On Sat, 30 Dec 2023 17:43:19 -0800, Nobody wrote:

> On Sat, 30 Dec 2023 23:00:34 +0200, Clank <clank75@googlemail.com>
> wrote:
>
>>On 2023-12-30 20:50, Roland Perry wrote:
>>> In message <EiYjN.114016$c68d.7595@fx15.ams1>, at 17:19:32 on Sat, 30
>>> Dec 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>> How many of these vintage objects can you identify?  If you're in the
>>>> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may
>>>> still own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-
vintage-it
>>>> ems-quiz-most-cant/
>>>>
>>>> I got:
>>>> You scored 49 out of 60 YOU KNOW YOUR STUFF.
>>>> Great job! That score is amazing.
>>>
>>> I got 60/60, most without seeing the multiple choices, some having to
>>> ignore somewhat USA-ian terminology, and only had to guess one (the
>>> Nintendo) but picked the most well known of the four.
>>
>>There wasn't a Nintendo.
>
> Qué?

Christ on a bike. This place hasn't changed a bit then...

OK. There wasn't A PICTURE OF a Nintendo.

You know, in the quiz, the one about identifying the pictures.

>
> The four offerings were: 1) ATARI SYSTEM; 2) SEGA GENESIS; 3) NINTENDO
> 64; 4) SEGA DREAMCAST
>
> The correct choice/answer is/was ATARI SYSTEM...
>
>
>>(There was an Atari.)

Quite.

JMB99 <mb@nospam.net> wrote:
> On 30/12/2023 19:23, Marland wrote:
> > 55 , should have noted which ones I got wrong. Heckler was one, another I
> > chose pepper grinder instead of Coffee.
>
>
>
> I got bored and did not finish. Too much of a mix of a couple of
> obscure items requiring detailed knowledge of a particular subject, some
> needing knowledge of US terminology but many that anyone older than a
> teenager would know.

+1. I got 57, but half of the objects I've never seen in real life. It's
not hard to guess them though, eg I know wired TV remotes were a thing and
that particular item has 'TV' written on it so it was clear it wasn't one of
the other options.

Things I got wrong:
- Seattle freeway eraser
- sugar sifter
- flax thingy

Theo

On 31/12/2023 02:19, Roland Perry wrote:
> In message <u2h1pil1ags8j422plslcknnqt565u9uf3@4ax.com>, at 17:43:19 on
> Sat, 30 Dec 2023, Nobody <jock@soccer.com> remarked:
>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2023 23:00:34 +0200, Clank <clank75@googlemail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> On 2023-12-30 20:50, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>> In message <EiYjN.114016$c68d.7595@fx15.ams1>, at 17:19:32 on Sat, 30
>>>> Dec 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>> How many of these vintage objects can you identify?  If you're in the
>>>>> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may
>>>>> still
>>>>> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>>>>>
>>>>> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-it
>>>>> ems-quiz-most-cant/
>>>>>
>>>>> I got:
>>>>> You scored 49 out of 60
>>>>> YOU KNOW YOUR STUFF.
>>>>> Great job! That score is amazing.
>>>>
>>>> I got 60/60, most without seeing the multiple choices, some having to
>>>> ignore somewhat USA-ian terminology, and only had to guess one (the
>>>> Nintendo) but picked the most well known of the four.
>>>
>>> There wasn't a Nintendo.
>>
>> Qué?
>>
>> The four offerings were: 1) ATARI SYSTEM; 2) SEGA GENESIS; 3) NINTENDO
>> 64; 4) SEGA DREAMCAST
>>
>> The correct choice/answer is/was ATARI SYSTEM...
>
> So there was a Nintendo after all.

There was no picture of a Nintendo; there was the word "Nintendo" as a
potential wrong answer for the picture of an Atari. I'm not going to
argue over the semantics of whether that constitutes "was a Nintendo".
I guessed that one correctly, having realised that it wasn't a Nintendo
and being lucky not to fall for other tempting but incorrect options.

>>> (There was an Atari.)
>>>
>>> Like the man said - 60/60???
>>
>> Roland has to roll back from 60/60... but we'll no doubt experience
>> the evidential fallback.
>
> I don't know what's going on, but I did a screenshot of the final score.

