Frugal Living: Dec 1, 2008

Monday, December 1, 2008

misc.consumers.frugal-living - 19 new messages in 10 topics - digest

misc.consumers.frugal-living
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

misc.consumers.frugal-living@googlegroups.com

Today's topics:

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Are name-brand low-energy fluorescent "Green" bulbs any brighter than
store brand?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/16514de0eabde21c?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 2:20 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)

In <9d18c4b1-b3fa-40a5-b590-24ebc0ec1197@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
meow2222@care2.com wrote:

>Don Klipstein wrote:
>> In article <7f-dnb85SsunAqzUnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@posted.visi>, Dave Garland
>> wrote:
>> >Doc wrote:
>
>> >> Just got a 4-pack of the Walmart "Great Value" version of these energy-
>> >> saver style fluorescent 23w bulbs which they claim are equivalent to a
>> >> 100w incandescent bulb. Not even close. It's about like a 40w bulb.
>> >>
>> >> Are the name brand bulbs of this type any better?
>> >
>> >Well, they should be brighter than a 40W incandescent. Check the lumens
>> >rating, that gives you a number to compare. A typical 100W incandescent
>> >is around 1600-1700 lumens. Walmart doesn't seem to give the lumen
>> >ratings on theirs but a Sylvania CF23EL is indeed rated for 1600 lumens.
>> >
>> >It may take it a few minutes to reach full brightness.
>> >
>> >But it seems like all the companies cheat on the "equivalent to" rating,
>> >if they say "equivalent to 100W" I figure it should be a bit brighter
>> >than a 60W.
>>
>> My experience is that non-dollar-store CFLs marketed as equivalent to
>> 100W significantly outperform 75W "standard" 750 hour incandescents rated
>> 1190-1210 lumens.
>>
>> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
>
>Lumen output drops quite a bit throughout a CFL's life, whereas
>filament lamp fall in output is much less. Consequently to get a real
>equivalent one needs to start with higher lumen levels than the
>equivalent filament lamp.

CFLs when aged to 3,000 operating hours have about 10% (maybe a bit
more) loss of light output compared to that at 100 hours (industry-
standard break-in period, immediately after which their light output
is "officially" determined).

So the 1600 lumen "100 watt equivalents" can fade to about 1400-1450
lumens at 3,000 hours, and fade a little more to maybe about 1300 lumens
if and when they get to 6,000-8,000 hours or so. Even that is still a
bit brighter than "standard" 75W incandescents.

If your home is one of those where the line voltage is on the high side,
then incandescents will have much-enhanced photometric performance. Light
output from a CFL may be merely roughly proportionate to line voltage,
while incandescents have light output typically proportionate to line
voltage to the 3.4 or so power.
So if you hit a 1190 lumen 75W 120V incandescent with 124V, then you get
about 1330 lumens from that incandescent. In homes with higher line
voltage, incandescents get a "disproportionate boost" in performance - if
you are not bothered by them not lasting as long as they should.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

== 2 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 2:49 pm
From: phil scott

On Nov 30, 11:17 am, phil scott <p...@philscott.net> wrote:
> On Nov 29, 3:28 am, Doc <docsavag...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>
> > Just got a 4-pack of the Walmart "Great Value" version of these energy-
> > saver style fluorescent 23w bulbs which they claim are equivalent to a
> > 100w incandescent bulb. Not even close. It's about like a 40w bulb.
>
> > Are the name brand bulbs of this type any better?
>
> full spectrum light is crucial to good health... the body evolved
> needing all spectums of light (natural light) or incandescent... to be
> healthy.
>
> cool white florescent etc..and others have that problem.
>
> a good google search....' full spectrum light, heatlh, Ott'
>
> Phil scott

addendum.... If yiou get a good daily dose of sunlight, or
incandescent bulb light, then florescent or LED wont have as much of a
detrimental effect on your health... for offices I recommend a small
incandescent light on the dest kept lit ..it supplies the full
spectrum you need. in a home an incandescent near your tv watching
chair would have a similar effect... I dont think the wattage is
crucial, 20 watts might be fine.

