>>>>> in North America, and perhaps elsewhere, because of the position of the
>>>>>>> flap that covers the fly.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> I hold the hose with my right hand. I am right handed.
>>>>>
>>>>> Gosh. I've been doing it Wrong all these years.
>>>>
>>>> I thought at first you were referring to the holding of the spout. Were
>>>> you referring to the opening ov the cover?
>>>>
>>>>> Let's celebrate our differences, eh?
>>>>> (Y-fronts and underpants are up next)
>>>>
>>>> I had to look y-fronts up. I don't think I have ever worn them, and
>>>> possibly have never seen them. I currently wear either briefs or
>>>> boxer-briefs.
>>
>>> But briefs and boxer-briefs *are* Y-fronts!
>>
>> I would call Y-fronts a subset of briefs and boxer-briefs.
>>
>> https://www.complex.com/style/how-to-buy-mens-underwear/boxers-or-briefs
>>
>> Cruise down to the heading "Boxers, Briefs, or Boxer Briefs?"
>>
>> No sign of a Y there. These are the only style of briefs or boxer-briefs
>> I have ever worn.
>>
>> I said I may never have seen Y-fronts, but I'll check the next time I am
>> in front of the underwear shelves.
>>
> The Y in a Y-front has changed to a reversed C over the years by many
> makers of the product, but the design concept has not changed: instead
> the vertical opening that boxers have, there's a side opening that is
> one of the stems of the Y.

When you say 'a reversed C', are you referring to the opening in the two
rightmost examples in the picture I sent you to?

If so, I will disagree that the Y-front has changed to one. The defining
factor, to me, is that the brief and boxer-brief I spoke of does not
have a single vertical portion that would make them Y-fronts.

> This shows a Y-front with a curved stem on the Y.
> https://www.theguardian.com/fashion/fashion-blog/2014/dec/03/why-i-hate-y-fronts

Yes it does, but it is still a Y-front. The briefs I wear have no Y.

> The wearer could adequately describe this item as a Y-front, a brief,
> or a tighty-whitey.

And I have seen some pictures of the briefs I wear labelled as Y-fronts,
which I can't agree with, there being no Y involved.

> A "boxer brief" is just a brief with longer legs.

I would agree with that, only if I considered a brief to have legs. I
don't. They have leg openings.

On 26-Apr-22 21:10, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>
> When it comes to urinals he might even be right. I can't swear to it, of
> course, but in <cough> decades of living here and having worked and
> lived in many parts of the country, I have never once encountered a
> manually flushed urinal. Is your experience different?

No. I first encountered that type on a naval base in Germany.
My comment was addressed to the idea that each and every urinal must
have exactly the same system, which of course they do not - even if they
all aim to maximise hygiene and water economy.

--
Sam Plusnet

On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:51:55 +0100, Richard Heathfield
<rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:

>On 26/04/2022 9:41 pm, Ken Blake wrote:
>> On Tue, 26 Apr 2022 21:10:06 +0100, Richard Heathfield
>> <rjh@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
>>
>>> On 26/04/2022 9:00 pm, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>
><snip>
>
>>>> Is it a good idea to encourage him?
>>>
>>> To avoid encouraging him, we'd all have to stop posting...
>>
>> No, we should all stop replying to him.
>
>I have done so.

Me too.

>> Killfile him
>
>I have done so.

Me too.

>> and he'll
>> eventually get bored and go away.
>
>Hasn't worked so far. We need to do some more work on that "all".

Yep. Too many people continue to reply.

On 27/04/2022 12:22 am, Sam Plusnet wrote:
> On 26-Apr-22 21:10, Richard Heathfield wrote:
>>
>> When it comes to urinals he might even be right. I can't swear to it,
>> of course, but in <cough> decades of living here and having worked and
>> lived in many parts of the country, I have never once encountered a
>> manually flushed urinal. Is your experience different?
>
> No.  I first encountered that type on a naval base in Germany.
> My comment was addressed to the idea that each and every urinal must
> have exactly the same system, which of course they do not - even if they
> all aim to maximise hygiene and water economy.

Well, there's no reason why they should. Indeed, if there are more firms
than one supplying them there are very good reasons why they shouldn't,
such as firms innovating and patent law slowing down the spread of those
innovations from firm to firm.

