On 10/2/13 12:12 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 11:50:56 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 10/2/13 11:48 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 09:53:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 05:36:21 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

I don't think you know squat about this. Server electrical costs that
will be billed to the government, hosting costs and line rental fees
that will be billed to the government. Contractors who run those
websites furloughed.
Nobody around to monitor for hacks.
etc, etc.



The new, alternate website took money to create, electricity to host, and has to be monitored for hacks. You didn't know that?

Your argument falls apart.

===

Yes, and you can bet that the original web site is up and running with
back door access available to USCG, US Customs and other law
enforcement agencies..

The weather pages are still up
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mob/

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/?atlc



Well, I think it would be a terrific public service if you and W'hine
spend your time keeping track of all the federal government websites,
and let us know which are or are not working at a given moment.

Unlike the people up north, we watch storms and prepare BEFORE they
come kick our ass.

Yeah, right. Sure. I was in SE Florida the day after Andrew, taking
photos, doing interviews, and helping in the preparation of a report
about what sorts of buildings failed and why. Not much preparation was
evident.

On 10/2/2013 12:28 PM, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 10/2/13 12:12 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 11:50:56 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 10/2/13 11:48 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 09:53:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 05:36:21 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

I don't think you know squat about this. Server electrical costs
that
will be billed to the government, hosting costs and line rental fees
that will be billed to the government. Contractors who run those
websites furloughed.
Nobody around to monitor for hacks.
etc, etc.



The new, alternate website took money to create, electricity to
host, and has to be monitored for hacks. You didn't know that?

Your argument falls apart.

===

Yes, and you can bet that the original web site is up and running with
back door access available to USCG, US Customs and other law
enforcement agencies..

The weather pages are still up
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mob/

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/?atlc



Well, I think it would be a terrific public service if you and W'hine
spend your time keeping track of all the federal government websites,
and let us know which are or are not working at a given moment.

Unlike the people up north, we watch storms and prepare BEFORE they
come kick our ass.

Yeah, right. Sure. I was in SE Florida the day after Andrew, taking
photos, doing interviews, and helping in the preparation of a report
about what sorts of buildings failed and why. Not much preparation was
evident.

That was 20 years ago. Out of curiosity, That report you were a helper
on; did it lead to any changes of any kind that helped improve building
codes and construction methods? Or was it just another meaningless fluff
piece that ended up un the round file.

In article , says...

On 10/2/13 12:12 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 11:50:56 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 10/2/13 11:48 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 09:53:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 05:36:21 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

I don't think you know squat about this. Server electrical costs that
will be billed to the government, hosting costs and line rental fees
that will be billed to the government. Contractors who run those
websites furloughed.
Nobody around to monitor for hacks.
etc, etc.



The new, alternate website took money to create, electricity to host, and has to be monitored for hacks. You didn't know that?

Your argument falls apart.

===

Yes, and you can bet that the original web site is up and running with
back door access available to USCG, US Customs and other law
enforcement agencies..

The weather pages are still up
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mob/

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/?atlc



Well, I think it would be a terrific public service if you and W'hine
spend your time keeping track of all the federal government websites,
and let us know which are or are not working at a given moment.

Unlike the people up north, we watch storms and prepare BEFORE they
come kick our ass.

Yeah, right. Sure. I was in SE Florida the day after Andrew, taking
photos, doing interviews, and helping in the preparation of a report
about what sorts of buildings failed and why. Not much preparation was
evident.

You sure didn't look for evidence of preparation then!

On 10/2/13 1:11 PM, iBoaterer wrote:
In article , says...

On 10/2/13 12:12 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 11:50:56 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 10/2/13 11:48 AM, wrote:
On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 09:53:25 -0400, Wayne.B
wrote:

On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 05:36:21 -0700 (PDT), wrote:

I don't think you know squat about this. Server electrical costs that
will be billed to the government, hosting costs and line rental fees
that will be billed to the government. Contractors who run those
websites furloughed.
Nobody around to monitor for hacks.
etc, etc.



The new, alternate website took money to create, electricity to host, and has to be monitored for hacks. You didn't know that?

Your argument falls apart.

===

Yes, and you can bet that the original web site is up and running with
back door access available to USCG, US Customs and other law
enforcement agencies..

The weather pages are still up
http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mob/

http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/?atlc



Well, I think it would be a terrific public service if you and W'hine
spend your time keeping track of all the federal government websites,
and let us know which are or are not working at a given moment.

Unlike the people up north, we watch storms and prepare BEFORE they
come kick our ass.

Yeah, right. Sure. I was in SE Florida the day after Andrew, taking
photos, doing interviews, and helping in the preparation of a report
about what sorts of buildings failed and why. Not much preparation was
evident.