Phil scott

== 3 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 3:13 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)

In <e748a390-88b8-47f7-87eb-bfcd4a0ccb9d@i20g2000prf.googlegroups.com>,
phil scott wrote:

>On Nov 29, 3:28 am, Doc <docsavag...@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Just got a 4-pack of the Walmart "Great Value" version of these energy-
>> saver style fluorescent 23w bulbs which they claim are equivalent to a
>> 100w incandescent bulb. Not even close. It's about like a 40w bulb.
>>
>> Are the name brand bulbs of this type any better?
>
>full spectrum light is crucial to good health... the body evolved
>needing all spectums of light (natural light) or incandescent... to be
>healthy.
>
>cool white florescent etc..and others have that problem.
>
>a good google search....' full spectrum light, heatlh, Ott'

I've been there done that. My sensation is hype.

I have studied this area enough to be in a good position to know every
known and reasonably-theorized photoreceptor and significant photochemical
mechanism in the human body.

They are:

1. The red, green and blue cones in the retina of the eye:
Having 2 different light sources matching each other in color and
visually-apparent brightness is sufficient to achieve matching stimulation
of all 3 of those different photoreceptors by such 2 different light
sources in question. Even if one is an incandescent and the other is a
CFL with the usual spiky spectrum.

2. Rods in the retina of the eye: If 2 light sources have the same
apparent brightness and same "s/p ratio" (scotopic/photopic), then they
stimulate the rods of the eye equally.

CFLs of incandescent-like color tend to have s/p ratio about 10% less
than incandescents of same color. I don't think that is all that bad.

3. There is highly suspected to be a "cirtopic receptor" in the human
eye, influencing circadian rhythms. I hear various figures for peak
wavelength of sensitivity of that one and no figures for bandwidth.
Figures for peak wavelength tend to be in the greenish-blue to
very-bluish-green range. I suspect, in part from wide variation in
determinations in peak wavelength for sensitivity, that the bandwidth is
on the wide side - as in maybe similar to that of rods.

So it appears to me that the cirtopic receptors don't get shortchanged
much more than the rods do by an incandescent-like CFL in comparison to an
incandescent of same color and same photometrics.

4. A somewhat-suspected separate "violet cone" that has its neural output
being channeled into something like 80% blue 20% red neural channels:
I suspect that such *may be true* since I have foveal tritanopia, and I
find that defect in my vision to affect spectral pure deep blues but not
spectral violets (such as the 404.7 nm wavelength of mercury).

Should the "violet cone" actually exist, CFLs of incandescent-like color
do stimulate that one as well as incandescents do - via the 404.7 nm
wavelength of mercury vapor.

5. Suntanning/erythemic ultraviolet: Both incandescents and CFLs are
similarly lacking in production of such. Erythemic UV found in daylight
is mainly the longer wavelength 35% or so of UVB and the shorter
wavelength 25-30% or so of UVA.

6. UVA of wavelengths absorbed by tryptophan and related compounds: I
have yet to hear of anything good from that and I am aware of a harmful
mechanism from that ("nuclear cataracts" ["permanent suntanning of the
core of the lens of the eye], as well as contribution to the more-common
foggy "regular" cataracts).
Most of the trouble from this is "superlinear" with intensity of
exposure. As in if exposure intensity is cut in half but imposed for
twice as much time, you are better-off.

The main offender here for a very large majority of the population is
natural daylight. Both incandescents and incandescent-like CFLs run
low in such wavelengths and do so similarly. Non-dollar-store CFLs and
other triphosphor fluorescents of higher color temps. produce even less,
due to the blue phosphor component used in these lamps utilizing the
365-366 nm mercury spectral feature - which other fluorescent lamp
phosphors usually do not absorb. (2700K CFLs generally lack the usual
blue phosphor of "triphosphor fluorescents".)

