Hello, I am trying to learn about the plant information catalog and am struggling to find material. Any links to pdf, videos or just descriptions would be very much appreciated

Posts in this series (note: link will not work properly in old Reddit or 3rd-party apps): https://www.reddit.com/lds/collection/363e4ce4-8cec-40ad-8ea9-5954cf1fe52d
Last week, I briefly mentioned some of the insults and ill-treatment that have come my way because of writing these posts. One of the primary accusations made against me was that I was trying to make a name for myself. This couldn’t be further from the truth.
I have personally advertised these posts a grand total of six times: when I made my first Reddit post regarding the CES Letter, I went to a private LDS-related sub with about 30 active members and asked that if anyone had anything further they’d found, to share it in the comments of the post; when FAIR asked if they could repost them, I linked to the first one on my Facebook account and told my friends for the first time what I’d been doing for the past six months; I also mentioned when FAIR and Jennifer Roach each graciously invited me onto their podcasts; I announced this current series on Facebook; and I thanked FAIR for giving me an award at last year’s Conference, as well as all of the people who had been so supportive of me to that point. That’s it.
While I’m incredibly grateful to FAIR for giving me a wider platform and I’m very proud of the work I’ve put out, my goal was never to get attention for myself. I haven’t been searching out ways to put myself in the spotlight. I wasn’t even the one who approached FAIR; it was the other way around. In my offline life, I’m pretty shy and introverted, and attention actually makes me uncomfortable. It’s been an adjustment these past few years, with people suddenly knowing my name and recognizing my face. I don’t regret putting my real name to my writing and numerous blessings have come my way because of it. I’ve made a lot of friends, and the FAIR audience is generous and amazing and inspiring. But honestly, it hasn’t been easy and it wasn’t my intention.
I had five goals when writing the original CES Letter series:
1) To say that yes, these questions actually have been answered, and to share a few of those answers
2) To offer up a bunch of resources people could use to investigate the truth for themselves and find their own answers
3) To teach people how to evaluate sources and rank them according to their reliability and trustworthiness
4) To teach people how to study with the Spirit by their side, and
5) To point out manipulation tactics and fallacies commonly used by critics in their attacks
Ultimately, my intent was always to teach people how to maintain and grow their faith in Christ and in His restored gospel.
And you know what? Intention matters. It’s why I spent time at the beginning of each of these blog series delving into the background and prior statements of the authors whose documents we’re discussing. It’s why I give background information on some of the notable figures that come up. It’s why we need to learn how to evaluate sources in the first place.
A hostile source has a bias and an agenda. So does a friendly source, and so does a neutral source. Jeremy Runnells and Thomas Faulk have a bias and an agenda against the Church. I have a bias and an agenda in favor of the Church. You need to know that going into this material. Their intention is to tear down your faith. Mine is to build up your faith. I’ve been upfront about that right from the beginning. Have they? Because that’s information that you can use while evaluating our reliability and trustworthiness. Which of us is hiding information from you? Which of us is cutting quotes out of all context to give a false impression? Which of us is telling you to trust them, and which is telling you to trust God, the ultimate source of truth?
I’m bringing this all up because today’s topic involves accounts written by sources that need to be treated with caution. However, Thomas Faulk presents them as being completely truthful. Understanding how to evaluate sources is critical, and it’s only going to become more so as the years go by.
We all know that we can’t trust everything we read on the internet. Or, at least, we should know that. But for some reason, a lot of otherwise very smart, capable people don’t hold history books to the same standard. They need to. People make mistakes, and people have biases that aren’t always immediately clear.
You know the saying, “History was written by the winners”? That’s true. Historians have agendas, too. For a prime example of this, you don’t need to look any farther than D. Michael Quinn’s thoroughly debunked Same-Sex Dynamics Among Nineteenth-Century Americans: A Mormon Example.
In today’s chunk of the LFMW, Faulk picks up with a discussion about the Eight Witnesses:

• The 8 Witnesses

On March 25, 1838, Martin Harris testified in public that none of the 3 or 8 witnesses saw or handled the physical plates.

That’s a mischaracterization of what we know.
After the fall of the Kirtland Safety Society bank in 1837, most of the Saints left Kirtland in early 1838. By the time this meeting occurred, a faction led by Warren Parrish had taken control of the temple with the intent, according to George A. Smith, “to renounce the Book of Mormon and Joseph Smith, and take the ‘Mormon’ doctrines to overthrow all the religions in the world, and unite all the Christian churches in one general band, and they to be its great leaders.” He also said, “One of them told me that Moses was a rascal and the Prophets were tyrants, and that Jesus Christ was a despot, Paul a base liar and all religion a fudge. And Parrish said he agreed with him in principle.”
Eventually, a growing division between the members of the faction came to a head, and they held a meeting to determine the validity of the Book of Mormon and other revelations Joseph received. This is the meeting referred to in Burnett’s letter.
I’m going to briefly skip ahead in the LFMW, just so the rest of this explanation makes sense:

