Are architects the problem?
I would like to preface my question with an apology to the few architects I respect who regularly post on this website. This question/opinion is not directed at you.
So apparently Robert Riversong has been banned from this website. I don’t know this for certain… but if it is true it’s a DAMN shame.
This website will not be the same with out his entertaining perceptive and intelligent posts.
But why do people get into arguments on this website? I have spent the last couple of days going back and analyzing the threads that contained heated discussions.
It is interesting that in a large majority (nearly all) of arguments one of the parties was an architect. I know this because the person either admitted his/her profession or I google the person and/or his/her company. If you don’t believe this folks, check for yourselves. Trust me it’s true.
This seems to be story 1,000 of the pretentious nature of this profession. It is why myself, and many builder friends of mine are going towards design + build work. Dealing with architects is difficult. Most are know-it-alls that want zero design input from builders and subcontractors. Integrated design is something that happens only because LEED for Homes and other green building programs give points for it.
I’m a rational guy so I understand that all of my projects can’t be design + build. I would like to work more with architects, I just wish more architects could show some humility…
At least there would be less fighting on this website.
GBA Detail Library
A collection of one thousand construction details organized by climate and house part
Replies
I haven't seen any pretentious archys on this site. This is mainly building science, and that's engineering physics and mechanical engineering, not architecture. A small percentage of architects are really good at building science, but the rest should get a consultant, (and a cost engineer while they're at it). Bless 'em for coming to this site and learning.
Robert enjoys a good argument a little too much. He is usually correct, though, and I've never before seen "the smartest guy in the room" get banned. Apparently it's a very common problem, so everyone should just keep it civil: http://www.takethislife.com/other-challenges/i-think-im-addicted-arguing-internet-47814/ He also is a bit too free with insults. If someone is an idiot, common civility dictates that you not say it.
The best response to someone trying to start a fight is no response. A response is positive reinforcement but that awkward silence is negative reinforcement.
Yes, a damn shame, approaching idiotic. He provided a pretty unique perspective. They should have hired him to write a blog instead. Look at his posts, he was doing a pretty good job of it for free. Outside of Martin, no one is as prolific a writer on this site.
As to your point, I think people are a bit sensitive on both sides. Seriously, it's a forum, not a tea party (ah crap, that analogy doesn't work any more now does it?). Funny, considering that this is an open and non professional forum my personal opinion is that it is quite civil overall.
I'm a builder and I've really come to dislike being handed a prescribed set of plans with no latitude or room for input. We do primarily design&build for this reason and we work with a variety of design professionals- rarely architects. We specialize in timber fame- a unique and (dare I say) highly specialized trade. You'd think that an architect, usually with little or no experience in our field, would look to us for advice..
I'd love to hear from architects how they imagine a successful collaboration with a builder might look. I'd really like to forge successful symbiotic relationships.
Although Robert Riversong has contributed greatly to this website by answering technical questions with useful information, he has also repeatedly ignored requests to tone down his insults. After being warned of the possibility of being temporarily banned, he posted a vulgar insult yesterday including a four-letter word that begins with F.
GBA has suspended Robert's access to our website for two months.
Robert is not the only person who has posted insults on GBA, and several other visitors have been warned about the GBA policy. GBA will strive to enforce our policy consistently.
Brett,
The vast majority of those contributing to the GBA forums participate in a way that is constructive and does not involve insults.
If there is a "problem" -- your word -- it is certainly not attributable to any one profession. (All we're trying to do here is keep rudeness to a minimum level.) I can't imagine any benefit from trying to point fingers at anyone -- architects, engineers, or builders -- in order to determine which profession constitutes a "problem."
One final point: GBA does not expect any different standards from participants than the ordinary expectations of professional life.
If Robert Riversong has posted the insult he posted on GBA at his place of employment -- if he had posted the same insult on a physical bulletin board (an actual cork-board) in an office or at a university -- it would have been considered inappropriate and unprofessional.
As many other observers have noted, there seems to be something about the internet that encourages disinhibition, and leads people to behave in ways they wouldn't if they were having a face-to-face conversation.
All of that said, GBA is extremely grateful to the overwhelming majority of the visitors to this website, who contribute on a daily basis without resorting to vulgar insults.
Brett
Obviously design is a key element when try to built a high performing energy efficient sustainable green home. (did I leave any key adjectives out?) I have worked with many architects and for the most part I find them willing to take my input and suggestions, although I am always careful to never show them up in front of the client.
I would never do design-build with an in-house architect, but I will do design-build with independent architects. I would not want to limit my source of business to an in-house person or limit the client’s options to only use my in-house person. Many of my clients start their process valuing the architecture and the architect much more than the builder, that’s just the way it is.
Brett, I’m not sure who you are talking about but if you feel inclined to discuss this or anything related to me, email me at [email protected] I know you have criticized me a few times and maybe we can clear the air off the forum.
I have a suggestion, I wish GBA required participants to identify what they do: builder, architect, homeowner, consultant, engineer, etc. Or have a place next to their name and make it optional. I know some people post here quite regularly and I don’t even know what they do and would find it helpful if I did.
As to internet forum etiquette, after years of posting on a few sites I’ve learned that if someone disagrees with anything I post or criticizes me, I don’t have to respond every time. Sometimes I might but often it is just better to ignore. Besides, who has the time to respond each time someone else disagrees.