You sure didn't look for evidence of preparation then!



The lack of preparation was obvious. No ties or not enough ties holding
roofs to frames, CMU walls without enough tied together steel, not
enough ties holding frames to foundations, no storm shutters on windows,
huge glass areas on houses, not enough ties on tilt-up buildings, et
cetera.

On Wednesday, October 2, 2013 1:17:18 PM UTC-4, F.O.A.D. wrote:
On 10/2/13 1:11 PM, iBoaterer wrote:

In article , says...



On 10/2/13 12:12 PM, wrote:

On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 11:50:56 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:



On 10/2/13 11:48 AM, wrote:

On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 09:53:25 -0400, Wayne.B

wrote:



On Wed, 2 Oct 2013 05:36:21 -0700 (PDT), wrote:



I don't think you know squat about this. Server electrical costs that

will be billed to the government, hosting costs and line rental fees

that will be billed to the government. Contractors who run those

websites furloughed.

Nobody around to monitor for hacks.

etc, etc.







The new, alternate website took money to create, electricity to host, and has to be monitored for hacks. You didn't know that?



Your argument falls apart.



===



Yes, and you can bet that the original web site is up and running with

back door access available to USCG, US Customs and other law

enforcement agencies..



The weather pages are still up

http://www.srh.noaa.gov/mob/



http://www.nhc.noaa.gov/?atlc







Well, I think it would be a terrific public service if you and W'hine

spend your time keeping track of all the federal government websites,

and let us know which are or are not working at a given moment.



Unlike the people up north, we watch storms and prepare BEFORE they

come kick our ass.



Yeah, right. Sure. I was in SE Florida the day after Andrew, taking

photos, doing interviews, and helping in the preparation of a report

about what sorts of buildings failed and why. Not much preparation was

evident.



You sure didn't look for evidence of preparation then!







The lack of preparation was obvious. No ties or not enough ties holding

roofs to frames, CMU walls without enough tied together steel, not

enough ties holding frames to foundations, no storm shutters on windows,

huge glass areas on houses, not enough ties on tilt-up buildings, et

cetera.

You don't have the education or knowledge to be able to make those statements.

In article ,
says...

On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 13:17:18 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:




The lack of preparation was obvious. No ties or not enough ties holding
roofs to frames, CMU walls without enough tied together steel, not
enough ties holding frames to foundations, no storm shutters on windows,
huge glass areas on houses, not enough ties on tilt-up buildings, et
cetera.

That is not "preparation" it was the corrupt Dade county building
department that was doing "drive by" inspections or simply selling
approvals. Dade county set the standards that became the coastal
building code, they just did not enforce them,. It was not true in
other parts of the state. I have a poured tie beam with two #5s in it
and truss straps bigger than current code. My house was built in 1963.

Yup, codes are okay, it's the people who's job it is to make sure those
code requirements are met. The Achilles heal in the infrastructure is
shoddy residential building and as you say, corrupt officials and lazy
inspectors. It's different in commercial and industrial construction
where the architects and engineers get sued left and right for design
that doesn't meet the current building codes and there is a problem or
event.

iBoaterer wrote:
In article ,
says...

On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 13:17:18 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:




The lack of preparation was obvious. No ties or not enough ties holding
roofs to frames, CMU walls without enough tied together steel, not
enough ties holding frames to foundations, no storm shutters on windows,
huge glass areas on houses, not enough ties on tilt-up buildings, et
cetera.

That is not "preparation" it was the corrupt Dade county building
department that was doing "drive by" inspections or simply selling
approvals. Dade county set the standards that became the coastal
building code, they just did not enforce them,. It was not true in
other parts of the state. I have a poured tie beam with two #5s in it
and truss straps bigger than current code. My house was built in 1963.

Yup, codes are okay, it's the people who's job it is to make sure those
code requirements are met. The Achilles heal in the infrastructure is
shoddy residential building and as you say, corrupt officials and lazy
inspectors. It's different in commercial and industrial construction
where the architects and engineers get sued left and right for design
that doesn't meet the current building codes and there is a problem or
event.

Why is commercial different? If the engineers and architects do their job,
and the builder shortcuts and the inspector passes that crap, you still
have a ****ty built building!

On 10/2/13 12:33 PM, wrote:
On Wed, 02 Oct 2013 12:28:48 -0400, "F.O.A.D." wrote:

On 10/2/13 12:12 PM, wrote:


Unlike the people up north, we watch storms and prepare BEFORE they
come kick our ass.

Yeah, right. Sure. I was in SE Florida the day after Andrew, taking
photos, doing interviews, and helping in the preparation of a report
about what sorts of buildings failed and why. Not much preparation was
evident.

bull****


I was there, courtesy of several building trades unions. Drove there
from Tallahassee.