diyrebel

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/27346179

When an arrogant presumptuous dick dumps hot-headed uncivil drivel into a relatively apolitical thread about plumbing technology and reduces the quality of the discussion to a Trump vs. $someone style shitshow of threadcrap, the tools given to the moderator are:

• remove the comment (chainsaw)
• ban the user from the community (sledge hammer)

Where are the refined sophisticated tools?

When it comes to nannying children, we don’t give teachers a baseball bat. It’s the wrong tool. We are forced into a dilemma: either let the garbage float, or censor. This encourages moderators to be tyrants and too many choose that route. Moderators often censor civil ideas purely because they want to control the narrative (not the quality).

I want to do quality control, not narrative control. I oppose the tyranny of censorship in all but the most vile cases of bullying or spam. The modlog does not give enough transparency. If I wholly remove that asshole’s comment, then I become an asshole too.

He is on-topic. Just poor quality drivel that contributes nothing of value. Normally voting should solve this. X number of down votes causes the comment to be folded out of view, but not censored. It would rightfully keep the comment accessible to people who want to pick through the garbage and expand the low quality posts.

Why voting fails:

• tiny community means there can never be enough down votes to fold a comment.
• votes have no meaning. Bob votes emotionally and down votes every idea he dislikes, while Alice down votes off-topic or uncivil comments, regardless of agreement.

Solutions:

I’m not trying to strongly prescribe a fix in particular, but have some ideas to brainstorm:

• Mods get the option to simply fold a shitty comment when the msg is still on-topic and slightly better quality than spam. This should come with a one-line field (perhaps mandatory) where the mod must rationalise the action (e.g. “folded for uncivil rant with no useful contribution to the technical information sought”).

• A warning counter. Mods can send a warning to a user in connection with a comment. This is already possible but requires moderators to have an unhuman memory. A warning should not just be like any DM.. it should be tracked and counted. Mods should see a counter next to participants indicating how many warnings they have received and a page to view them all, so as to aid in decisions on whether to ban a user from a community.

• Moderator votes should be heavier than user votes. Perhaps an ability to choose how many votes they want to cast on a particular comment to have an effect like folding. Of course this should be transparent so it’s clear that X number of votes were cast by a mod. Rationale:

  • mods have better awareness of the purpose and rules of the community
  • mods are stakeholders with more investment into the success of a community than users

• Moderators could control the weight of other user’s votes. When 6 people upvote an uncivil post and only 2 people down vote it, it renders voting as a tool impotent and in fact harm inducing. Lousy/malicious voters have no consequences for harmful voting and thus no incentive to use voting as an effective tool for good. A curator should be able to adjust voting weight accordingly. E.g. take an action on a particular poll that results in a weight adjustment (positive or negative) on the users who voted a particular direction. The effect would be to cause voters to prioritize civil quality above whether they simply like/dislike an idea, so that votes actually take on a universal meaning. Which of course then makes voting an effective tool for folding poor quality content (as it was originally intended).

• (edit) Ability for a moderator to remove a voting option. If a comment is uncivil, allowing upvotes is only detrimental. So a moderator should be able to narrow the ballot to either down vote or neutral. And perhaps the contrary as well (like some beehaw is instance-wide). And perhaps the option to neutralise voting on a specific comment.

When an arrogant presumptuous dick dumps hot-headed uncivil drivel into a relatively apolitical thread about plumbing technology and reduces the quality of the discussion to a Trump vs. $someone style shitshow of threadcrap, the tools given to the moderator are:

• remove the comment (chainsaw)
• ban the user from the community (sledge hammer)

Where are the refined sophisticated tools?

When it comes to nannying children, we don’t give teachers a baseball bat. It’s the wrong tool. We are forced into a dilemma: either let the garbage float, or censor. This encourages moderators to be tyrants and too many choose that route. Moderators often censor civil ideas purely because they want to control the narrative (not the quality).

I want to do quality control, not narrative control. I oppose the tyranny of censorship in all but the most vile cases of bullying or spam. The modlog does not give enough transparency. If I wholly remove that asshole’s comment, then I become an asshole too.

He is on-topic. Just poor quality drivel that contributes nothing of value. Normally voting should solve this. X number of down votes causes the comment to be folded out of view, but not censored. It would rightfully keep the comment accessible to people who want to pick through the garbage and expand the low quality posts.

Why voting fails:

• tiny community means there can never be enough down votes to fold a comment.
• votes have no meaning. Bob votes emotionally and down votes every idea he dislikes, while Alice down votes off-topic or uncivil comments, regardless of agreement.