7. There is some notation to a wound-healing mechanism using deep red
light of wavelengths around 660-670 nm.

CFLs lack that. However, the study I saw noting a proposed actual
photochemical mechanism also noted requirement of intensity of exposure to
such wavelengths, easily fallen short from by direct sunlight, let alone
home indoor lighting of any kind.

8. Acne treatment - the main acne bacterium does produce a waste product
that is converted into something toxic to that bacterium by "mid-violet"
wavelengths. Direct midday sunlight usually has enough of that to make a
difference. Indoor home lighting, regardless of type, does not.
Artificial lighting to blast acne bacteria is typically "03
super-actinic" fluorescent lamps, available from pet/aquarium shops among
some other sources. Exposure requirement is high enough to require a lot
of this - or preferably twice-daily or whatever 15 minutes or whatever
amount of time blasting acne-befallen parts of your body by such a lamp
mere inches away.

9. Photoreceptor in animals other than humans - live coral has a
requirement for deep blue to bluish-violet wavelengths.

10. Photoreceptor in animals other than vertebrates - arthropods have a
UV (probably UVA) photoreceptor in their eyes, occaisionally noted as
having peak sensitivity around 350 nm.

There are some other photochemical processes and photochemicals known to
be in the plant kingdom, and notably found absent in anything that is into
the animal kingdom enough to lack chloroplasts. (Euglenas are protozoa
with both mitochondria and chloroplasts, and were considered to be within
the "animal kingdom" until the kingdoms were redefined to make protozoa
and slime molds [masses of amoebas - prorozoa] to be not considered
animals.

Bottom line: I see "preponderance of evidence" to a great extent that
incandescent-like CFLs are not much more unhealthful to humans than
incandescents of same photometric performance are, despite the spiky
spectrum of CFLs.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

== 4 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 3:53 pm
From: meow2222@care2.com

Don Klipstein wrote:
> In <9d18c4b1-b3fa-40a5-b590-24ebc0ec1197@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
> meow2222@care2.com wrote:
>
> >Don Klipstein wrote:
> >> In article <7f-dnb85SsunAqzUnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@posted.visi>, Dave Garland
> >> wrote:
> >> >Doc wrote:
> >
> >> >> Just got a 4-pack of the Walmart "Great Value" version of these energy-
> >> >> saver style fluorescent 23w bulbs which they claim are equivalent to a
> >> >> 100w incandescent bulb. Not even close. It's about like a 40w bulb.
> >> >>
> >> >> Are the name brand bulbs of this type any better?
> >> >
> >> >Well, they should be brighter than a 40W incandescent. Check the lumens
> >> >rating, that gives you a number to compare. A typical 100W incandescent
> >> >is around 1600-1700 lumens. Walmart doesn't seem to give the lumen
> >> >ratings on theirs but a Sylvania CF23EL is indeed rated for 1600 lumens.
> >> >
> >> >It may take it a few minutes to reach full brightness.
> >> >
> >> >But it seems like all the companies cheat on the "equivalent to" rating,
> >> >if they say "equivalent to 100W" I figure it should be a bit brighter
> >> >than a 60W.
> >>
> >> My experience is that non-dollar-store CFLs marketed as equivalent to
> >> 100W significantly outperform 75W "standard" 750 hour incandescents rated
> >> 1190-1210 lumens.
> >>
> >> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)
> >
> >Lumen output drops quite a bit throughout a CFL's life, whereas
> >filament lamp fall in output is much less. Consequently to get a real
> >equivalent one needs to start with higher lumen levels than the
> >equivalent filament lamp.
>
> CFLs when aged to 3,000 operating hours have about 10% (maybe a bit
> more) loss of light output compared to that at 100 hours (industry-
> standard break-in period, immediately after which their light output
> is "officially" determined).
>
> So the 1600 lumen "100 watt equivalents" can fade to about 1400-1450
> lumens at 3,000 hours, and fade a little more to maybe about 1300 lumens
> if and when they get to 6,000-8,000 hours or so. Even that is still a
> bit brighter than "standard" 75W incandescents.
>
> If your home is one of those where the line voltage is on the high side,
> then incandescents will have much-enhanced photometric performance. Light
> output from a CFL may be merely roughly proportionate to line voltage,
> while incandescents have light output typically proportionate to line
> voltage to the 3.4 or so power.
> So if you hit a 1190 lumen 75W 120V incandescent with 124V, then you get
> about 1330 lumens from that incandescent. In homes with higher line
> voltage, incandescents get a "disproportionate boost" in performance - if
> you are not bothered by them not lasting as long as they should.
>
> - Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