Allan
Brett,
Your title is a heck of a troll, but your actual posting asks some interesting questions.
A few comments:
GBA attracts passionate people, and passions can easily burn hot and turn into arguments, especially when you add in the internet's tendency to remove the natural limiters face to face conversation provides at keeping things from blowing up. If someone feels malicious on the internet, it's fairly easy to spark nasty arguments by taking people's passions and turning them against them. Accuse a proud builder of trying to cheat people by building crappy buildings, and you'll get push back. Architects who show up on a website dedicated to technical practice will have their soft spots as well.
And really, tension between architects and builders is as old as the professions. It's always good for a laugh when things are going well, and handy to have as an easy subject to blame when things aren't moving smoothly.
In our architecture company, we haven't gone the Design / Build route because we want to be part of an larger eco-system of builders and not get isolated in our practice. D/B is a great way to fully control the construction process, but there's a risk of having only one set of tools in your kit for every problem (if all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail...) and a risk of not ever being exposed to different project types and different construction methods, which is how you keep learning, in my opinion.
We like talking to lots of builders. We like asking for other people's opinions on how to build projects. We try to hold off on how we're going to construct the shell of a building until we get feedback from the people who might be building it and can truly weigh out cost, speed and quality. We have our opinions, of course, and there are areas where our vision of what makes a project beautiful, durable and affordable conflicts with the simplest way to build something, but we always hope there's room for a conversation on how to get to that end point without conflict.
Perhaps that's rare, but I'm not sure it is among the types of people who show up on GBA. Most people here are quality driven folks, not bottom line / git er done folks (and that's on the design and build side).
One last thing, trying to do anything well in life is extremely difficult and takes a certain amount of bull-headedness to make it through the daily struggles. There is always an easier path out there available for the taking, but the folks who take the easy path probably don't end up here typing out their thoughts...
Jesse Thompson
Kaplan Thompson Architects
Wow. That's a pretty strong indictment of architects. I don't *think* that I am significantly more argumentative than the average person, but I'm probably not the best judge of that! As for architects in general, most architects that I know are driven by curiosity and inquisitiveness, which may come across as being argumentative. Of course, there are know-it-alls and boorish architects too, but all fields have a few of that type (builders included).
I do disagree with your statement that integrated design only happens because it's required. Many of us do work closely with contractors and other specialists early in the process, because we know that this will lead to a better building. Buildings have reached a point of complexity that make it unlikely that any one person alone has the ability to bring any project to successful fruition without the expertise of others (if that was ever the case). It's a requirement on large scale projects, where it's not unusual to bring on 10 consultants plus a contractor early in schematic design. It also happens on residential projects (I'm working on retrofits), where a contractor is sometimes brought on early to assist with detailing and pricing, among other things. Depending on the situation, other consultants may be brought in as well.
Kristen Simmons, AIA, LEED AP
Hi,
I am an architect at the beginning of what I hope to be a long and exciting career. One of the biggest things that drew me to the field of architecture and building, was the opportunity to learn something new on every project and every day for that matter.
While we certainly don't always make the most efficient, most sustainable or most builder friendly choices, we strive to balance the myriad of technical, aesthetic and client-driven issues that exist on every project. I suspect not a day goes by that I don't ask a builder for options for a particular detail or assembly. I also suspect that not a day goes by that we aren't encouraging and pushing a builder to build a more efficient and durable house.
If you have had negative experiences with architects, I would encourage to look for other architects to work with. Just as we reevaluate the builders we work with on every project. Integrated design is only as good as the team that is assembled. Additionally, I would love for a builder to come to me and say "this is what your office does well and here are some things that you could work on." That discussion doesn't happen often enough.
Chris Harris
Jill Neubauer Architects
From and architects’ prospective, there has always been a love hate relationship between the builder and architect. I truly dislike the stereo type that architects are ALL snobby, design unrealistic buildings and are hard to deal with…but….I know they are out there because I have dealt with them myself! During my college years we would have critiques from architects that were pampas instead of giving us true criticism that perhaps would help us. Classes in design were mostly made up of “what is your big idea” of the building is instead of form and function. I vowed never to be one of those pampas “big idea” architects. I have been designing for 24 years and I’m still learning. I wish that more BUILDERS would be open to working with me! I always state to a builder from the beginning that please tell me if you don’t like something or you think it could be done differently, it doesn’t offend me! I am always open for suggestions…but it goes both ways! Please here me out too as to WHY I placed rooms/areas/windows etc in a building/house and don’t bash me behind my back until you understand my thoughts. I look at most “builder” plans and think that with just a simple different placement of an appliance/door/window etc. that the plan would be more functional and more appealing to the eye…and it doesn’t cost anymore!
I am always on this website because I want to learn more, especially on designing a solid envelope of the house. I honestly don’t mind being “wrong”, my goal is to get my client a beautiful functional home that’s built well and hopefully can be passed down to another generation. Okay I said my peace, now let’s work together!
Amy @ NHDC
A real shame about Robert IMO. I have not come accross a single person who felt so strongly about helping others build sustainable homes. I've been around here for a few months, but it was clear as day from reading just a couple of his posts, the man is an asset to a site like this....swimming in a sea of "green" builders who perhaps care too much about the greenback than building sustainable homes. His fight is not easy, harsh as he might be sometimes, his message is clear.....