There was a time when I thought Armitage Shanks had a monopoly in
bathroom furniture, so prevalent was their name. They do not, of course,
have a monopoly. But even if they did, according to their Web site they
boast that to the problem of water wastage "we offer a wide range of
solutions".

--
Richard Heathfield
Email: rjh at cpax dot org dot uk
"Usenet is a strange place" - dmr 29 July 1999
Sig line 4 vacant - apply within

On 26/04/22 23:33, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
> On Monday, April 25, 2022 at 10:56:33 PM UTC-4, Peter Moylan wrote:
>> On 26/04/22 02:43, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>>> On Sunday, April 24, 2022 at 6:05:59 PM UTC-4, Anders D. Nygaard
>>> wrote:
>>>> Den 24-04-2022 kl. 21:51 skrev Peter T. Daniels:
>>>>> On Sunday, April 24, 2022 at 12:24:33 PM UTC-4, Kerr-Mudd,
>>>>> John wrote:
>>>>>> On Sun, 24 Apr 2022 14:23:00 +0100 Richard Heathfield
>>>>>> <r...@cpax.org.uk> wrote:
>
>>>>>>> Quite. Regardless of their age, anyone who feels it
>>>>>>> necessary to prove masculinity by peeing standing up has
>>>>>>> yet to reach adulthood.
>>>>>> I often see^w hear it the other way around; a lot of men
>>>>>> seem reluctant to use the urinal, they go into a cubicle to
>>>>>> pee. Still standing up, but wasting a flush.
>>>>> Don't you flush the urinal? (Or step away from the sensor so
>>>>> it flushes itself as you leave?)
>>>> Waterless urinals haven't crossed the pond?
>>> Uh -- don't they smell?
>>
>> Not in my experience. They are designed to conduct liquid away
>> without leaving a residue. A big improvement over the older
>> designs.
>
> Must be some Space-Age materials! Perhaps involving fluorine
> compounds!

I don't know the precise design details, but I suspect that careful
attention to the shape also plays a part.

They have become common, so they must not need rare or expensive materials.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

On 27/04/22 05:56, lar3ryca wrote:
> On 2022-04-26 13:45, Sam Plusnet wrote:
>> On 26-Apr-22 4:06, Peter Moylan wrote:
>>
>>> When I wash my hands at home, I adjust the tap for the smallest possible
>>> stream of water. That lets me add water only gradually as needed. A
>>> side benefit is that I need far less soap that way. Many people fail to
>>> understand the logic here, so they wash away the soap before it's had a
>>> chance to do its job.
>>
>> We have soft water so a very little soap goes a long way.
>> My wife turns the tap full on, leaves it running, gets a huge squirt
>> of (liquid) soap and puts her hands into the flow - thus washing off
>> 95% of the soap she just collected - and then washes her hands.
>>>
>>> I agree that the sensor-controlled taps are faulty in that respect.
>>> However, the trend for the last many years has been to avoid the need
>>> for anyone to touch the equipment in public facilities, because user
>>> controls are a common way of transmitting disease. That's why
>>> user-operated flushing controls on urinals were abandoned (at least in
>>> this country) decades ago.
>>>
>> Taps need a more controllable controller - something akin to a Theramin.
>
> Did you ever get that feeling that you have invented something, only to
> find out that someone else has already invented it?
>
> You should have that feeling right now, but I have no idea if it's
> already patented and/or in production. That's a GREAT idea!

The electronics for capacitive control would be cheap. The main cost
would be in the valve that controls the flow.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org

On 27/04/22 01:48, Tony Cooper wrote:

> Even if was in position, I would follow the conventional practice of
> men at the urinals in public toilets studiously avoiding looking at
> other men at the urinals.

Recently I was talking about the protocol for using a row of urinals,
which evolved from the protocol used when the urinals were a single
continuous trough.

The first man to arrive goes as far to the left as possible. The second
one goes as far to the right as possible. Then the third goes exactly
halfway in between, and so on. The goal in all cases is to maximise the
distance from one's neighbours. (At rush hour, of course, standing
shoulder-to-shoulder is the only possibility.)

"Eyes front" is of course part of the rule.

The men who were present agreed with me that that's the way it works.
For the women, though, it was a revelation, causing much laughter.

--
Peter Moylan Newcastle, NSW http://www.pmoylan.org