Many of us now use CFLs rated at 10k hrs mean life, so many of them
will go on to well over 10k. Using your figures and extrapolating
wildly, at 15k hrs they will have lost somewhere vaguely in the region
of 50% output. Not that bad in most cases, but yes big drop.

== 5 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 4:12 pm
From: WDS

On Nov 30, 12:04 pm, d...@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote:
> There is a general trend for ones with outer bulbs to start dimmer and
> take more time to warm up than ones with bare tubing. Ones with outer
> bulbs have their tubing designed to work best at the higher temperature
> that occurs inside the bulb-enclosed ones.

Oddly the ones we have the get to full brightness the fastest and the
slowest are the ones in "more traditional" packaging (i.e., with an
outer shell around the twisty one).

BTW, one more thing to do is in a multi-bulb fixture put in one
incandescent bulb to provide immediate brightness.

== 6 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 6:58 pm
From: "Tomes"

"WDS" <Bill@seurer.net> wrote in message
news:a06c930a-160a-4c31-8ecf-739a55906124@d32g2000yqe.googlegroups.com...
On Nov 30, 12:04 pm, d...@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein) wrote:
> There is a general trend for ones with outer bulbs to start dimmer and
> take more time to warm up than ones with bare tubing. Ones with outer
> bulbs have their tubing designed to work best at the higher temperature
> that occurs inside the bulb-enclosed ones.

Oddly the ones we have the get to full brightness the fastest and the
slowest are the ones in "more traditional" packaging (i.e., with an
outer shell around the twisty one).

BTW, one more thing to do is in a multi-bulb fixture put in one
incandescent bulb to provide immediate brightness.

_____________________

I tried this in a multi-bulb fixture that has a ceiling fan when I first
went towards CFLs. It did make a good transition for me at the time, but
after a while I just swapped out that bulb for the CFL too. I just got used
to the lighting timing all over the house now.
Tomes

== 7 of 7 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 10:56 pm
From: don@manx.misty.com (Don Klipstein)

In <8b76c1c2-c206-4ebd-9d2f-012c10a84e16@20g2000yqt.googlegroups.com>,
meow2222@care2.com wrote:

