• Welcome to the new and improved Building Code Forum. We appreciate you being here and hope that you are getting the information that you need concerning all codes of the building trades. This is a free forum to the public due to the generosity of the Sawhorses, Corporate Supporters and Supporters who have upgraded their accounts. If you would like to have improved access to the forum please upgrade to Sawhorse by first logging in then clicking here: Upgrades

Absolutely NO EXCUSE ICC, Really!

ICC New Release

Hey everyone a new release went out this morning on the website/security update.

Jump on over to ICC's Facebook page to read it, (In the notes section). If you don't have Facebook, PM me and I can give you the gist of what it says.

V767

p.s. That headline should read "ICC News Release." Stupid thumbs... :/
 
CowboyRR, thanks!

I am hopeful that this will begin a wonderful conversation across the entire spectrum of our industry.

V767
 
conarb said:
Kyle:Whatever happened to our old webmaster? Is he still there, I think everybody liked him.
Click to expand...
Conarb, I don't know how to take that. Do you not like me? My feeble self-esteem can only throw out that question.

Joking aside, he is still around and has a more behind-the-scenes role right now. I imagine that role will progress toward a more public role but currently I am the main the contact point for this discussion board and the future board that will be hosted on ICC's site.

Regardless, fantastic to meet you and hope I can get to that same level the previous moderator had on the old board.

V767
 
sheesh, way to go CA, we finally get an ICC presence here and you insult him..........JK

V, glad to see you came on board. I didn't get a chance to really chat with you at length in Denver, but am heartened to see you here.
 
Kyle:

Do us a favor when you see him and tell him that we all really appreciated is efforts, I'll never forget the way he handled the aftermath here of 9-11.

Another comment, several months ago I went to the Communities of Interest and posted a question about accessing the Legacy ICBO Reports, the one I wanted was no-longer in the list of Legacy Reports (specifically the first approvals of DuPont's Tyvek as an air-barrier only), my question was not only not answered but the thread with my one post was taken down within hours. I felt this was a rather heavy-handed approach to protect DuPont from revealing the history of their approvals, I hope this doesn't continue to happen.
 
conarb said:
Kyle:Do us a favor when you see him and tell him that we all really appreciated is efforts, I'll never forget the way he handled the aftermath here of 9-11.

Another comment, several months ago I went to the Communities of Interest and posted a question about accessing the Legacy ICBO Reports, the one I wanted was no-longer in the list of Legacy Reports (specifically the first approvals of DuPont's Tyvek as an air-barrier only), my question was not only not answered but the thread with my one post was taken down within hours. I felt this was a rather heavy-handed approach to protect DuPont from revealing the history of their approvals, I hope this doesn't continue to happen.
Click to expand...
Conarb, I will be sure to let him know that.

On your other comment, that happened before I came on board, and while I am not excusing myself from answering properly, I am saying that it will take me a little bit of time to figure out why that instance did occur that way.

PM me next week (If you don't mind, to remind me, my notes lately have an amazing habit of disappearing) about this and hopefully by then I will have a proper response for you.

Thanks!

V767
 
Welcome Kyle... good "seeing" you again. We've had the same issue with our VOIP network too... when you lose something, you lose everything.
 
V767 said:
CowboyRR, thanks!I am hopeful that this will begin a wonderful conversation across the entire spectrum of our industry.

V767
Click to expand...
To that end - are other ICC staff going to be encouraged to participate on this board?
 
AegisFPE said:
There still seems to be some lingering effects with the ICC servers. The free e-codes let's you navigate to a code, but upon selecting a section, a popup window repeatedly opens, "500 - Internal Server Error."
Click to expand...
Aegis, I will follow up on this tomorrow to see if that is the true issue with that.

Thanks!

V767
 
I'm not sure where to put this comment, but in my experience with 10 years or so of forum use, when two forums have the same "qualities", eventually one becomes the active forum and the other slowly disappears. I believe this same thing would happen if ICC's new forum closely resembled this forum (I can't say which would become inactive, I don't know that). If ICC's new forum had functions that this forum does not, it is possible the two could live side by side (for instance, if ICC's forum was more formal and had areas to post questions and get "ICC" answers).

I still am not sure how an "open" forum like this would benefit ICC to have on their server, except to have control, and what does one do with control on an "open" forum? Advertise? The propensity would be to become more and more controlling toward their own interests (and there is nothing wrong with that).

Perhaps they should consider supporting this forum at arms length, and have a very specific forum of their own , , , which sounds like what the idea was with the "communities of interest" except their forum didn't WORK.

Point being, I am not at all convinced that two forums will both thrive.
 
Yankee stated:

Point being, I am not at all convinced that two forums will both thrive.
Click to expand...
The regular users of any forum will naturally gravitate towards the better, more

user friendly one. As of right now, IMO, there is no other forum available to compare

to!

Thanks Jeff and others for all of your efforts! :)

.
 
CowboyRR said:
To that end - are other ICC staff going to be encouraged to participate on this board?
Click to expand...
Hey V767 - I'm still waiting for an answer....
 