Does a charette work? Or is everyone too busy / threatened / otherwise unwilling to make time for a meeting of all the principals in the work? I've seen it mentioned on a number of sites, and in several books, so I wonder if it's something that's feasilble.
I did it on my last house and everyone (except the electrician) worked great with it ... though the subs were young and small and that may have made them more agreeable.
Re: Brett's allegation that architects might be argument catalysts -- my observation has been that anyone who disagreed created impatience and rudeness and that started the argument.
I don't know how much the consumer is a part of the GBA mission statement, but I doubt anyone with the money and interest to pursue a well-designed custom home is going to be willing to put up with a "my way or the highway' attitude, no matter how much information the person has available.
In my next (last) house, I want a good design and I want a good build. I'm willing to pay what I can for that. But if I want a prophet, as Robert told me he was in an exchange, I'll go to church.
GBA is a wonderful resource; there are committed people here who are willing to invest time to make their workmanship, design, and product better; there is plenty of room for respectful disagreement; I'm preparing to interview architects and design/build contractors with a full binder of expectations and hopes I'm gathering (and frequently revising) from this site.
I mean this -- Thanks to all of you.
Joe
When a site such as this has to result to the banning of one of it's most valuable contributers a great disservice is placed upon the folks that visit this site for" real" green building advise. The passion for doing things well for people, coupled with his green building genius is truely a rare combination. The truth is, there have been several regular visitors that intentionally, almost masterfully irritate his genius. It has been very obvious. These guys know just what buttons to push to get a razz out of Robert and they push away.
Martin~ you of all people should recognize this. Robert was pushed for no good reason. I know the feeling. If you put the good that Robert brought to this site on the scale of justice with the silly spats, which way would they tilt. No brainer. You, in fact have sounded a bit like Robert with your posts on this thread Martin.(minus the F).
There were two main contributers of real substance to this site based on the number of postings and their content. Robert would pose regular challanges to some of the advise given by Martin. Robert would be right most, if not all of the time. Martin gets paid for his work and Robert volunteers his services. Martin uses policy to justify an out of balance judgement and banning of Robert for using the F word. My virgin ears are burning, What's wrong with this picture architects?
I hope I don't get banned for speaking truthfully...
Allen and FYI for others. You can go to account, edit, and add your general location, climate and what you do, to your last name field. Then hit save and you are done.
Very helpful to have active members do so.
I would rather not extend this thread in any argumentative way, but I have learned to really enjoy working with everyone involved with building a home including architects. No way are architects a cause for improper discourse here or anywhere. If GBA (this site) asks for us to be respectful of others and enforces such, as it now is, this site will benefit tremendously.
As to losing truly natural green (sage) advice, GBA could and should start a section dedicated only to it. And set up a new advisor dedicated to natural green topics. I know we would want that person to be Robert R, but we can only suggest that. It is up to them whether they would enter into such an agreement.
Thank you fellow arch pros for posting on this thread and for all your participation both here at GBA and in the field we all are passionately involved in.
Allan ,
I think your suggestion is great. A flaw with the way that this site is managed is that they allow anonomous posters to do so without a degree of accountibility for the things that are posted . It seems that these types are generally the other side of arguments, mainly the starting of them. If posters were required to demonstrate truely who they are and what experience they bring to this forum, many of the pointless problems would not even come about . This has been requested many times by valuable contributers like Robert and others, but ignored for some reason. You would think that anyone with confidence in their ability share and teach would be happy to say who and what they are. I do understand insecurities associated with maturity though, and the problems caused as a result. Green~green builders...
I respect ALL who have the honesty and courage to post with their real names.
@JOEW
Yes, charrettes do happen in real life. I find it best to start with a clear goal for what you want to come out of the session, so that agenda is clear to all participants. All of us will make time for a paid service like this.
In my experience, successful energy efficient and sustainably design projects require a strong degree of cooperation among all the participants, including owner, designer, builder, subs, consultants,etc. For example, great details might become meaningless if the builder and/or sub doesn't understand (or agree) that tighter tolerances are necessary on this particular job. Charrettes and working together early on can help to build this cooperation.
A lot of us who do this work do have experience working together already. I can say that in my part of the country (Massachusetts), we have a lot of people who've been doing this work for a long time, including builders, architects, the trades, engineers, etc. The people who are doing this work usually know each other from other projects, conferences, and symposiums.
Even if I don't know someone personally, I usually know who they are and what they have been doing. :-) Frankly, we all seem to get along quite well, and it seems like we all want to learn from each other and continue to build better and more sustainable buildings. I suspect that this is true in your area as well.
To be honest, I see more arguments and rigid stances here on this board than I ever do in practice! No, things aren't always perfect, but respect, along with sharing a strong commitment to a mutual goal, can smooth over any rough patches.
Kristen Simmons, AIA, LEED AP
But John don't you think some people might want to protect their privacy for whatever reason. I don't see it as a "courage" issue and really don't see why anyone would care.
If privacy is a concern for some reason then simply don't post. Read and learn.
I think Raf, in post 12 said it best....
