Share your craft projects
Make new craft buddies
Ask craft questions
Blog your craft journey
VKD
33 posts
and
1 follower
in over 12 years
in over 12 years
Lumberjocks
Just curious as to how many of you frequent the LJ site. I would also like this site to be as heavily used as LJ’s. Any suggestions as to how we can increase membership?
17 Replies
DKV is here.
I doubt LJ is heavily used anymore.
For the number of members they have , the frequency of the post lacks far behind.
The quality of the posts is no longer what it used to be.
Abbas, Castro Valley, CA
We have slow but steady growth :) Feel free to invite your LJ buddies here.
Martin Sojka, Maker of Craftisian
I think LJ became a corporate takeover a couple times. Pop-up ads were everywhere. Lots of folks may not be very active there anymore.
Sycamore,the opposite of dkv is here.
lanwater, I agree. Same ol’ stuff all the time.
I do, but to be honest it’s my least favorite site. The membership and traffic are very good (the reason I visit) but that software platform is at the very top of my most hated list. I dislike it so mush I’ve often thought of just signing out and not going back, but it’s one of the 2 busiest sites I visit; so I suffer with it.
"I long for the day when coke was a cola and a joint was a bad place to be" Merle Haggartd
I’ve never been on that site except for a few times that one of their threads came up on a Google search result when I was researching something. I’ve never set up an account.
Lumberjocks – Infrequently. I’m here more than anywhere else – other than a Rocking Chair forum, where I’m very active there.
My observation… and this will offend many; and it’s not my interest to do so – is that a site is as good as the woodworking skills that its active members possess.
For Lumberjocks, I have the opinion, and professional woodworkers have shared this with me, as well, there are too many members who ‘speak before they know’ or ask questions before they’ve done any research – whether its tool reviews (often on just-purchased equipment), methods of work (that are down-right scary or dangerous, sometimes); or giving advice on final prep and finishing – “well, I bought some poly from a BigBox store and wiped it on”.
Serious woodworkers are interested in interacting with other serious woodworkers – learning from, and helping others learn, who are serious about learning, and improving their craft. In my opinion, the way to achieve this is to identify several members who are serious about a specialty – bent lamination, finishing, joinery, Layout… there are hundreds to choose from – and have them champion this skill on this site.
Again, it’s not my intent to sound uppity… I’ve grew tired of Lumberjocks long ago; and I’ve always hoped that W3 would be better.
I know I’d love to see an app made where I can use my mobile device easier. It would also alert me when someone is commenting on something to where I could respond in a timely manner. It would also be easier to post from my phone as I along with others I’m sure have a lot of project pictures on my phone. It’s something LJ never did and I never liked it. I think everyone is always looking for the easiest quickest thing so offering something like that may help growth. At the very least I think it would help existing members post more.
I’ve been on lumberjacks for years, I didn’t even know this sight existed. Nice to see miss Deb and Martin again.
I seldom visit anymore…just not worth the time or effort. Even worse is one of the sister sites, woodworking talk. Admins will edit your posts to remove comments they don’t like, then threaten to ban you if you complain.
Artisan Woodworks of Texas- www.awwtx.com
I’ve been on Ljs for some time and enjoy the folks there and here.
woodworking classes, custom furniture maker
I lurk there a lot, in fact that’s where I recently heard of this site, I rarely post anywhere
Invite LJ buddies here, we’re far better ;)
Martin Sojka, Maker of Craftisian
Hardly go there anymore. I do check on my friend Mads though.
—Madts.
Tor and Odin are the greatest of gods.
almost every day
Wheaties
I've been on LJ'S for years. Sadly, they allowed people acting in the corporations name to interject their version of morality and so on.
I'm about an inch away from getting booted, again.
I new asshat showed up and immediately started acting like an arrogant ass. I and others smacked him around a bit and it seemed he was behaving.
Someone asked about quitting their job and going in full time. Generally, he got a lot of good advice.
At one point, I mentioned it wasn't a good idea for painters to ever decide paint colors for a customer, and the same applied to woodwork. Building inventory for sale aside.
I used the example, from over 40 years ago, of an etched glass mirror for a friend, who was really more of an associate, since we didn't hang out at other than work. He asked me to make an item. When asked what he wanted, he left it up to me. Big mistake - I agreed.
I only charged him $35.00 for a project that took hours. And there was the cost of equipment to do the job, securing materials, designing, laying out and building the piece.
He didn't like the end product.
I asked him if it had to be shipped? He said yes. I told him to insure it for $300. It broke and he said he got the insured value for it.
