Skip Navigational Links
LISTSERV email list manager
LISTSERV - LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG
LISTSERV Menu
Log In
Log In
LISTSERV 17.5 Help - BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS Archives
LISTSERV Archives
LISTSERV Archives
Search Archives
Search Archives
Register
Register
Log In
Log In

BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS Archives

The listserv where the buildings do the talking

BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS@LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG

Menu
LISTSERV Archives LISTSERV Archives
BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS Home BULLAMANKA-PINHEADS Home

Log In Log In
Register Register

Subscribe or Unsubscribe Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Search Archives Search Archives
Options: Use Forum View

Use Monospaced Font
Show HTML Part by Default
Condense Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Mime-Version:
1.0
Sender:
"BP - \"The Cracked Monitor\"" <[log in to unmask]>
Subject:
Re: failed building materials
From:
David west <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Wed, 25 Aug 1999 21:21:20 +0100
Content-Transfer-Encoding:
quoted-printable
Content-Type:
text/plain; charset=US-ASCII
Reply-To:
"BP - \"The Cracked Monitor\"" <[log in to unmask]>
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (16 lines)
Barbara

Pseudo light-hearted response follows:

One of the local building diagnosticians promulgates a theory which says that the rate and frequency of failures on any given building is directly proportional to the number of architectural awards won by that building.

This suggests that preservation of failed materials will become increasingly important due to the proliferation of award systems ...

More importantly, does it suggest that award-winning buildings are poorly detailed from a construction sense - for example, all those clean crisp lines and flat surfaces are terrible at water-shedding.  

As I've finished my breakfast, I will respond to the rest of your email once I've thought about it some more.

Cheers

david

ATOM RSS1 RSS2

LISTSERV.ICORS.ORG CataList Email List Search Powered by LISTSERV