My experience includes spending years at the superintendent and PM level trying to effectively get out of messes caused by an unfortunate majority of the architects with whom we were working as well as a stressed out GC who relied on me to just make it work. When I became a GC, this experience helped me to work with clients and architects before work begins to address these issues. I know I lost in the bidding process when I had to explain and include remedies to poor design that cost big $ that could be avoided by cooperation. And likely the clients ultimately paid in change orders, or the winning and unsuspecting GC had to eat it. But, because someone with building experience can be persuasive in the design stage with reasonable people, often you get consensus, you win in the bidding process, and those projects are among those with which you've had the best experiences and get the best referrals. I'm pro collaboration. Some do it well, some don't. This forum can potentially be an excellent collaborative experience. If you fight with your clients, consultants, employees etc.. in real life, you don't get very far.
Okay, I'll take the bait.
Very early in my career I learned that when an experienced builder gives you a suggestion, points out a problem, wants to share a piece of advice, you shut up and listen. Foolish is the architect who thinks he always knows better. Likewise, a builder who thinks he knows everything just because he's been doing this for 15 years and is stubborn as heck, is also a fool. It all has to do with relationships. For residential projects, I always bring in the contractor in the design development phase. They'll have their own input, their own methods, and best of all, their own opinion of cost. As the project moves forward we work together, sometimes we solve problems the client doesn't even know were ever there.
I'll say that there are great architects out there that builders enjoy working with, and there's some real A-holes (the 'A' stands for architect, don't ban me:) that are pompous and stubborn, just like any other profession.
Chris
I agree most emphatically with Chris Harris, post # 10: "If you have had negative experiences with architects, I would encourage you to look for other architects to work with."
Allan,
I think your suggestion has merit.
However, it does seem somewhat inconsistent with your subsequent comment:
Just sayin'.
It is a shame that Robert has been banned - hopefully he will want to return some day.
Although I'm not sure about architects, I can't count the number of times when a bystander (ie: someone who had made no prior contribution to a discussion) decided to involve themself in an inflammatory way.
The responses by architects in this thread are predictable. Of course you're going to explain how you always accept the advice of builders and subs. How you enjoy the Integrated Design process mandatory in LEED for Homes (its actually an optional credit- ID 1.2). Nobody is going to respond with phrases like "yeah I NEVER listen to builders," or "good luck trying to convince me of a building material or method."
BUT, at the end of the day, how much advice are you really willing to take in? How much criticism are you willing to accept? How much design input are you willing to say yes to?
I'm sorry to bring Riversong back into the equation, but most architects that posted on this thread have gotten into it heated discussions with the guy at one time or another. Why should we believe that your dealings with other builders are any different? I know he can be abrasive at times, but like it or not, your projects would be better if more Robert Rs were out there.
Don't think so... think about how he feels after donating so much of his life to this site.I have communicated with him and betrayal would be an appropriate term.
I can only wonder if the 2 month thing was just a random knee jerk thing or if there was some thought process used to determine the proper punishment. No one even contacted him to let him know, just flipped the switch.
I am concerned that this site is showing strong "greenwash" tendancies.... GwBA?
My two cents is that it may be the process--at least in the design/bid/build tradition--the client goes to the architect, a design evolves, then it goes out for bidding. The architect already has an established relationship and now the client is looking for numbers. Maybe not the cheapest, but if he gets three names from an architect, the assumption may be that they are all equal in quality, it's a numbers game. It ignores interpretation of the plans (no matter how complete they appear). It assumes that all builders will be willing to spend an extreme number of hours pro bono to give an accurate bid--and fearing it may be too accurate (too high). Above all, it ignores the relationship that should be at the heart of this. Builders and clients will have a long relationship during the build and after, a relationship should be established prior to that as well.
Roy,
Your statement, "No one even contacted him to let him know," is untrue. I called Robert twice on the telephone, explaining the policy and the consequences, and urging him sincerely to be careful, because I valued his input. I honestly didn't want to this to happen.
Nevertheless Robert proceeded with his F bomb.
...
Double standards are true. I stand firm with the truth of my statements, doesn't really matter though, I've felt the wrath.
Whatever Works, the movie. Watch it. We all need to lighten up and love all who come here especially those that differ!
And tell, does this main character remind you of anyone????
What a laugh. at life, ourselves, and our sometimes over the top passions.
Oh well...
Ok, let me see if I have this right.
I can post comments and offer advice here at GBA.
I can call myself just about anything I want.
I can taunt and Insult other members as long as I do not call them by name.
or use profanity.
Cool
Master Gardener,
I imagine that there are all kinds of ways you might imagine and develop to skirt the system and walk the fine line between polite behavior and violating our policy.
But it would be great if, instead, we all focused on green building questions.
Yea, I agree Martin, Got my second warning from you this morning. I'd like you to pause for a moment and just imagine what I'd like to tell you right now...... about green building..... and then read the post about toxic spray foam problems in the attic. Is this responsible green advice? The problem is rampant, only a tiny percent of the dangerous problems are exposed here at GBA but yet the use is being pushed as green every day. Warning, Warning, Warning...
Roy, I believe 100% that foam IS green. It is the best use of petroleum there is, aside from leaving it in the ground to keep the earth's crust floating. It DOES come with safety issues, as does nearly every building material. It all goes back to how do you define green. It's green because it saves energy. You wouldn't use it for Natural building, which is another component of green.
Nobody here is pushing anything (aside from the cellulose faction, perhaps). This is a forum for open debate; like any debating platform there are rules to abide by.
Mike,
First of all, NO thanks for turning this thread into a foam discussion.