>Don Klipstein wrote:
>> In <9d18c4b1-b3fa-40a5-b590-24ebc0ec1197@l39g2000yqn.googlegroups.com>,
>> meow2222@care2.com wrote:
>>
>>>Don Klipstein wrote:
>>>>In <7f-dnb85SsunAqzUnZ2dnUVZ_qjinZ2d@posted.visi>, Dave Garland wrote:
>>>>>Well, they should be brighter than a 40W incandescent. Check the lumens
>>>>>rating, that gives you a number to compare. A typical 100W incandescent
>>>>>is around 1600-1700 lumens. Walmart doesn't seem to give the lumen
>>>>>ratings on theirs but a Sylvania CF23EL is indeed rated for 1600 lumens.
>>>>>
>>>>>It may take it a few minutes to reach full brightness.
>>>>>
>>>>>But it seems like all the companies cheat on the "equivalent to" rating,
>>>>>if they say "equivalent to 100W" I figure it should be a bit brighter
>>>>>than a 60W.
>>>>
>>>> My experience is that non-dollar-store CFLs marketed as equivalent to
>>>>100W significantly outperform 75W "standard" 750 hour incandescents rated
>>>>1190-1210 lumens.
>>>
>>>Lumen output drops quite a bit throughout a CFL's life, whereas
>>>filament lamp fall in output is much less. Consequently to get a real
>>>equivalent one needs to start with higher lumen levels than the
>>>equivalent filament lamp.
>>
>> CFLs when aged to 3,000 operating hours have about 10% (maybe a bit
>> more) loss of light output compared to that at 100 hours (industry-
>> standard break-in period, immediately after which their light output
>> is "officially" determined).
>>
>> So the 1600 lumen "100 watt equivalents" can fade to about 1400-1450
>> lumens at 3,000 hours, and fade a little more to maybe about 1300 lumens
>> if and when they get to 6,000-8,000 hours or so. Even that is still a
>> bit brighter than "standard" 75W incandescents.
>>
>> If your home is one of those where the line voltage is on the high side,
>> then incandescents will have much-enhanced photometric performance. Light
>> output from a CFL may be merely roughly proportionate to line voltage,
>> while incandescents have light output typically proportionate to line
>> voltage to the 3.4 or so power.
>> So if you hit a 1190 lumen 75W 120V incandescent with 124V, then you get
>> about 1330 lumens from that incandescent. In homes with higher line
>> voltage, incandescents get a "disproportionate boost" in performance - if
>> you are not bothered by them not lasting as long as they should.
>
>Many of us now use CFLs rated at 10k hrs mean life, so many of them
>will go on to well over 10k. Using your figures and extrapolating
>wildly, at 15k hrs they will have lost somewhere vaguely in the region
>of 50% output. Not that bad in most cases, but yes big drop.

As it turns out, the "halflife" increases a little as the lamps age.
So ones that make it to 15K hours have more like 70%, maybe 75% of the
light output that they had at 100 hours. I have actual experience in an
apartment building that had CFL hallway lights and some of them lasted
that long.

I have seen a few CFLs faded to about 60% or 2/3 or so of their original
light output, after over 2 years of continuous operation. Most don't last
that long.
If one makes it in home use past the 6,000-7,500 operating hours that
they used to be rated for, then I think its owner will be quite happy with
it in terms of actually achieving the long life that they are supposed to
have. My experience seems to support a figure more like 4,000-5,000
hours, due to average ontime less than the "industry standard test
condition" of 3 hours, and average ambient temperature around the lamp and
ballast housing hotter than the "industry standard test condition" of 25 C.

- Don Klipstein (don@misty.com)

==============================================================================
TOPIC: $ Young Sweet Innocent Strippers !
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/f31c148e9ca7abdc?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 2:53 pm
From: clams_casino

boobs wrote:

>- These girls are hot hot hot!
>
>

An obvious translation problem - burning sensations are not the same as
being hot.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Can I drop AT&T Long Distance, Keep Local?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/f4018914d4032866?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 3:32 pm
From: ezekielk@goct.net (Zeke Krahlin)

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 09:39:51 -0500, metspitzer <kilowatt@charter.net>
wrote:

>I use IDT. If I don't make a call, my bill is 0. AT 5cents per min,
>my bill is less then 2 bucks most months.

Onesuite only costs 2 cents/minute. Excellent service.
--
Final Testament (bible for queers only)
http://www.gay-bible.org

== 2 of 2 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 3:34 pm
From: ezekielk@goct.net (Zeke Krahlin)

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 03:33:08 -0800 (PST), Zee <zzaldy@gmail.com>
wrote:

>We use Onesuite in our household too. Aside from their main calling
>card service, you can use your account for voip calls too. It means
>more access to their service with no additional charge whatsoever.
>They got local access and toll free numbers so no worries even if you
>have no LD access in your landline.