Certes <Certes@example.org> wrote:
> On 31/12/2023 02:19, Roland Perry wrote:
>> In message <u2h1pil1ags8j422plslcknnqt565u9uf3@4ax.com>, at 17:43:19 on
>> Sat, 30 Dec 2023, Nobody <jock@soccer.com> remarked:
>>> On Sat, 30 Dec 2023 23:00:34 +0200, Clank <clank75@googlemail.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 2023-12-30 20:50, Roland Perry wrote:
>>>>> In message <EiYjN.114016$c68d.7595@fx15.ams1>, at 17:19:32 on Sat, 30
>>>>> Dec 2023, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>>>>>> How many of these vintage objects can you identify?  If you're in the
>>>>>> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may
>>>>>> still
>>>>>> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-it
>>>>>> ems-quiz-most-cant/
>>>>>>
>>>>>> I got:
>>>>>> You scored 49 out of 60
>>>>>> YOU KNOW YOUR STUFF.
>>>>>> Great job! That score is amazing.
>>>>>
>>>>> I got 60/60, most without seeing the multiple choices, some having to
>>>>> ignore somewhat USA-ian terminology, and only had to guess one (the
>>>>> Nintendo) but picked the most well known of the four.
>>>>
>>>> There wasn't a Nintendo.
>>>
>>> Qué?
>>>
>>> The four offerings were: 1) ATARI SYSTEM; 2) SEGA GENESIS; 3) NINTENDO
>>> 64; 4) SEGA DREAMCAST
>>>
>>> The correct choice/answer is/was ATARI SYSTEM...
>>
>> So there was a Nintendo after all.
>
> There was no picture of a Nintendo; there was the word "Nintendo" as a
> potential wrong answer for the picture of an Atari. I'm not going to
> argue over the semantics of whether that constitutes "was a Nintendo".
> I guessed that one correctly, having realised that it wasn't a Nintendo
> and being lucky not to fall for other tempting but incorrect options.

That Atari was one of the few of those old objects I once owned!

On 30/12/2023 19:23, Marland wrote:
> Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
>> How many of these vintage objects can you identify? If you're in the
>> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may still
>> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>>
>> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-items-quiz-most-cant/
>>
>> I got:
>> You scored 49 out of 60
>> YOU KNOW YOUR STUFF.
>> Great job! That score is amazing.
>>
>
> 55 , should have noted which ones I got wrong. Heckler was one, another I
> chose pepper grinder instead of Coffee.
>
> GH

58, got heckling wrong and the razor blade slot.

--
Colin

In message <umrot5$1ns00$2@dont-email.me>, at 13:04:37 on Sun, 31 Dec
2023, Certes <Certes@example.org> remarked:

>>>> There wasn't a Nintendo.
>>>
>>> Qué?
>>>
>>> The four offerings were: 1) ATARI SYSTEM; 2) SEGA GENESIS; 3) NINTENDO
>>> 64; 4) SEGA DREAMCAST
>>>
>>> The correct choice/answer is/was ATARI SYSTEM...
>> So there was a Nintendo after all.
>
>There was no picture of a Nintendo; there was the word "Nintendo" as a
>potential wrong answer for the picture of an Atari. I'm not going to
>argue over the semantics of whether that constitutes "was a Nintendo".
>I guessed that one correctly, having realised that it wasn't a Nintendo
>and being lucky not to fall for other tempting but incorrect options.

You've corrected nobody, then.
--
Roland Perry

Op 30-12-2023 om 18:19 schreef Recliner:
> How many of these vintage objects can you identify? If you're in the
> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may still
> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>
> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-items-quiz-most-cant/
>
> I got:
> You scored 49 out of 60
> YOU KNOW YOUR STUFF.
> Great job! That score is amazing.
>

39 out of 60
"You know a lot more than others"

A lot of mistakes because English is not my first language.
Never heard of Blockbuster.
And yes it was a Phone, but all four answers had that word,
Never heard of "Rotary phone".
Etcetera....

Thanks, nice quiz!

Rink

Rink <rink.hof.haalditmaarweg@planet.nl> wrote:
> Op 30-12-2023 om 18:19 schreef Recliner:
>> How many of these vintage objects can you identify? If you're in the
>> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may still
>> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>>
>> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-items-quiz-most-cant/
>>
>> I got:
>> You scored 49 out of 60
>> YOU KNOW YOUR STUFF.
>> Great job! That score is amazing.
>>
>
>
> 39 out of 60
> "You know a lot more than others"
>
> A lot of mistakes because English is not my first language.
> Never heard of Blockbuster.
> And yes it was a Phone, but all four answers had that word,
> Never heard of "Rotary phone".
> Etcetera....
>
> Thanks, nice quiz!