Solutions:

I’m not trying to strongly prescribe a fix in particular, but have some ideas to brainstorm:

• Mods get the option to simply fold a shitty comment when the msg is still on-topic and slightly better quality than spam. This should come with a one-line field (perhaps mandatory) where the mod must rationalise the action (e.g. “folded for uncivil rant with no useful contribution to the technical information sought”).
• A warning counter. Mods can send a warning to a user in connection with a comment. This is already possible but requires moderators to have an unhuman memory. A warning should not just be like any DM.. it should be tracked and counted. Mods should see a counter next to participants indicating how many warnings they have received and a page to view them all, so as to aid in decisions on whether to ban a user from a community.
• Moderator votes should be heavier than user votes. Perhaps an ability to choose how many votes they want to cast on a particular comment to have an effect like folding. Of course this should be transparent so it’s clear that X number of votes were cast by a mod. Rationale:
  • mods have better awareness of the purpose and rules of the community
  • mods are stakeholders with more investment into the success of a community than users
• Moderators could control the weight of other user’s votes. When 6 people upvote an uncivil post and only 2 people down vote it, it renders voting as a tool impotent and in fact harm inducing. Lousy/malicious voters have no consequences for harmful voting and thus no incentive to use voting as an effective tool for good. A curator should be able to adjust voting weight accordingly. E.g. take an action on a particular poll that results in a weight adjustment (positive or negative) on the users who voted a particular direction. The effect would be to cause voters to prioritize civil quality above whether they simply like/dislike an idea, so that votes actually take on a universal meaning. Which of course then makes voting an effective tool for folding poor quality content (as it was originally intended).
• (edit) Ability for a moderator to remove a voting option. If a comment is uncivil, allowing upvotes is only detrimental. So a moderator should be able to narrow the ballot to either down vote or neutral. And perhaps the contrary as well (like some beehaw is instance-wide). And perhaps the option to neutralise voting on a specific comment.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/26703241

This diagram is from the service manual of a combi boiler. It’s a flow sensor which detects whether hot water is running, which is then used to trigger on-demand heat and switch a diverter to take radiators out of the loop.

In English, the diagram shows:

• X ⅔ red wire (+5V)
• X 2/2 black wire (ground)
• X 2/6 green wire (signal)

I need to know what those fractions mean. I took the voltage measurements in this video:

• https://iv.ggtyler.dev/watch?v=d8ucufoyUlQ

I cannot necessarily trust the model in that video to have the same specs as mine. My voltmeter detected 4.68 V on the red input wire showing that the sensor is well fed. The green “signal” wire is supposed to be 0 V at rest and 2 V with water running (or I think the reverse of that is used in some models). In my case the green wire is ~1.33 V at rest and ~0.66 V when water is running. I need to know if these readings are normal as I troubleshoot this problem.

update

@unexposedhazard@discuss.tchncs.de and a couple others gave the answer I was after. Then @tofubl@discuss.tchncs.de helped solve the underlying problem. The theory that the sensor was fine but the board was not drove me to test the sensor in isolation. The sensor gave correct output in isolation. Then I connected it back to the motherboard to retest and reconfirm that it’s still broken. But it actually worked. The hot water suddenly and mysteriously works now. I guess the act of draining the water and unplugging the connector then reconnecting and repressurizing caused it to work. It may be temporary, since in the past it was hit or miss whether it would work.

This diagram is from the service manual of a combi boiler. It’s a flow sensor which detects whether hot water is running, which is then used to trigger on-demand heat and switch a diverter to take radiators out of the loop.

In English, the diagram shows:

• X ⅔ red wire (+5V)
• X 2/2 black wire (ground)
• X 2/6 green wire (signal)

I need to know what those fractions mean. I took the voltage measurements in this video:

• https://iv.ggtyler.dev/watch?v=d8ucufoyUlQ

I cannot necessarily trust the model in that video to have the same specs as mine. My voltmeter detected 4.68 V on the red input wire showing that the sensor is well fed. The green “signal” wire is supposed to be 0 V at rest and 2 V with water running (or I think the reverse of that is used in some models). In my case the green wire is ~1.33 V at rest and ~0.66 V when water is running. I need to know if these readings are normal as I troubleshoot this problem.

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/12359577

There are a few youtube videos where someone suggests using sulfuric acid to clean a secondary plate-style heat exchanger (for example). Yet I’ve heard sulfuric acid is extremely corrosive to metal, so something seems off about that advice. I certainly would not want an internal leak to cause radiator fluid to enter the tap water. I saw a drop of sulfuric acid land on a galvanized steel pipe once and within minutes it was rusted on the spot.

This guy also says sulfuric acid is an option but also says there is a safer alternative acid -- yet he did not mention what it is! Does anyone know?

This guy says he uses an ultrasonic bath but he does not say what chemicals he uses. Would distilled white vinegar be good for this?