A letter on Josephsmithpapers.org dated April 15, 1838, Stephen Burnett wrote the following to Lyman Johnson:
“I have reflected long and deliberately upon the history of this church and weighed the evidence for and against it — loth to give it up — but when I came to hear Martin Harris state in public that he never saw the plates with his natural eyes only in vision or imagination, neither Oliver [Cowdery] nor David [Whitmer] and also that the eight witnesses never saw them and hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason, but were persuaded to do it, the last pedestal gave way, in my view our foundations was sapped and the entire superstructure fell a heap of ruins, … I was followed by W. [Warren] Parish, Luke Johnson and John Boynton, all of who concurred with me. After we were done speaking, M[artin] Harris arose and said he was sorry for any man who rejected the Book of Mormon for he knew it was true, he said he had hefted the plates repeatedly in a box with only a tablecloth or handkerchief over them, but he never saw them only as he saw a city through a mountain. And said that he never should have told that the testimony of the eight was false, if it had not been picked out of air but should have let it passed as it was.” (http://josephsmithpapers.org/paperSummary/letterbook-2?p=69)

Burnett was a member of Parrish’s band of dissenters, and believed that Martin Harris recanted his testimony during this speech. Parrish agreed with his assessment, though George A. Smith, who was in town during the meeting, reported the opposite. He said that Harris testified in favor of the Book of Mormon’s truthfulness, and said that anyone who rejected it would be damned.
According to a Church Institute Manual handout, “Martin Harris strongly objected to how Burnett described his testimony and ‘remained a convinced Book of Mormon believer.’” The quote is taken from Richard L. Anderson’s fantastic book, Investigating the Book of Mormon Witnesses:

We are of course seeing Harris through the mind of a frustrated intermediary, one who thinks Mormonism presents a “whole scene of lying and deception.” He thinks that Martin Harris has not really seen the plates. If “only in vision,” then Burnett (not Harris) says it was really just “imagination.” If the Three Witnesses “only saw them spiritually,” then Burnett (not Harris) can explain it as essentially “in vision with their eyes shut.” But Martin Harris felt misrepresented, or he would not have stood up in the Kirtland Temple to challenge the explanations of Burnett and his disaffected associates. Note that there are two distinct experiences of Harris: (1) “he said that he had hefted the plates repeatedly in a box with only a tablecloth or handkerchief over them, but he never saw them, only as he saw a city through a mountain”; (2) “he never saw the plates with his natural eyes, only in vision.” Getting at the real Martin Harris requires subtracting Burnett’s sarcasm that seeps into the above wording. … In other words, Burnett heard Martin say that he had seen the plates in vision, and when Burnett uses “only” four times to ridicule the experience, that shows his disbelief, not Martin’s speech. Martin’s candid denial of seeing the plates while translating was sometimes exaggerated into a denial of ever seeing the plates, but even Burnett reports Martin claiming two types of contact with the plates: lifting them thinly covered, plus later seeing them in the hands of the angel. So Burnett paraphrased Martin Harris with the evident rationalizations of a skeptic. But Martin knew his own experience and remained a convinced Book of Mormon believer. Study of his interviews shows how strongly he insisted that the sight of the angel and plates was as real as the sight of the physical objects around him….

In fact, Burnett’s own letter says that when Harris realized how Burnett and others interpreted his testimony, he stood back up and testified of the Book of Mormon, then said that his previous comments had been “picked out” of him under duress.
Now, there is a slight discrepancy on what this letter actually says. The Joseph Smith Papers Project transcribes this line as “picked out of air.” However, in his Early Mormon Documents, Volume 5, Dan Vogel transcribes it as “picked out of [h]im.” When you zoom in on the text, it’s hard to tell exactly what it says. Either way, though, the point is clear that in Burnett’s own words, Harris felt like he’d been forced into making whatever statement he may have made about the Eight Witnesses.
So, since none of these are firsthand accounts from Harris himself, we have to try to judge the sources on their merits. Burnett and Parrish claim Harris said one thing, Smith felt he said something else. And, as was just pointed out, Burnett’s letter later shows Harris agreeing with Smith.
Personally, to me, it sounds like Burnett and Parrish mischaracterized the situation. Regardless of where you land on that, however, it’s obvious that the actual situation is a lot more questionable than Faulk’s proclamation makes it seem. The following sentence actually comes in between the first sentence I quoted from Faulk and the letter:

This statement caused apostles Luke S. Johnson, Lyman E. Johnson, John F. Boynton, high priest Stephen Burnett and LDS Seventy Warren Parish to leave the church.

This is factually untrue. They left the Church because of the failure of the Kirtland Safety Society. As most of the people listed in that sentence were apostles at the time, their departures from the Church are well-documented.
Luke Johnson denounced Joseph alongside Warren Parrish and many others in late 1837 and at that point resigned from the Church. He was formally excommunicated alongside his brother Lyman E. Johnson and David Whitmer on April 13, 1838.
That denunciation took place shortly after December 10, 1837. All of those listed by Faulk were among those who denounced Joseph at this time. The History of the Church had this to say about it:

I returned to Kirtland on or about the 10th of December. During my absence in Missouri Warren Parrish, John F. Boynton, Luke S. Johnson, Joseph Coe, and some others united together for the overthrow of the Church. Soon after my return this dissenting band openly and publicly renounced the Church of Christ of Latter-day Saints and claimed themselves to be the old standard, calling themselves the Church of Christ, excluding the word “Saints,” and set me at naught, and the whole Church, denouncing us as heretics, not considering that the Saints shall possess the kingdom according to the Prophet Daniel.