I think some of us in the UK were caught out by the American brands and and
terminology, and had to guess at a few questions that we might have known
under their British names.

Op 2-1-2024 om 18:13 schreef Recliner:
> Rink <rink.hof.haalditmaarweg@planet.nl> wrote:
>> Op 30-12-2023 om 18:19 schreef Recliner:
>>> How many of these vintage objects can you identify? If you're in the
>>> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may still
>>> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>>>
>>> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-items-quiz-most-cant/
>>>
>>> I got:
>>> You scored 49 out of 60
>>> YOU KNOW YOUR STUFF.
>>> Great job! That score is amazing.
>>>
>>
>>
>> 39 out of 60
>> "You know a lot more than others"
>>
>> A lot of mistakes because English is not my first language.
>> Never heard of Blockbuster.
>> And yes it was a Phone, but all four answers had that word,
>> Never heard of "Rotary phone".
>> Etcetera....
>>
>> Thanks, nice quiz!
>
> I think some of us in the UK were caught out by the American brands and and
> terminology, and had to guess at a few questions that we might have known
> under their British names.
>

I can understand this.

Rink

In message <un1fk5$2p8hd$1@dont-email.me>, at 18:02:59 on Tue, 2 Jan
2024, Rink <rink.hof.haalditmaarweg@planet.nl> remarked:
>Op 30-12-2023 om 18:19 schreef Recliner:
>> How many of these vintage objects can you identify? If you're in the
>> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may still
>> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.

>>
>>https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-i
>>tems-quiz-most-cant/

>> I got:
>> You scored 49 out of 60
>> YOU KNOW YOUR STUFF.
>> Great job! That score is amazing.
>
>39 out of 60

>"You know a lot more than others"
>
>A lot of mistakes because English is not my first language.
>Never heard of Blockbuster.

They had numerous stores throughout the USA and UK. But many of the
items in the quiz were entertainment-media related. Either the players,
or the medium (eg VHS, 8-track)

>And yes it was a Phone, but all four answers had that word,
>Never heard of "Rotary phone".

I agree, must be a USA-ian name, but a "rotary dial" is also
British-English.

>Etcetera....
>
>Thanks, nice quiz!
>
>Rink

--
Roland Perry

In message <3vXkN.64236$ogWb.35166@fx14.ams1>, at 17:13:35 on Tue, 2 Jan
2024, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> remarked:
>Rink <rink.hof.haalditmaarweg@planet.nl> wrote:
>> Op 30-12-2023 om 18:19 schreef Recliner:
>>> How many of these vintage objects can you identify? If you're in the
>>> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may still
>>> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>>>
>>>
>>>https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-
>>>items-quiz-most-cant/
>>>
>>> I got:
>>> You scored 49 out of 60
>>> YOU KNOW YOUR STUFF.
>>> Great job! That score is amazing.
>>
>> 39 out of 60
>> "You know a lot more than others"
>>
>> A lot of mistakes because English is not my first language.
>> Never heard of Blockbuster.
>> And yes it was a Phone, but all four answers had that word,
>> Never heard of "Rotary phone".
>> Etcetera....
>>
>> Thanks, nice quiz!
>
>I think some of us in the UK were caught out by the American brands and and
>terminology,

One of the enduring themes of consumer electronics (and associated
technologies) is that they arise in the USA as B2B products, then
eventually become affordable enough to be B2C products, at which point
savvy UK distributors can make the leap to B2C-in-the-UK.

Understanding all that (and scouting it in the field) is one potential
summary of my career. Which career in a way got launched by
talent-spotting the first generation of 4-function calculators and
importing them for resale in around 1975. UK consumers literally threw
money [equivalent to a week's minimum wage pay, so about £400 in today's
money] at us.

We had to hire extra staff just to stuff them in jiffy bags.

>and had to guess at a few questions that we might have known
>under their British names.