I can also vouch for Onesuite's excellent and inexpensive LD service.
I dropped AT&T for LD, precisely because they started charging for the
"privilege"...and have kept their local service. That was four or five
years ago...I'm very happy with the arrangement.

--
Final Testament (bible for queers only)
http://www.gay-bible.org

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Extreme savers share their secrets
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/0b9763f9a81d7d00?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 4:19 pm
From: Ablang

Extreme savers share their secrets
By Elaine Appleton Grant • Bankrate.com

"Saving money is, well, a passion of mine," Lynn Tostado says. "I've
always kept my eyes out for creative ways to stretch a dollar."

The Dover, N.H., accounting manager had a compelling reason to
practice thrift. She and her husband helped put three kids through
college.

"I really had to watch our pennies," she says.

These days, as the cost of food and gas skyrockets, credit becomes
more difficult to get and consumer confidence reaches an all-time low,
saving has become a must. Tostado's years of experience as a
passionate saver stand her in good stead. She's hardly alone. There's
a whole group of people who are passionate about saving without living
a Spartan life.

Call them "uber savers."
Finding ways to save
1. Saving on retail
2. Groceries
3. Automobiles
4. Giving
5. Commuting & housing
6. Phone services & other necessities
7. Travel

1. Saving on retail
Michele Carter, a CPA and mother of two in Barrington, N.H., is a hawk
about tracking sales prices on her purchases and asking retailers for
the savings. For example, Carter keeps her Christmas gift receipts
and, after the holiday, checks to see if retailers have slashed prices
on any of the gifts she's already plunked under the tree.

Then she calls the merchant and, without returning the item, asks the
store to refund the difference between her cost and the new sales
price. She then gives the difference to the gift recipient.

"I once got my mother-in-law $60 back on a gift we purchased for her,"
she says.

Carter also claims the price guarantees offered by stores like Lowe's
and Home Depot: If you find the same product for less elsewhere, you
get the item for 10 percent off the lowest price.

"I have seen an ad for something I purchased, after the purchase, and
I have been given the lower price," she says.

Keeping an eye on these promotions paid off recently when Carter
bought a new refrigerator. After she saw an ad for the same
refrigerator at a competitor's store, she netted close to $100 in
savings with a single phone call. Her advice: Call, don't visit the
store. In Carter's experience, a local store manager will always find
a reason to say no.

Carter, an inveterate comparison shopper, also shops on home repairs.
Recently, she bought a new Pella front door at Lowe's, spending $1,000
less than Pella's asking price. Then, rather than paying Lowe's $800
installation fee, she hired a local carpenter for $400 -- and paid
that tab with the $400 tax credit she'll receive for installing the
energy-saving door.

Stay-at-home mom Martha Andersen is an avid reader, as are her husband
and her two children. Last year, Andersen, who lives in Durham, N.H.,
decided to spend only $4 per person on Christmas gifts.

She acquired most of her gifts through Paperbackswap.com, a site on
which members can trade paperback and hardcover books for the cost of
postage, and Daedalus, a discount book catalog that Andersen says
offered "really nice gifts for less than $4." You can also swap CDs on
SwapaCD.com and DVDs at recently launched SwapaDVD.com.

Next: He saves $500 a year on meat by purchasing whole animals ...
Page | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 |

Read on at:
http://www.bankrate.com/nltrack/news/pf/20080404_savings_sales_shoppers_a1.asp

==============================================================================
TOPIC: What does one get when milk spoils?
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/cdb0345f0221733f?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 7:00 pm
From: Samatha Hill -- take out TRASH to reply

Epiphany wrote:

>
> We raised chickens too. After the eggs hatched, the ones that were
> left, which didn't hatch, always went to my mother-in-law, who
> considered them a delicacy. Yuck.