And you are wrong! Foam is not green. This is not up to debate. You need to do some research. Airtight wall assemblies (air sealed at the exterior and interior), with limited thermal bridging (ie double wall), filled with cellulose, perform just as well if not better than a wall with spray foam and/or foam sheathing.
Open cell spray foam has around the same (some brands are less) R-value as dense pack cellulose and blown in fiberglass. Sure it has air sealing qualities, but these become redundant in an air tight wall assembly, and remember it only seals the cavities. You can (builders have been doing it for decades) build an airtight wall and use a LESS EXPENSIVE and much greener cellulose insulation.
If there was no other option that compared to the performance levels of foam than fine, you might have a valid argument. But as I have explained there are.
Now go pimp foam on another unrelated thread.
Brett, I apologize for getting into the foam debate here. I'll leave it at that.
Mike Maines
To your post #39...Here, here! Well said. Couldn't agree with you more.
I'm an architect that got a start in construction, then had a design build firm, then worked solely as an architect and now am going back to working collaboratively from inception of projects, hoping to circumvent the bid process. I suggest clients interview similar sized construction companies (apples to apples), check references, pick one and get them on board early. Collaboration is the way to go.
For every "holier than thou" architect that you can find, I'll show you a stereotypical, "that's the way we do it" GC. Unfortunately, the construction industry has low barriers to entry. Study for two weeks and you can probably pass the test to get a contractor's license. I can show you plenty of builder designed properties that would make you cringe because they felt that they didn't need an architect. Designs with more wasted, awkward spaces than you would know what to do with. Before I went to architecture school, I thought I had a natural feel for design. Oops...I realized it takes a long time to become a good at design (a subset of architecture). The same is true to become a proficient builder.
Architecture schools should require architects to take more building science and construction methodology classes. Building science requires us to collaborate - it's too complicated for one person to know it all. As I see it, we need to be part of the solution rather be at odds. Ditch the stereotypes and work together. it's more fun, saves time and money and is a better way to go through life.
"How difficult it is to be simple" Vincent Van Gogh
IMO, the original post unfairly bashes architects. I had heated debate here with someone who claimed they were right because they were working in accord with god's natural law and apparently that person thought they were justified in saying many unkind things to others when they would happen to disagree about things. Neither of us were architects.
I tend to think that one of the key characteristics of natural systems are their flexibility. Even when a mega comet strikes, life at some level goes on. I was on St Helens just a couple years after the blast (snuck in past the closure zone). There was all kinds of life in the rock and ash.
Maybe instead of bashing any one profession what we most need is to embrace flexibility with each other. All god's creatures have a place in the choir but to make music when there is a note of discord it is necessary they work together instead of bashing each other.
Architects are note immune to discord, nor are they necessarily the source.
Steve El
Some food for thought...
But first I should make sure I introduce myself! I live in Squamish BC CAN, and am a handyman/jack of a few, type of guy. I am also a LEED AP, CSBA (Certified Sustainable Building Advisor), and BC Built Green Certified, oh and almost a Certified Energy Advisor...but that's not official. All of this only means that I am somone who enjoys learning about Green Building and the field as a whole and do not consider myself an expert.
Anyway, all of the above has motivated me to mention a few things:
First, Robert Riversong's input makes this site not only extremely entertaining, but also well balanced in valuable opinion, perspective, and aggressiveness. Without his perspective (or those like his) most 'green' initiatives become victims of at least one of "the seven sins of greenwashing" (google it).
That brings me to my second point and was motivated by the above comments about foam being "one component of green building". The term 'green' rightly refers to the process by which we pursue 'sustainability' as a community, country, or planet. Decisions should not be considered to be 'green' ultimately unless they promote the pursuit of 'sustainability'. Accordingly, 'sustainability' is a goal to which we should all aspire to acheive. Any organization or individual that claims to be 'more' or 'less' sustainable does not fully understand the complexity of this goal. Unfortunately, the 'green' term is now used to describe anything and everything that we think 'does less harm' for some reason. So in my mind, saying that petrochemical product insulation is green is akin to saying that shooting someone in the stomach is less lethal than shooting them in the face. You're just delaying the inevitable - and and for fossil fuels encouraging further consumption and reliance on a finite resource.
Renewability of resources and energy, durability of materials and extremely prudent/cautious use of man-made chemical products, stewardship of the life supporting ecosystems that allow us to survive, and addressing global human health and sustainability issues are a few of the concepts that can be derived from understanding a sustainability framework called The Natural Step (google it).
No one on this site should be made to felt that they are wrong for considering foam, but we should all understand the benefits and trade offs of our choices or recommendations and avoid falling into the same ridiculous spin cycle of GREEN marketing that has served to distort the concept into oblivion.
Keep up the good work GBA and Martin...Oh...and bring Robert back please. His depth of knowledge makes this site what it is!
Sean,
Thank you. Your comments are MUCH appreciated!
I hear the terms sustainable and homes in the same sentence far too often. And when I hear the phrases "more sustainable" and "less sustainable" I want to pull my own hair out.
Will we ever get to truly sustainable building practices? I don't think so (not in the U.S. at least). But I do think it is a terrific goal.
It was nice to see a bunch of recent conversations on this website questioning the "greeness" of foam insulation. 'Twas a coming to Jesus! I think many foam users have started to reevaluate their opinions on foam. Hopefully a few have been converted.