Immediately, idiots started telling me I committed fraud. All because I told him replacement value.
The moderator got involved and wrote a long, erroneous legal conclusion I committed a crime. Of course, while he cited a federal law on fraud, he neglected to mention the Domestic Mail Manual [DMM] . And, certainly, not section 609, subsections 3 and 5 that state items can be insured for replacement value, versus actual cost.
The idiot moderator went far out of his way to commit libel. Saying things like, my pointing out we could insure our ounce of gold for its value even if we bought it when it was $35.00/ounce. Mista MPR says, that doesn't count because its a commodity.
I'm not sure if the ass would consider the Mona Lisa a commodity too and limit its value to what someone paid for it at a garage sale. Apparently, the ass doesn't know as much as he thinks he does, because, while we can only claim what it cost us to build something, the person we sold it to can donate it and claim appraised value far above hat it cost to make.
Of course, the ass blocked any challenge to what he said, liability of LJ's for his acts in its name aside.
https://www.lumberjocks.com/threads/i-want-to-quit-my-job-and-start-making-stuff.359541/page-3
Notice how the POS moderator painted it as if I was primarily responsible for what the purchaser did. never mind that he only had to produce evidence of what would be charged to build the item again, or have an appraisal done (e.g., there was a place, Pegasus, that did glass etch full time and he would have paid no less there, but wouldn't have gotten the custom frame).
#42 · 1d ago
I'm about an inch away from getting booted, again.
I new asshat showed up and immediately started acting like an arrogant ass. I and others smacked him around a bit and it seemed he was behaving.
Someone asked about quitting their job and going in full time. Generally, he got a lot of good advice.
At one point, I mentioned it wasn't a good idea for painters to ever decide paint colors for a customer, and the same applied to woodwork. Building inventory for sale aside.
I used the example, from over 40 years ago, of an etched glass mirror for a friend, who was really more of an associate, since we didn't hang out at other than work. He asked me to make an item. When asked what he wanted, he left it up to me. Big mistake - I agreed.
I only charged him $35.00 for a project that took hours. And there was the cost of equipment to do the job, securing materials, designing, laying out and building the piece.
He didn't like the end product.
I asked him if it had to be shipped? He said yes. I told him to insure it for $300. It broke and he said he got the insured value for it.
Immediately, idiots started telling me I committed fraud. All because I told him replacement value.
The moderator got involved and wrote a long, erroneous legal conclusion I committed a crime. Of course, while he cited a federal law on fraud, he neglected to mention the Domestic Mail Manual [DMM] . And, certainly, not section 609, subsections 3 and 5 that state items can be insured for replacement value, versus actual cost.
The idiot moderator went far out of his way to commit libel. Saying things like, my pointing out we could insure our ounce of gold for its value even if we bought it when it was $35.00/ounce. Mista MPR says, that doesn't count because its a commodity.
I'm not sure if the ass would consider the Mona Lisa a commodity too and limit its value to what someone paid for it at a garage sale. Apparently, the ass doesn't know as much as he thinks he does, because, while we can only claim what it cost us to build something, the person we sold it to can donate it and claim appraised value far above hat it cost to make.
Of course, the ass blocked any challenge to what he said, liability of LJ's for his acts in its name aside.
https://www.lumberjocks.com/threads/i-want-to-quit-my-job-and-start-making-stuff.359541/page-3
Notice how the POS moderator painted it as if I was primarily responsible for what the purchaser did. never mind that he only had to produce evidence of what would be charged to build the item again, or have an appraisal done (e.g., there was a place, Pegasus, that did glass etch full time and he would have paid no less there, but wouldn't have gotten the custom frame).
#42 · 1d ago
I analyzed Post # 28 and subsequent posts. This was a clear case of insurance fraud, intentional or not. Since this is a "necro" thread and the OP is long gone. I'm shutting this one down.
To establish insurance fraud or mail fraud (e.g., under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 for federal mail fraud or state-level insurance fraud statutes), key elements must be met:
To establish insurance fraud or mail fraud (e.g., under 18 U.S.C. § 1341 for federal mail fraud or state-level insurance fraud statutes), key elements must be met:
- Misrepresentation of Value / Material Fact: The seller instructed the buyer to insure a $35 item for $300. Obtaining a policy payout based on an artificially inflated or dishonest valuation constitutes a material misrepresentation.