Generic branding like "Hoover" and "Biro", and for a while even
"Amstrad" for a small-business computer.
--
Roland Perry

On 02/01/2024 17:13, Recliner wrote:
> Rink <rink.hof.haalditmaarweg@planet.nl> wrote:

>> 39 out of 60
>> "You know a lot more than others"
>>
>> A lot of mistakes because English is not my first language.
>> Never heard of Blockbuster.
>> And yes it was a Phone, but all four answers had that word,
>> Never heard of "Rotary phone".
>> Etcetera....
>>
>> Thanks, nice quiz!
>
> I think some of us in the UK were caught out by the American brands and and
> terminology, and had to guess at a few questions that we might have known
> under their British names.

Agree, nice quiz hampered by Americanisms. However, most were guessable
such as the rotary phone.

--
Colin

On 30/12/2023 17:19, Recliner wrote:
> How many of these vintage objects can you identify? If you're in the
> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may still
> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>
> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-items-quiz-most-cant/
>
> I got:
> You scored 49 out of 60
> YOU KNOW YOUR STUFF.
> Great job! That score is amazing.

46 out of 60. Some I had to guess, had never heard of some of the USA
terminology, and one or two photos were not entirely clear on my monitor
screen - I have no space for a ginormous monitor.

Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com> wrote:
> How many of these vintage objects can you identify? If you're in the
> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may still
> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>
> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-items-quiz-most-cant/
>
> I got:
> You scored 49 out of 60
> YOU KNOW YOUR STUFF.
> Great job! That score is amazing.
>

You scored 56 out of 60
YOU KNOW YOUR STUFF.
Great job! That score is amazing.

One silly one, one I had no chance on and guessed wrong, and a couple where
the wording confused me.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 30/12/2023 17:19, Recliner wrote:
> How many of these vintage objects can you identify? If you're in the
> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may still
> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>
> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-items-quiz-most-cant/

56, having guessed at many of them, but I reckon I am well below average age
here. I thought the heckler was a hay straightener and the mimeograph was a
duplicator, but that wasn't an option so I foolishly guessed at printer.
I've heard of duplicators; is that what this was, or are they something
else? I think my primary school had one in the 1980s.

Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
> On 30/12/2023 17:19, Recliner wrote:
>> How many of these vintage objects can you identify? If you're in the
>> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may still
>> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>>
>> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-items-quiz-most-cant/
>
> 56, having guessed at many of them, but I reckon I am well below average age
> here. I thought the heckler was a hay straightener and the mimeograph was a
> duplicator, but that wasn't an option so I foolishly guessed at printer.
> I've heard of duplicators; is that what this was, or are they something
> else? I think my primary school had one in the 1980s.
>

I think we called them stencils. Stencils needed a master, typed by an
accurate typist on special paper, which was then used in a dedicated
machine to print a limited number of rather poor copies. They were still in
use when I started work in the mid-1970s, but were soon superseded by early
photocopiers (using smelly paper).

On Wed, 03 Jan 2024 22:19:58 GMT, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com>
wrote:

>Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 30/12/2023 17:19, Recliner wrote:
>>> How many of these vintage objects can you identify? If you're in the
>>> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may still
>>> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>>>
>>> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-items-quiz-most-cant/
>>
>> 56, having guessed at many of them, but I reckon I am well below average age
>> here. I thought the heckler was a hay straightener and the mimeograph was a
>> duplicator, but that wasn't an option so I foolishly guessed at printer.
>> I've heard of duplicators; is that what this was, or are they something
>> else? I think my primary school had one in the 1980s.
>>
>
>I think we called them stencils. Stencils needed a master, typed by an
>accurate typist on special paper, which was then used in a dedicated
>machine to print a limited number of rather poor copies. They were still in
>use when I started work in the mid-1970s, but were soon superseded by early
>photocopiers (using smelly paper).
>
Stencil duplicator, usually (or always ?) a Gestetner. The "master"
was the stencil. Mimeographs (mostly a US description) were the same
underlying technology (ink forced through a stencil) but most
drawings/photographs seem to be of simpler machines than the Gestetner
ones which tended to belt out copies at a fairly fast pace.

Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
> On Wed, 03 Jan 2024 22:19:58 GMT, Recliner <recliner.usenet@gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
>>> On 30/12/2023 17:19, Recliner wrote:
>>>> How many of these vintage objects can you identify? If you're in the
>>>> typical demographic for this group, most should be easy, and you may still
>>>> own some. Roland will probably ace it and score 60/60.
>>>>
>>>> https://www.exploredplanet.com/life/are-you-able-to-pass-this-vintage-items-quiz-most-cant/
>>>
>>> 56, having guessed at many of them, but I reckon I am well below average age
>>> here. I thought the heckler was a hay straightener and the mimeograph was a
>>> duplicator, but that wasn't an option so I foolishly guessed at printer.
>>> I've heard of duplicators; is that what this was, or are they something
>>> else? I think my primary school had one in the 1980s.
>>>
>>
>> I think we called them stencils. Stencils needed a master, typed by an
>> accurate typist on special paper, which was then used in a dedicated
>> machine to print a limited number of rather poor copies. They were still in
>> use when I started work in the mid-1970s, but were soon superseded by early
>> photocopiers (using smelly paper).
>>
> Stencil duplicator, usually (or always ?) a Gestetner. The "master"
> was the stencil. Mimeographs (mostly a US description) were the same
> underlying technology (ink forced through a stencil) but most
> drawings/photographs seem to be of simpler machines than the Gestetner
> ones which tended to belt out copies at a fairly fast pace.

Definitely a duplicator in casual speech. The masters were typed on a
multilayer form where the top layer was a creamy colour, and possibly
waxed. There were bits at the edge where the master was attached to the
inky drum.

There was a different technology whose name now escapes me which produced
coloured (purple, red, blue, green(?)) copies, usually from handwritten
originals. I think it may have been based on spirit dyes rather than
printers inks.

And then there were the outline maps that the Geography teachers used to
roll into your exercise books for you to add details.

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

On 04/01/2024 15:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>> Stencil duplicator, usually (or always ?) a Gestetner. The "master"
>> was the stencil. Mimeographs (mostly a US description) were the same
>> underlying technology (ink forced through a stencil) but most
>> drawings/photographs seem to be of simpler machines than the Gestetner
>> ones which tended to belt out copies at a fairly fast pace.
>
> Definitely a duplicator in casual speech. The masters were typed on a
> multilayer form where the top layer was a creamy colour, and possibly
> waxed. There were bits at the edge where the master was attached to the
> inky drum.
>
> There was a different technology whose name now escapes me which produced
> coloured (purple, red, blue, green(?)) copies, usually from handwritten
> originals. I think it may have been based on spirit dyes rather than
> printers inks.

This appears to be a "spirit duplicator", which is probably what my primary
school had.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_duplicator

Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
> On 04/01/2024 15:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> Stencil duplicator, usually (or always ?) a Gestetner. The "master"
>>> was the stencil. Mimeographs (mostly a US description) were the same
>>> underlying technology (ink forced through a stencil) but most
>>> drawings/photographs seem to be of simpler machines than the Gestetner
>>> ones which tended to belt out copies at a fairly fast pace.
>>
>> Definitely a duplicator in casual speech. The masters were typed on a
>> multilayer form where the top layer was a creamy colour, and possibly
>> waxed. There were bits at the edge where the master was attached to the
>> inky drum.
>>
>> There was a different technology whose name now escapes me which produced
>> coloured (purple, red, blue, green(?)) copies, usually from handwritten
>> originals. I think it may have been based on spirit dyes rather than
>> printers inks.
>
> This appears to be a "spirit duplicator", which is probably what my primary
> school had.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_duplicator

That’s the one - a Banda!

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
> Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
>> On 04/01/2024 15:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>> Stencil duplicator, usually (or always ?) a Gestetner. The "master"
>>>> was the stencil. Mimeographs (mostly a US description) were the same
>>>> underlying technology (ink forced through a stencil) but most
>>>> drawings/photographs seem to be of simpler machines than the Gestetner
>>>> ones which tended to belt out copies at a fairly fast pace.
>>>
>>> Definitely a duplicator in casual speech. The masters were typed on a
>>> multilayer form where the top layer was a creamy colour, and possibly
>>> waxed. There were bits at the edge where the master was attached to the
>>> inky drum.
>>>
>>> There was a different technology whose name now escapes me which produced
>>> coloured (purple, red, blue, green(?)) copies, usually from handwritten
>>> originals. I think it may have been based on spirit dyes rather than
>>> printers inks.
>>
>> This appears to be a "spirit duplicator", which is probably what my primary
>> school had.
>>
>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_duplicator
>
> That’s the one - a Banda!
>
> Sam
>

When duplicating mathematical representations it could be a Banda graph
generator :)

