« first day (43 days earlier)      last day (1933 days later) » 

12:23 AM
@drs Nice! Yeah, they are really useful. I always thought it was weird that some benches sold with holes in them, but now that I have some bench dogs... woo!
 
 
15 hours later…
3:05 PM
@rob What do you think is an appropriate answer for a Community Project? Was @PeterGrace 's answer OK outside the "what was learned"
 
3:18 PM
In the question
6
Q: How can I make a cutting board handle like this?

Jordan BentleyHow is this cutting board handle possible? The only way I can think of is that it was done by hand with a gouge, but it looks too clean for that. Can this be done with power tools?

Want to add to the title and question with a description of the handle. Something like hand insert, deep handle, hand groove. I don't know what this is called. Right now the question is useless without the picture. Adding these details would help
 
rob
4:00 PM
@Matt I would describe that as an inset grip or inset handle; maybe someone else has a better name.
 
I just found inset as well. That is what I was going to use.
@rob
 
rob
@Matt s/a/an/ :)
 
6
Q: How can I make an inset cutting board handle?

Jordan BentleyHow is this cutting board handle possible? The only way I can think of is that it was done by hand with a gouge, but it looks too clean for that. Can an inset handle, such as the one pictured below, be done with power tools?

I know... i saw
 
rob
:)
 
Is it ok now??
 
rob
4:05 PM
Looks great
@Matt I'm not sure how other SE sites handle community projects (if they have them), but I would lean toward a very minimalist answer. It's really up to everyone to come to a consensus on what the appropriate Q&A format is for the community projects, but personally I think the meta question is effectively, "What questions can we ask on the main site about building [a workbench]?"
Each answer to that question would include a list of the tools that person chose to use or investigate, along with a list of questions that were spawned as a result.
 
Thanks @rob
 
rob
If anyone chooses to add more I guess its's up to them, but I'd probably try to keep it very short to avoid making meta more of a supplemental site than a meta site.
 
Maybe we could have another chat room merely for putting up pictures and more information about the projects. Keep the content in WW but keeping the main Q&A on topic
 
rob
I think that's a great idea.
 
I will make a meta about that then.
 
4:38 PM
@rob... I promise I will make an effort to proofread my posts from now on. That was just embarrassing. Just trying to juggle work.
 
2
Q: I think we should have a chatroom for showcasing our projects

MattI have been thinking about this for a while but didn't want to have another chatroom that no one frequented which would then fizzle and die. Now that community-projects is starting to take off this idea might have a more permanent place. Our first community project was Community Project: Lets b...

 
rob
4:57 PM
@Matt hahaha...no problem. :)
 
@rob just helping you get the copy editor badge!
 
 
1 hour later…
rob
6:09 PM
Can anyone think of a reason why woodworking.stackexchange.com/q/1261/49 shouldn't be closed this as a dupe of woodworking.stackexchange.com/q/1144/49?
 
Not unless the question gets more specific. I would think it is a dup
 
 
3 hours later…
9:27 PM
@rob, @Matt I'm not sure the best way to make the question obvious to others, but when 'getting' lumber from trees, size does matter for the tools and techniques one can or should use.
 
 
1 hour later…
rob
10:48 PM
@bowlturner I agree with your size comment, but my point in the comments was just that I think the size issue should be made as explicit as possible to discourage anyone from suggesting an inappropriate solution (including using a mill intended for larger pieces).
I made a suggestion a few times that would clarify the difference but had settled on making the title more explicit. I'll go ahead and make the other edit that I had suggested.
 
rob
11:09 PM
If there's a fair chance that a question could be interpreted as a dupe, ideally it should explicitly mention the other question and explain why it is not a duplicate.
 

« first day (43 days earlier)      last day (1933 days later) »