Baahhhh-lut!!!!!!!

Samantha, who was on Guam in the mid-70s and learned not to buy dyed
eggs -- or, for that matter, to ask what was in the delicious
Filipino/Korean food she was eating and who STILL missed Chicken Kelaguen

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Älä osta mitään- päivä huomenna
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/c0dee9d2f646ffd3?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 6:58 pm
From: Jyrki Niemelä

Olen useammasta tekstistä huomannut, että täällä väitetään yhtä sun toista
tekstiäni minun tekemikseni.

Alituiseen niitä tuntuu kopioivan esim. nimimerkki "Lehtiniemi".Hänellä kun
on sellaiseen ilmeisen suoranainmen "fetisisti".

Toki annan fiinejä tekstejäni lainata, koska ne kovasti useita kiinnostavat.
Ja totuutta ei sinällään ole maasamme ydinasioista koskaan liikaa. Ja
sellaisille lainaajille, joille ne ihan oikeasti avautuvat, niin ilman muuta
siitä vaan!

Mutta kun minulla ei asiaan ole osaa ei arpaa, niin luulisi minimin olevan
kaiken maailman "rahasta virtsanomaisille" ruikuttaville ydininsinööreille
selvää, että katsoo mistä kissat nousee, ennenkuin mm. Lehtiniemen
tekemisistä täällä huuhailee pilvin pimein krapulakivistyksissään ummet ja
lammet.

==============================================================================
TOPIC: 12 LEDs Flickering Tea Light Candles-LEDs Flickering Candles for
Christmas Gifts
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/dfca67e068bb2c4e?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:06 pm
From: Zanasil

Led flickering tealight candle, Features
1. Size:37CMx34CM
2. On/off button is located on the bottom of the tealight.
3. Flicker like real candles which are flameless, smokeless and safe
to use.
4. Long lasting battery can operate for 48 hours continuously while
LED can last up to 100,000 hours.
5. No danger and it is convenient to use with.

12 LEDs Flickering Tea Light Candles Description:
1. 12 Flickering Tea Lights LED candles that are everlasting powered
by CR2016 easily replaceable batteries.
2. High quality battery with realistic soft flickering light.
3. Multi-color LED Light flickering like real candles.
4. Changing color which fades in and out with 7different
combinations.
5. Safe alternative to real candles and suitable for indoor and
outdoor use.
6. Decorate your cafe, bars, weddings, receptions, parties, room, dorm
or any other promotional events.
7. Enjoy a romantic candle light dinner with your lover.

reference from:
http://www.power-batteries.net/led-flicker-tealight-candle.html

http://www.laptop-battery-inc.co.uk/led-flicker-tea-light-candle.htm

==============================================================================
TOPIC: FUJIFILM NP-30 Digital Camera Battery
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/6a0ddf5509354b73?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:14 pm
From: Zanasil

FUJIFILM NP-30 Digital Camera Battery,the best replacement for oem
np-30 camera battery.

specifications:
Chemistry : LI-ION
Voltage : 3.7V
Capacity : 600mAh
Dimension : 38.10 x 27.57 x 6.70 mm
Color : Light Brown
Brand : Fujifilm

compatible with fujifilm battery part:
NP-30

fits camera models:
FUJIFILM FINEPIX F440 FUJIFILM FINEPIX F450 FUJIFILM FinePix F455
Zoom

reference from:
http://www.power-batteries.net/digital-camera/fujifilm/np-30.html

http://www.laptop-battery-inc.co.uk/digital-camera-batteries/fujifilm-np-30.htm

==============================================================================
TOPIC: NIKON EN-EL3 Digital Camera Battery
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/e4de246662f9b2a1?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 1 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 8:22 pm
From: Zanasil

Overview:
NIKON en-el3 battery is a high quality rechargeable replacement
battery which can 100% compatible with the OEM en-el3 battery which
can works with a lot of battery (machine) - en-el3, en-el3.