Note these questions are very loosely related to this thread which describes a problem I am having, but really it’s a separate discussion. Secondary exchangers need periodic maintenance regardless of whether this is my current problem. I saved my previously clogged heat exchanger from a few years ago so I could work on cleaning it. I have a quite small ultrasonic I could try, but I cannot submerge the whole exchanger. I would have to stand it on end and only clean a few centimeters deep.

I’m seeing a contradiction on chain cleaning articles. One dodgy site says:

It is essential to avoid some common mistakes when cleaning a bike chain. Firstly, be cautious not to oversaturate the chain with degreaser as this can lead to damage or corrosion.

Then another site says to remove the chain and submerge it in degreaser.

The first site seems dodgy, like one of these machine-generated sites that scraps together fragments of other works and plagurizes it in a clumsy way. But is the advice good? If the chain is 100% degreased, when you oil it wouldn’t the oil eventually spread everywhere it’s needed?

The 2nd article says remove the chain. Yet I’ve heard advice to not re-use quick-links. So WTF are they implying we need to buy a new quick-link every time we clean it? If yes, then removing the chain defeats the cost effective motivation for cleaning it in the 1st place.

Maybe this is crazy talk, but one idea I have is to leave the chain on the bike and submerge just the deraileur into an ultrasonic bath and very slowly move the chain through it. Not sure if my deraileur has ball bearings.. if it does, then indeed the ultrasonic would be a bad idea.

I replaced the whole drivetrain 23 months ago (cassette + crankset + chain all at once). I bought the cheapest new parts I could find which came out to 5 local Big Macs on today’s McDonald’s index (in total).

The chain has started slipping every time it rains. I don’t blame the rain I just suspect that it’s reaching the end of life and the water just puts it over the edge enough to slip. I assume it will soon start slipping in dry conditions as well, correct?

Can I do much better than 2 years?

I somewhat abused the chain. Added proper oil every ~2 weeks but never cleaned it. There are lots of unsupported claims in the wild that cleaning the chain substantially increases the longevity. Okay, sounds plausible but I’ve seen no stats. If a weekly cleaning (thus 104 cleanings) would extend the drivetrain’s life by a couple weeks for example, that’s not worth the effort. So does anyone have any figures, even anecdotal?

Guess I should mention this is urban city riding, not trail, so presumably cleaning would be less impactful. And I’m not a serious enough rider to need high performance.

I’ve also heard the sprocket and cassette should be replaced every other chain replacement. Is that good advice? So I only need to replace the chain at this point?

Is it just the chain’s life that is shortened by not cleaning, or are the gears also significantly worn down faster?

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/10839711

A top-floor room that’s not currently used has mold from excessive dampness. For a month I have been running a dehumidifier as it’s too cold to open the window.

Is this a good idea?

My concern: I heard about running a dehumidifier long-term in a damp basement is a bad idea because making the air more dry than the wall causes moisture to continuously flow from the outside in. That flow supposedly has the effect of washing the masonry through the capillaries and causing it to break down and weaken. In my case it’s not a basement, but similar because the exterior wall is non-stop wet from the frequent rains (possibly even leaky.. i think water seeps in).

I have the humidity set to 55%. I wonder if there is an optimum setting that would inhibit mold without overly causing water to flow through the wall (which is very old brick+mortar and rendered over on both sides, no insulation).

BTW, the water collected in the dehumidifier looks clean. Is it good for drinking?

The manual for an ultrasonic cleaner says:

• “Cold, clean tap water is generally best suited as cleaning fluid. The cleaning effect can be enhanced by the addition of approximately 3 drops of washing-up liquid. Do not use caustic cleaners, ammonia, bleach or heavily perfumed detergents.” (emphasis mine)

I know a professional jeweler with decades experience who cleans jewelry (mostly gold) using “Mr. Clean”¹ and ammonia, diluted, in an ultrasonic tub. The cheap ultrasonic I bought for myself is not for pros - but jewelry cleaning is the advertised purpose and it has a stainless steel tub just like the pro models have.

So the question is, what’s the purpose of the ammonia avoidance guidance, and is the pro jeweler I know making a mistake by using ammonia?

UPDATE: I also have to question why the manual says to use cold water. Pro ultrasonics have built-in heating elements. The pro jeweler waits until the solution is hot before using it.

footnote:

① out of curiosity, is there a brand-neutral name for “Mr. Clean” (aka “Mr. Propre” in French regions)?