It appears that you have a good head on your shoulders Sean, we need more people like yourself on this website and in the building industry.
Keep up the good work!
and yeah...
FREE ROBERT RIVERSONG!!!!
I agree.
Whatever "green" means it does imply something more than just energy-efficiency - and the ends don't always justify the means.
I understand that some people don't like his "bedside manner" - but usually those are people that are being challenged.
"Green" building is frontier, and doing anything on a frontier means dealing with challenges.
Riversong should be allowed back.
Brett, sorry, but I can't help go a little off-topic here.
I'm not sure I agree that there is any other way to talk about "sustainability" except in terms of more or less than an alternative - although I suspect we are in agreement in principal.
100% sustainability is impossible (at least within the context of physics).
The concept of pure sustainability violates the laws of thermodynamics since there will always be some waste or entropy within a system - a perpetual motion machine might be considered "sustainable".
It seems to follow then that, any practice or behaviour can only be "more sustainable than X" or "less sustainable than X".
The problem with this "more than/less than" view is that it means that there is no "finish line" with sustainability - It is a never-ending journey of self-improvement.
A never-ending journey of self-improvement probably isn't what most consumers are interested in...
What makes me want to pull my hair out is when I hear people talk about "sustainable housing" or a "sustainable product".
There is no such thing!
The word "sustainable" should be banned from advertising - it is an almost sure sign of "greenwashing".
Again, sorry for going off-topic. "Sustainability" is a hot-button for me.
I'm with you, Lucas. Here's my blog on the topic: What Does ‘Sustainable’ Mean?
I just re-read your blog, Martin - an excellent article & discussion. I've purged both the S and G words from my professional vocabulary for similar reasons - I don't try to oversell what it is I do. "Less bad" is about as far as I go.
And it's my understanding that Robert is welcome back with some rather mild requests that he cool it. Which he seems, sadly, to have taken as an assault on his integrity.
I haven't seen any women bickering on this site, so maybe the problem isn't architects, but men?
After all:
All women are pleasant and all men are argumentative.
And all architects are the same, and all builders are the same, and all Presidents are the same, and-- wait a minute.
Maybe some people are different from other people.
Maybe some people are argumentative. Some of those people happen to be builders, some are architects, some are Senators, and some are street bums.
Maybe their profession has nothing to do with their temperament.
NAAAHHHH!!
Dan, in terms of Robert's claims of moral high ground as an instructor of nonviolence I.... did...... challenge his integrity. In his posts, he likened his work to Christ whipping the money changers out of the temple, and in debate, he would first denounce character attacks and then in the next breath attach people's character. But "nonviolence" is generally held to be a philosophic term of art with a particular meaning. You can't claim to be doing "nonviolence" and then hack and burn people that disagree with your opinions.
Mods, I will understand if you reject my post. On the other hand, above there are several posts that seem to seek some sort of reformation for Robert. In my opinion, third part rewriting of history is heartwarming in the desire to express support, but what really counts is what Robert actually does when his two month suspension is done. Hopefully, he will choose to respect the fact that some responsible and respectable people might disagree with him on some issues.
Steve El
Steve,
We were there- we don't need to go over your objections to Robert's views and philosophy.
It was clear that you enjoyed antagonizing him.
If we ignore new readers, then fair enough Brett. By the same token, why are you worried? I mean, do you think Robert needs third party rehabilitation? Personally, I believe in natural consequences and personal responsibility, and because I value those things I believe Roberts rehabilitation is in his hands. In the future, he can choose to respect those he disagrees with..... or he can choose to disrespect them.
Personally, I think one way is green, and one is not.
Steve,
Quit calling Robert's time away from Green Building Advisor "rehabilitation." That's just silly.
If Robert Riversong "chooses" to not "respect" someone, I couldn't care less. Some people don't deserve his (or anyone's) respect. He has been abrasive to me in the past- so what- I choose not to cry about it.
His posts are entertaining, and his building knowledge is second to few. AND, I believe that he (along with Martin) keeps this website in check.
GBA will suffer in his absence.
Brett, You almost have a point. But, Look at thousands of posts. Maritin informs and never takes anything personal. Robert takes it pesonal with every post. EVERY POST. Yes it is really entertaining. But for the wrong reason!!!!!! I could care less at this point that he and you try to make me out as some kind of hack. We don't know each other and we have never seen the other's work. I will post work someday. Some of my work is gorgeous. I build custom stairs and more. I build homes now that barely use fuel. I know my work. I do not know your work Brett. But, someday I may if you post some work or I visit you. I actually don't even know what you do or where you do it. All I know is you have been way too personal here. No biggy though as I laugh at your negative comments as often as you make them.
peace out
And as to this whole thread, it is pure crap. Martha hit the nail perfectly on the head. I wish Architects worked on all my projects. Talented group. Their job is to dream, to take things past what is.
GBA is a bit of a bore without Riversong fighting all. We all love his insights. But many who smartly say not, think he is a bit too over the top with his inability to show a drop of respect to, well, most. I forever wonder if he looks in the mirror daily and says, "I love, me".
Martin - great blog on sustainability. I'll mention again for anyone interested in delving deeper into the concept to google The Natural Step and learn about its 4 principle conditions that must be satisfied in order to acheive sustainability. It is a truly ambitious goal and a pipe dream at best without serious changes to global resource imbalances.