Features about NIKON EN-EL3 Digital Camera Battery
Brand: NIKON
Type: li-ion
Volt: 7.4V
Capacity: 1600mAh
Length: 55.80x39.50x20.75mm
Weight: 75.00g
Color: black

reference:
http://www.power-batteries.net/digital-camera/nikon/en-el3.html

http://www.laptop-battery-inc.co.uk/digital-camera-batteries/nikon-en-el3.htm

==============================================================================
TOPIC: Do you want your tax money to pay a forklift operator $103,000.00 a
year
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/t/ddfc45ecb2d7616d?hl=en
==============================================================================

== 1 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:41 pm
From: LeRoy Blue

On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:32:22 GMT, TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:

>
>
>
>The dance is you there racist asshole. I spean and you come along and
>whine like a little lost puppy. Its too bad you don't have more to do
>there in your trailer home.

kool! It only took you three days to compose your rapier like response

>In <s3kui4tf565aai3c28refk922jpin0mel2@4ax.com>, on 11/27/2008
> at 09:03 PM, LeRoy Blue <leroyblue@billon.net> said:

>>But we do so hope that you will stay for a while because we enjoy
>>watching you dance every time we pull your strings. Toying with you is
>>right up there with feeding maggots to a lizard.
>
>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>In <rqgui418g8jasjll0blploacapqnsr8keg@4ax.com>, on 11/27/2008
>>> at 08:07 PM, LeRoy Blue <leroyblue@billon.net> said:
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>>On Thu, 27 Nov 2008 13:28:10 GMT, TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>>Thanks for showing us your true colors. You don't give a damn about the
>>>>>unborn, you're just a hate-filled moron who lies and whines.
>>>
>>>>It's clear that you never read the post you respond to. You simply key
>>>>the macro that inserts some asinine boiler plate clip from your
>>>>wrong-wing Dogma.
>>>
>>>>>In <birri4d3rs5lcsrg7873pht7mutrdhs90f@4ax.com>, on 11/26/2008
>>>>> at 08:43 PM, LeRoy Blue <leroyblue@billon.net> said:
>>>
>>>
>>>>>>Of course the issue to be balloted on will include the following --
>>>>>>For every child not aborted but born under the conditioned you set down
>>>>>>there would be deported one wrong-winger aka democrap to Canada. That
>>>>>>would even out the load on the majority of tax payers who happen to be
>>>>>>REPUBLICANS, democraps, as clearly demonstrated in the recent election
>>>>>>and its result. being mostly welfare and food stamps kind of folks.-I
>>>>>>know you'll agree,

== 2 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:44 pm
From: LeRoy Blue

On Fri, 28 Nov 2008 09:32:24 GMT, TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:

>
>
>Stop driveling there racist asshole.

More asinine boiler plate? Have you a more current macro?

== 3 of 3 ==
Date: Sun, Nov 30 2008 9:49 pm
From: LeRoy Blue

On Sat, 29 Nov 2008 05:27:11 GMT, TruthTeller@nospam.net wrote:

>Wrong asshole.

Which ass hole are you today? Would you mind posting a list containing
information on which ass hole (of the many that you are) you will be
on a specific day of the week. It would save you the bother of having
to respond "Wrong asshole" so often.

==============================================================================

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "misc.consumers.frugal-living"
group.

To post to this group, visit http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living?hl=en

To unsubscribe from this group, send email to misc.consumers.frugal-living+unsubscribe@googlegroups.com

To change the way you get mail from this group, visit:
http://groups.google.com/group/misc.consumers.frugal-living/subscribe?hl=en

To report abuse, send email explaining the problem to abuse@googlegroups.com

==============================================================================
Google Groups: http://groups.google.com/?hl=en

Frugal Living

Blog Archive

Monday, December 1, 2008

misc.consumers.frugal-living - 19 new messages in 10 topics - digest