PG on nonprofits/Darfur

Post by ensignavenger » Sat, Jan 24, 2009, 7:33 AM UTC

mkn wrote: post #16

ensignavenger wrote: post #9

Earlier quoted context omitted.

However, straw burns- and mildews, rather easily. I'm sure they have ways to minimize the negative consequences of this, but I think the dirt houses may be easier? What do they use for roofing on the Eco-Domes?

Actually, straw bales burn very poorly. When locked away behind a layer of stucco, even more poorly. Ditto for mildew. The earthquake resistance, pest resistance, and insulating qualities of straw bale construction are mind-blowing.

Okay, I can agree with a tightly bailed bail of hay not burning (as long as it stays tight) but mildew? I've seen a lot of mildewed hay in my life. Living in a farming community, I know the importance of keeping your hay dry. Of course, I'm not totally familiar with the construction techniques- if you have any links you'd recommend, I'd be willing to read up on it.

Post by anamax » Sun, Jan 25, 2009, 11:02 PM UTC

dfranke wrote: post #30

anamax wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

"plead self-defense" to whom? To the govt that you didn't grease correctly? To the govt in your home country that thinks that bribing other govts is wrong? Note that "self-defense" typically is to prevent grave bodily harm or death and is usually reserved for immediate threats. Not being able to build houses for some poor wretch who will probably live at least a few weeks without the house doesn't qualify.

To the home government. And while self-defense typically connotes imminent grave bodily harm, it is also typically plead only when one is accused of inflicting the same. In a country with rule of law, in non-imminent situations one is expected to seek the help of authorities rather than take matters into his own hands. But when that expectation is clearly unrealistic, then you have an interesting case.

> In a country with rule of law, in non-imminent situations one is expected to seek the help of authorities rather than take matters into his own hands. But when that expectation is clearly unrealistic, then you have an interesting case.

No, you don't. The home govt has decided that bribery is wrong. It's well aware that banning bribery will mean that some poor wretch won't get a house and believes that that's an acceptable price to pay for the benefits of banning bribery.

Re: PG on nonprofits/Darfur

Re: PG on nonprofits/Darfur