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/8959162

I had a rod that was threaded on one half and smooth on the other half. I needed the smooth half to be installed into brick.

method 1: chemical anchor

The normal way to do this (I think) would be to cut some grooves into the rod using an angle grinder, drill a hole that has a diameter that’s ~2mm bigger than the rod, and use chemical anchoring. But that stuff is pricey and only lasts ~1 year on the shelf. Thus cost ineffective for 1 use.

method 2: ad hoc chemical anchor substitute

Similar to the above, I wonder if general 2-component household epoxy would work as a substitute in the above method since people are more likely to have that on-hand. I suspect the issue is that it’s too thin and gravity would do its thing and the topmost area would not get filled with epoxy. Hence why I did not attempt it.

method 3: (What I did)

The rod measured at ø=8.8mm. I had no 9mm drill bit for masonry (and that would be too loose anyway). So I used a nominal 8mm masonry bit on a hammer drill. I’m not sure what the actual diameter of that resulting hole was, but it was too tight to push in the 8.8mm rod in by hand. So I tapped it in, dry (no oil or glues). It worked! It feels really solid. Feels like I got away with murder.

Questions

(method 2) Is there something could be mixed with common 2-component household epoxy to thicken it so it acts more like chemical anchor epoxy?

(method 3) Did I take bad risk with fracturing the brick? Is there perhaps a guide somewhere that safely maps brick hole diameter to metal rod diameter? Or is this something is never done and should never be done?

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/8959162

I had a rod that was threaded on one half and smooth on the other half. I needed the smooth half to be installed into brick.

method 1: chemical anchor

The normal way to do this (I think) would be to cut some grooves into the rod using an angle grinder, drill a hole that has a diameter that’s ~2mm bigger than the rod, and use chemical anchoring. But that stuff is pricey and only lasts ~1 year on the shelf. Thus cost ineffective for 1 use.

method 2: ad hoc chemical anchor substitute

Similar to the above, I wonder if general 2-component household epoxy would work as a substitute in the above method since people are more likely to have that on-hand. I suspect the issue is that it’s too thin and gravity would do its thing and the topmost area would not get filled with epoxy. Hence why I did not attempt it.

method 3: (What I did)

The rod measured at ø=8.8mm. I had no 9mm drill bit for masonry (and that would be too loose anyway). So I used a nominal 8mm masonry bit on a hammer drill. I’m not sure what the actual diameter of that hole was, but it was too tight to push in the 8.8mm rod in by hand. So I tapped it in, dry (no oil or glues). It worked! It feels really solid. Feels like I got away with murder.

Questions

(method 2) Is there something could be mixed with common 2-component household epoxy to thicken it so it acts more like chemical anchor epoxy?

(method 3) Did I take bad risk with fracturing the brick? Is there perhaps a guide somewhere that safely maps brick hole diameter to metal rod diameter? Or is this something is never done and should never be done?

cross-posted from: https://lemmy.dbzer0.com/post/8721869

Parts like sprockets, chains, hubs, BBs, etc are quite useful for projects to build tools, furniture, art. I get them at no cost by dumpster diving. Cleaning them is quite a pain though. These are some of the options I’ve considered:

• dishwashing machine— if normal dishwasher detergent is used, I would expect it to corrode aluminum parts (correct? Can someone confirm or deny that?) Chains and /some/ sprockets are steel, right? Would they do well in the dishwasher? I wonder if there is some kind of alternative detergent that won’t harm aluminum since I always have to hand-wash an aluminum pot cover.

• ultrasonic bath— this method strikes me as the most convenient and what I would expect someone who needs to clean lots parts to use. But there is a risk of de-anodization if you use degreaser. Some jewelers use ultrasonic cleaners with a cocktail of Mr. Clean and ammonia. Would that work well on bicycle parts, non-destructively?

• Enzyme-based oven cleaner— I tested this on sprockets and it seemed to work quite well but doesn’t get into the nooks and crannies and dissolve any of the mud.

• Enzyme-based drain cleaner— instructions say wait 6 hours, so i did not test it. Is that time perhaps just because it takes that long to spread down the drain and munch on large volumes of gunk? Perhaps it would work in less time on bicycle parts.

• boiling water with dish soap— I hoped it would melt the greasy grime. The water was quite dirty afterwards but did not make much noticeable progress.

• degreaser spray— did not test this. I just have degreaser for kitchen surfaces so maybe not the right stuff.

• bicycle cleaning spray— kind of strange that this exists. Bicycles have many different materials and different kinds of grime. It did not do too well on greasy sprockets as far as I could tell.

Question on the enzyme-based cleaners: enzymes are a bit pricey by volume compared to other cleaners. Is there a way to store and reuse them? Ideally I would like to pour a bottle of enzyme-based drain cleaner into a bucket and just always soak parts in that same bucket. Do those little guys multiply when you feed them? If the water is always dirty, will the enzymes always be too full to chow down on parts being added?