I also cringe when the G and S terms are used so loosely. I also cringe when I hear that buying product X helps "save the environment".
Anyway, great posts and discussion. I like to think that a fire without fuel tends to go out, regardless of who started the fire!!
"All I know is you have been way too personal here. No biggy though as I laugh at your negative comments as often as you make them.
PEACE out
And as to this whole thread, it is pure crap."
AJ,
Comments like these are exactly why Robert and many others have criticized you. You jump from topic to topic, your posts make little sense, you dish out advise on subjects you know nothing about, and your jokes are NOT appropriate.
And this happens time and time again. You want another example? Ok.
On Peter Yost's blog "Blower Door Testing Row Homes," here was your response (word for word):
"rediculous... crazy talk bro
Better to just test a unit and fix air leaks we know are the usual. This blog post sounds like a real waste.
I could be wrong.
Wait a minute... I do have a friend that is addicted to having a perfect lawn whatever that is..."
WHAT?!?
And what about the recent comment you made explaining to a member that you weren't going give out any more advise unless they sent you a check? As if you have become the authority on this website. Give me a break. Give yourself a break.
There are countless more but I'm done dealing with you.
Brett, this is your thread, I think the whole thing is contentious and should be deleted. I still have no clue what you do Brett or where you do such. I think you and Robert should try to get along. Some of my poor posts are unfortunate but so are yours. We all should do our best to not post the personal stuff. As to the checks, I guess the humor was lost over the internet. LOL Martin did a nice job cleaning that up.
Brett,
I agree with all of your comments post #60
I was a little surprised when you suggested that Architects are "the Problem".
The number ONE problem at GBA is the policy that allows Anonymous and Pseudo-Name posting.
"The Problem" is more than a nuisance....
Martin and Robert are/were the two best things about GBA.
Now GBA is LESS than half as good as it was.
I don't blame Robert for becoming frustrated and dropping the "F-Bomb"
I would much rather see a few F-bombs than the pollution and damage constantly spewed by a handful of Pseudo-Name Trolls.
If it is true that Robert has been given a chance to return....
I suspect he will not Return until/unless "The Problem" is corrected.
GBA please do something about the pseudo-name-graffiti.
And this post of yours is helpful Brooks?
I second John's comments in #62.
AJ, as Brett has pointed out, your "humour" can hardly be called appropriate and I think you are being disingenous by saying that your cheque comments were meant as humour.
Hilarious AJ.
And I don't care if you built the grand staircase of the QE2.
Now I shall resume trying to ignore you to the best of my ability.
Here's another example. On Alex Wilson's most recent blog:
Bought and paid for?
by aj builder, Upstate NY Zone 6a
"Again, I wonder why Alex is thought of as anything to do with Green Building Advising?"
Perhaps GBA should ban AJ Builder, not Riversong?
Brett - I disagree with your initial statement. There are a number of architects that visit this site and contribute valueable information---you admitted as much. I'd like to say thanks to those architects that regularly post here (and the infrequent posters too ;).
It's true that Riversong is challenging, sometimes abrasive. He turns some people away from this forum---see Jesse Thompson's earlier post. But he's also a huge asset, and attracts many others.
Martin has a tough job, trying to please everybody. He attempts to arbitrate / mitigate when necessary, to focus the discussion on topics, not personal attacks. Unfortunately, this doesn't always work.
No matter what he does, it's probably going to make some people happy, other not so happy . . .
My personal opinion? I'd have to agree with Architect John Brooks:
"I would much rather see a few F-bombs than the pollution and damage constantly spewed by a handful of Pseudo-Name Trolls."
In the beginning of GBA’s rather short life, we wanted people to use their real names. We thought it would bring some accountability to what they said. We realized, though, that it would be very difficult to force people to do it and that, unless we built a small, closed community. We felt that encouraging people to do it voluntarily was really the best way to go.
What we’ve learned, though, is that using real names doesn’t make people act cordially. In fact, the only people who have been banned from GBA used their real names. Also, there are many reasons for not wanting to post with your real name (from “I work for a big company that will penalize me if I post anything that doesn’t toe the company line” to “ fear of wackos hunting me down and harming my family,” etc.).
At first we also allowed comments from people with unverified e-mail addresses because we wanted to build up a community rather than slam a gate. What we (all of us) have built is a great community of passionate building professionals and enthusiasts. There is excellent advice given out here every day and I am thrilled about it. When people e-mail me with a question about building science, it feels great to be able to tell them to post the question in this Q&A forum. Thank you all very much for contributing.
We recently turned the e-mail verification requirement on. Now people who want to post must register as a free member and click a link that is e-mailed to them. As a result of this, we shouldn’t see any more posts with “Anonymous” as the name. On the most recent handful of anonymous comments, I changed “Anonymous” to something that the user will recognize (and they can change it to their real name, hopefully, by clicking “My Account” at the top of the page).
As for Robert Riversong, ever since he showed up on GBA, people have been e-mailing me, calling me, and approaching me at trade shows to ask that he be banned. I have resisted all of these requests, explaining to these people that Robert contributes great advice quite often, and that we would e-mail him and ask him to be a little less combative.
I really thought that professionals could be counted on to act like professionals. We asked Robert over and over again to refrain from being rude and to stick to information. He made a choice to ignore our requests.