Yankee said:
I still am not sure how an "open" forum like this would benefit ICC to have on their server, except to have control, and what does one do with control on an "open" forum? Advertise? The propensity would be to become more and more controlling toward their own interests (and there is nothing wrong with that). Perhaps they should consider supporting this forum at arms length, and have a very specific forum of their own , , , which sounds like what the idea was with the "communities of interest" except their forum didn't WORK.Point being, I am not at all convinced that two forums will both thrive.
Click to expand...
Personally, I think this bridge has already been crossed and the members here that are crawling back in bed with the Cow are doomed to repeat the history they already resent. ICC leaders have done some pretty inexcusable things inthe past - and they show no signs of reversing that tren going forward. There is a process for fixing screw ups like this and the ICC does not like to follow that protocol. They want to avoid the accountability that is required to prevent future recurrences and jump straight into imediate solutions instead. Flying folks to Denver to issue a "heartfelt" apology is not accountability. Glad they did that - but that is not accountability.
 
If this board dies in favor of the ICC, then so be it. As for me, I use the ICC for what little I need it for, outside of that it can pound sand. Fool me once, shame on you, fool me twice ...

The ICC has no use for what I contribute to this board. In my present job I have very little use or need of the ICC. I trust folks until they show me that I shouldn't trust them, ICC broke that trust quite a while ago.
 
Easy there cowboy.......nobody has "crawled in bed" with anybody. I myself find that statement more than a bit offensive, as I'm sure the other folks that took time out away from their families, and money out of their own pockets to go to Denver and open a dialogue with the ICC folks. I was one of the first to say "first time the horse kicks ya, it's the horses fault. And I, like most of the others went there with a chip on my shoulder, and at a minimum, a sheltered mindset. I wasn't expecting much, and the ball is in ICC's court. They don't produce, well then they can't say we didn't listen to their proposal.

So, crawl off your horse sport, at least with the people from this forum that invested their own time in this venture.
 
"There is a process for fixing screw ups like this and the ICC does not like to follow that protocol. They want to avoid the accountability that is required to prevent future recurrences and jump straight into imediate solutions instead"

Would you develop that statement more fully, because I can't quite grasp the specific meaning?
 
View attachment 447Perhaps I can help? The cow has made mistakes at the code hearings. Instead of admitting a MAJOR mistake they "fix-it" in the next code cycle??? wtf. You know... like the sill plate / joist / foundation anchor bolt spacing table in the 2006 IRC that was SUPOSSED to be for D-1 and D-2 zones ONLY!!! Has anyone wondered why it disappered in the 2009 IRC? Look we all make mistakes. Inspectors, plans examiners, code officials, etc... Why in the name that is all is Holy can't they admit to it? And then fix it? I can tell you that BOCA & SBCCI were no different. Anybody remember Minneapolis and Baltimore? Not to bring up the dead but... or is that butt... Mistakes/ Ya we all make them but is seems that the icc just can't quite bring them selves in humility to admit to jack. Retorspective humility is a good thing. Beeen there. Choking down some some crow, feet, feathers and all is is good for the soul.

View attachment 205

View attachment 205

/monthly_2010_08/572953b96af59_madcow..jpg.b779af03ca2e3e9ef636f14cf9bc8c36.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
globe trekker said:
Yankee stated:The regular users of any forum will naturally gravitate towards the better, more

user friendly one. As of right now, IMO, there is no other forum available to compare

to!

Thanks Jeff and others for all of your efforts! :)

.
Click to expand...
The ICC doesn't get the benefit of free.

Trying to monetize user generated content is what killed their board.

It hurt their brand as well.

They'll never deliver what this board does because they can't bring themselves to allow all the things that give a board character.

If they had ICC staff providing official answers, then sure people would use it.

But they can't do that because 1. they want to monetize those 2. official answers take too long to generate.

Heck it's not like they're sending their code experts over here to participate in answering code questions.

Instead it's an IT person to build buzz.
 
ICC doesn't provide "interpretations" without a committee vetting them first. I chair one of the interpretation committees.. they send us what staff believes the code to mean, we hash it out and either approve it or disapprove it. We approve more than we disapprove, but we've made ICC staff change their opinion.. and after we vet the new opinion, we authorize it to go out.

They view and possibly comment on what is going on in this board.

This board will never go away; ICC's will be separate, even though many of us will participate on both. ICC isn't going to buy this board out; it's not good for the industry.

Just keep an open mind when they launch something.

Thanks
 
Yankee said:
Would you develop that statement more fully, because I can't quite grasp the specific meaning?
Click to expand...
Meaning that they/we need to hold those responsible for these gaffs accountable. There does not appear to be any tangible consequence when they exercise poor judgement. We are at a disadvantage with the elected leaders protecting each other when these things occur - it's hard to pull the trigger on voting somebody out when you don't know what role they played in the decision. ICC does not mind flooding my inbox with emails touting all the great things they do - how about they put the website fiasco on the front page - admit what they did wrong, why & how it happened, what they are doing to fix it, and what they hav edone to prevent it from happening again? Give us full disclosure without naming names.
 
fatboy said:
I wasn't expecting much, and the ball is in ICC's court. They don't produce, well then they can't say we didn't listen to their proposal. So, crawl off your horse sport, at least with the people from this forum that invested their own time in this venture.
Click to expand...
I'm not of the mind to invest any more time with ICC leaders until they demonstrate accountablility for their actions. I don't think they regret their actions to pull the plug on the old BBS one bit - but they are very sorry that nobody plays on their website. Same as people that are not sorry for wrongdoing when they are caught - they're just sorry that they got caught. The BBS is just one of many instances like this. I still believe the membership is the lifeblood of the org. but the leaders are not going to change until the membership holds them accountable. Meeting with them to launch a new site is not about accountability. I will just keep my thoughts to myself from now on. Best of luck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top