On 06/01/2024 15:55, Tweed wrote:
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
>>> On 04/01/2024 15:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>> Stencil duplicator, usually (or always ?) a Gestetner. The "master"
>>>>> was the stencil. Mimeographs (mostly a US description) were the same
>>>>> underlying technology (ink forced through a stencil) but most
>>>>> drawings/photographs seem to be of simpler machines than the Gestetner
>>>>> ones which tended to belt out copies at a fairly fast pace.
>>>>
>>>> Definitely a duplicator in casual speech. The masters were typed on a
>>>> multilayer form where the top layer was a creamy colour, and possibly
>>>> waxed. There were bits at the edge where the master was attached to the
>>>> inky drum.
>>>>
>>>> There was a different technology whose name now escapes me which produced
>>>> coloured (purple, red, blue, green(?)) copies, usually from handwritten
>>>> originals. I think it may have been based on spirit dyes rather than
>>>> printers inks.
>>>
>>> This appears to be a "spirit duplicator", which is probably what my primary
>>> school had.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_duplicator
>>
>> That’s the one - a Banda!
>>
>> Sam
>>
>
> When duplicating mathematical representations it could be a Banda graph
> generator :)
>

;-) ;-)

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>>>>
>>>> There was a different technology whose name now escapes me which produced
>>>> coloured (purple, red, blue, green(?)) copies, usually from handwritten
>>>> originals. I think it may have been based on spirit dyes rather than
>>>> printers inks.
>>>
>>> This appears to be a "spirit duplicator", which is probably what my primary
>>> school had.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_duplicator
>>
>> That’s the one - a Banda!
>>
>> Sam
>>
>
> When duplicating mathematical representations it could be a Banda graph
> generator :)
>
>

For a sparky reply like that you should be be put on a charge.

GH

Tweed <usenet.tweed@gmail.com> wrote:
> Sam Wilson <ukr@dummy.wislons.fastmail.co.uk> wrote:
>> Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
>>> On 04/01/2024 15:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>>>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>>>> Stencil duplicator, usually (or always ?) a Gestetner. The "master"
>>>>> was the stencil. Mimeographs (mostly a US description) were the same
>>>>> underlying technology (ink forced through a stencil) but most
>>>>> drawings/photographs seem to be of simpler machines than the Gestetner
>>>>> ones which tended to belt out copies at a fairly fast pace.
>>>>
>>>> Definitely a duplicator in casual speech. The masters were typed on a
>>>> multilayer form where the top layer was a creamy colour, and possibly
>>>> waxed. There were bits at the edge where the master was attached to the
>>>> inky drum.
>>>>
>>>> There was a different technology whose name now escapes me which produced
>>>> coloured (purple, red, blue, green(?)) copies, usually from handwritten
>>>> originals. I think it may have been based on spirit dyes rather than
>>>> printers inks.
>>>
>>> This appears to be a "spirit duplicator", which is probably what my primary
>>> school had.
>>>
>>> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_duplicator
>>
>> That’s the one - a Banda!
>>
>> Sam
>>
>
> When duplicating mathematical representations it could be a Banda graph
> generator :)

Ka-boom tish!

Sam

--
The entity formerly known as Sam.Wilson@ed.ac.uk
Spit the dummy to reply

Roger Lynn <usenet@rilynn.me.uk> wrote:
> On 04/01/2024 15:45, Sam Wilson wrote:
>> Charles Ellson <charlesellson@btinternet.com> wrote:
>>> Stencil duplicator, usually (or always ?) a Gestetner. The "master"
>>> was the stencil. Mimeographs (mostly a US description) were the same
>>> underlying technology (ink forced through a stencil) but most
>>> drawings/photographs seem to be of simpler machines than the Gestetner
>>> ones which tended to belt out copies at a fairly fast pace.
>>
>> Definitely a duplicator in casual speech. The masters were typed on a
>> multilayer form where the top layer was a creamy colour, and possibly
>> waxed. There were bits at the edge where the master was attached to the
>> inky drum.
>>
>> There was a different technology whose name now escapes me which produced
>> coloured (purple, red, blue, green(?)) copies, usually from handwritten
>> originals. I think it may have been based on spirit dyes rather than
>> printers inks.
>
> This appears to be a "spirit duplicator", which is probably what my primary
> school had.
>
> https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spirit_duplicator
>

Remember the aroma well, its a wonder that one of those compensation
seeking law firms haven’t tried to whip up hysteria amongst the baby
boomer generation to claim for health damage caused by sniffing the
documents when they were at school.

GH