He is not coming back. He made that choice in his follow-up e-mails to me and the Fine Homebuilding staff after we cut him off. He is free to start his own blog if he wants to with his own discussion forum.
Martin, Peter, Rob, and I are all genuinely sorry that he made that choice; we felt that he had good advice to offer. It was a hard decision to make but ultimately, we chose what we thought was best for the readers. If people are denigrated for not knowing enough, or bullied when they try to answer a question, or generally made to feel unwelcome, then they will go away and GBA will transform into a pit of vitriolic stew. Instead, we want to help people get from where they are, to where they want to be in green building.
Other people here have received messages from us asking them to please tone it down or they’d be asked to leave also. That’s not what we want to do. We’d rather spend our days making great content for our customers than banning people, deleting posts, and refereeing arguments.
Thanks for contributing,
Dan
I applaud the staff for making some hard decisions.
Mustard seeds turn into mustard plants, acorns into oak trees, and I don't believe you can browbeat ecological wisdom into people any more than knocking your teenager around will get them to stop texting while driving and put on their seatbelt. If we're going to treat ecology with respect, we should start with each other.
The defenders of Robert who have posted here appear to be regular readers of this board. I'll hazard a guess that your views on green building have been technically improved by your time here, but your heart was probably leaning toward "green" before becoming regular readers. That's great, you made the most important step before signing up. My concern is and always has been for people that are only just starting to inquire in this area. It is imperative that we encourage their exploration instead of bludgeoning them for doing too little too late.
For those who are already true believers (and that's a term of affection that I identify with myself) Robert has often posted about his school up in Vermont, and I'm sure he'll continue to advocate his ideas there and on some other internet media. Hopefully we'll all try to be conduits so more of that message can reach green beginners without driving them inside and slamming the shutters.
RESPECT THE NEWBIE
WHO MIGHT THEN BECOME TOMORROWS TEACHER
Steve El
Terrell Owens is a terrific receiver.
Rush Limbaugh is a highly successful radio personality.
Mel Gibson is a phenomenal actor and director.
Robert Riversong is a smart builder/architect/think tank.
But if I'm building anything that might be defined as a team, a forum, a movement, or a coalition, these are the last personality types I would seek in pursuit of collaborative minds seeking a collective win. The self-righteous may be brilliant, but they are poisonous.
Thanks to the GBA staff for focusing on the team rather than the individual.
too bad
I think we could all learn a lot from Robert
Steve El,
You seem to be very pleased that Robert has been banned from GBA.
You also seem to say that your main concern is about "the Newbies" that Robert may have "bludgeoned".
I'm sorry .....but I do not ever remember Robert bludgeoning a "newbie".
Can you give me some examples?
Does anyone know if Robert frequents any other online forums? A true natural building pioneer, and just a full awn cool dude, should be celebrated.....above the law to some extent. We all know he's not good for yer typical "green" business and this whole decision feels more like "the empire strikes back" ;) than anything else...
I feel he was the essence of this place...with him gone....well you can read the most recent Q&A's for yourselves...
I also found the mention of his name and opinions, in one of the recent blogs by Scott Gibson, simply inappropriate.
John, I'd be more interested in your thoughts how we can get Rush Limbaugh to care about global warming. Any proactive ideas?
Martin,
It has been many, many months now since Robert was "banned for 2 months"
It is my understanding that Robert would like to return.
How about giving Robert Riversong a second chance?
Kinda crazy that Robert was banned from GBA for losing his patience with AJ-uvenile....
And for at times being TOO Green
His other "crime" was to frequently challenge those who promote McMansions, Fiberglass & Foam.
As you can see ... he is not getting younger.
Robert should be allowed to come back if he wants - it has been a while now.
I can only imagine that he stepped too hard on someone's toes if his "temporary" banishment has become permanent while AJ's brand of schizophrenic verbal diarrhea is apparently tolerable.
I too would welcome Robert back. Though he tends to be short on tact he is long on sound building advice. His unique perspective runs counter to many (even within the green building community), but he is generous in sharing his ideas and knowledge. That he offers these unconventional but quite sensible thoughts so willingly in a free and public forum is something that should be encouraged.
I have been on the receiving end of Robert's sharp criticism in the past, but it never bothered me much. I always thought of him a little like the Soup Nazi on Seinfeld - a prickly and sometimes easily provoked character who nonetheless offers great value to those willing to accept his less-than-perfect etiquette.
RR needs to be let back in.
Back in the wild-West days that many GBA readers now remember nostalgically, I spent a lot of time refereeing fights between readers who were slinging insults. I eventually posted a simple rule: GBA comments should focus on building science and green construction topics. Posts consisting of insults directed at other GBA readers would be removed.
Fortunately, the past few months have been remarkably insult-free. I'm grateful to the GBA community for that.
Concerning the topic recently raised by John Brooks: it is remarkable how little time it took for the insults to reappear after John made his latest suggestion. Within less than 3 hours, another GBA reader was referred to as "AJ-uvenile." Within 14 hours, another post referred to a someone's "schizophrenic verbal diarrhea."
I don't want to return to those days. I have neither the time nor the interest to babysit readers who like to sling insults.
Here's a message that anyone who wants to could pass on to Robert Riversong: I believe Robert is a brilliant man and a gifted writer. I suggest that Robert Riversong should start his own blog. I'm sure many readers would be happy to read his writing there. GBA would be happy to link to his blog.