- Intent / Scheme to Defraud: Insurance policies are contracts of indemnity—they exist to reimburse actual loss, not to serve as a mechanism for profit or to unload unwanted goods. The poster explicitly links the buyer's dissatisfaction with the item ("Since his heart wasn't into the purchase...") to the execution of the insurance claim.
- Intentional Damage or Fraudulent Submission: The statement explicitly implies that the item was either intentionally damaged/insufficiently packed to trigger a claim, or that a claim was filed under false pretenses because the recipient didn't want the item.
Element | Poster's Action | Legal Implications
Valuation | Sold for $35, but insured for $300. | Inflation of Value: Claiming a loss far exceeding the agreed-upon transaction value/cost to induce a higher payout.
Motive | Recipient "didn't care for it." | Fraudulent Pretext: Using government/carrier mail insurance as a substitute for a refund or return policy.
Outcome | "Post Office paid him for the damaged, insured item." | Unlawful Enrichment: Obtaining postal funds through misrepresentation or pre-planned damage.
imaginationuninc explicitly describes a scheme where postal insurance was leveraged to bail out a dissatisfied customer and artificially generate a $300 payout on a $35 transaction. Under federal and state laws governing mail and insurance transactions, knowingly inflating value or manufacturing/taking advantage of a loss to collect insurance money constitutes fraud.
USPS domestic indemnity claims are governed by the USPS Domestic Mail Manual (DMM 609). The postal service's policies directly contradict imaginationuninc's claims regarding "replacement cost":
- Proof of Actual Value Required: USPS DMM Section 609.3.2 explicitly requires evidence of value to pay any indemnity claim. For manufactured or custom items, this is determined by the actual purchase price, sales receipt, or cost of materials/labor, not a theoretical retail appraisal or arbitrary estimate.
- No Pay-Out Above Actual Loss: Insurance is a legal contract of indemnity—it pays only the actual financial loss incurred by the claimant. If the buyer paid $35, the buyer's maximum financial loss was $35. The USPS will not pay $300 on an item purchased for $35 unless the claimant provides verifiable proof (such as a formal independent appraisal or invoice) that the item’s actual market value was $300 at the time of mailing.
- Insuring vs. Collecting: While anyone can buy $300 of coverage at the retail counter (USPS will gladly accept the premium), purchasing coverage does not guarantee payment of that amount. Claimants must prove value during the claims process. Filing a claim asserting a $300 value on a $35 transaction without proof of higher value constitutes making a false statement on a federal claim.
imaginationuninccompares the custom mirror to a gold ingot purchased 40 years ago that appreciated in value.
- The Reality: Gold is a liquid commodity with a universally recognized, publicly traded spot price. A custom-etched glass mirror created for a friend has no established market index or appreciation record.
- The Legal Standard: To claim appreciated or fair-market value above purchase price, the claimant must produce concrete proof of market value (e.g., formal appraisal prior to shipping). Artificially selecting a $300 figure simply because the recipient disliked the item and wanted out of the transaction is arbitrary valuation, not market appreciation.
imaginationuninc argues: "I did not send, so did not insure the package... all I got from the project, was the $35.00."
- The Reality: In law, directing, instructing, or conspiring with another person to submit a inflated or fraudulent claim makes one a co-conspirator or accessory to fraud (18 U.S.C. § 2 / 18 U.S.C. § 371). Telling the buyer to insure the item for $300 to recover money on an item they were unhappy with directly induced the claim.
imaginationuninc attempts to draw a parallel to tax deductions for charitable donations.
- The Reality: IRS tax rules regarding non-cash charitable contributions (IRS Publication 561) require formal appraisals for higher-value items and explicitly prohibit taxpayers from self-assigning inflated values. Drawing an analogy to IRS appraisals actually undermines their argument, as self-assessing an unappraised $35 item at $300 violates both IRS and USPS standards.
imaginationuninc's Argument | Legal & Postal Reality
"Postal insurance is about replacement cost, not purchase price." | False: USPS indemnity pays the actual evidence-backed loss (purchase price or proven material/labor cost), capped at the coverage amount.
"I only received $35, so I did nothing wrong." | False: Advising or setting up a scheme for a buyer to collect an inflated $300 payout from a postal carrier still constitutes participation in a fraudulent claim.
"It's like an appreciating gold ingot." | False: Commodities have clear market prices. Custom crafts require formal proof of value; self-assigned values are not accepted by USPS.
aboveboard's position accurately reflects how insurance regulations work: regardless of passage of time or rationalizations, using postal insurance to collect $300 on a $35 transaction to resolve customer dissatisfaction constitutes an improper, non-indemnifiable insurance claim.