Remember, The History of the Church was written to sound like it was Joseph speaking, but there’s no guarantee this paragraph was actually taken from his own words. It may have been the recollection of someone else entirely that was rewritten to sound like Joseph’s voice.
John F. Boynton was excommunicated in 1837. So was Warren Parrish. In fact, between July and August of 1837, Parrish was the one who led the armed riot inside the Kirtland Temple, an incident in which Boynton participated. They were well out of the Church before that letter of Burnett’s was ever written.
The only one whose timeline of apostasy is at all murky is Stephen Burnett. Most sources just say that he apostatized “by 1838.” He was one who participated in that denunciation of Joseph in December of 1837, but it’s unclear whether he actually left the Church at this point or within the next few months of early 1838.
There was no love lost between Burnett and Joseph. In the Elder’s Journal from August 1838, Joseph described Burnett as an “little ignorant blockhead ... whose heart was so set on money that he would at any time, sell his soul for fifty dollars and then think he had made an excellent bargain; and who had got wearied of the restraints of religion, and could not bear to have his purse taxed.”
So, clearly, by the time April 1838 rolled around, Burnett and Parrish were both incredibly hostile toward the Church and particularly toward Joseph Smith. That bias has bearing on how we should view their characterization of the meeting featuring Martin Harris, just like Richard L. Anderson explained above.
And let’s not forget the words of Martin Harris himself:

[N]o man ever heard me in any way deny the truth of the Book of Mormon, the administration of the angel that showed me the plates; nor the organization of the Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints, under the administration of Joseph Smith Jun., the prophet the Lord raised up for that purpose, in these the latter days, that he may show forth his power and glory. The Lord has shown me these things by his Spirit–by the administration of holy angels–and confirmed the same with signs following....

A similar point was made by John Whitmer, the next Witness we’re going to discuss:

I have never heard that any one of the three or eight witnesses ever denied the testimony that they have borne to the Book as published in the first edition of the Book of Mormon. There are only two of the witnesses to that book now living, to wit., David Whitmer, one of the three, and John Wh[itmer], one of the eight. Our names have gone forth to all nations, tongues and people as a divine revelation from God. And it will bring to pass the designs of God according to the declaration therein contained.

These men were firm in their testimonies. Each one of them died still declaring their testimonies to the world.

On April 5, 1839 member of the Church, Theodore Turley, challenged John Whitmer, one of the 8 witnesses, to either affirm or deny his testimony regarding the gold plates. Whitmer responded by saying “I now say, I handled those plates ... they were shown to me by a supernatural power.” (History of the Church, vol.3 p307).

According to the 1828 Webster’s Dictionary, “supernatural” was synonymous with “miraculous” in Joseph’s day. The Witnesses appeared at various times to use the word to mean “by the power of God.”
As FAIR explains, three years before this report by Turley, John Whitmer said:

I desire to testify unto all ... that I have most assuredly seen the plates from whence the Book of Mormon [was] translated, and that I have handled these plates, and know of a surety that Joseph Smith, jr. has translated the Book of Mormon by the gift and power of God.

Then, in 1839, Turley reports Whitmer as making this statement:

Whitmer replied: ‘I now say, I handled those plates; there were fine engravings on both sides. I handled them;’ and he described how they were hung [on rings], and [said] ‘they were shown to me by a supernatural power;’ he acknowledged all.

And then, in late 1877 or early 1878, Myron Bond reported Whitmer as saying:

John Whitmer told me last winter ... [that he] ‘saw and handled’ [the plates and] ... helped to copy [the Book of Mormon manuscript] as the words fell from Joseph’s lips by supernatural or [A]lmighty power.

In each of these three statements, he declared that he both physically saw and handled the plates. Then he closed each statement by also testifying of the miraculous nature of the Book of Mormon. In the Turley incident, if it was reported accurately, he wasn’t saying that he didn’t literally see and handle the plates. He was saying that the plates themselves were miraculous. It was miraculous that Joseph received them, that he was able to translate them, and that Whitmer was allowed to see them for himself.
Again, situations like this are why we need to research these questions. If we only looked at one quote presented in a slanted manner, we wouldn’t know that this was a common pattern of Whitmer’s, and that he didn’t mean what Faulk implies he meant.

Why would a supernatural power be necessary if the plates actually existed? Couldn’t Joseph just invite the men he wanted to be witnesses over to his house, take the plates out of the box where he kept them and pass them around?

That’s exactly what was done when the Eight Witnesses saw the plates. They went into the woods to do it, but Joseph is the one who handed the plates over to them and let them hold them and turn the leaves.
The Three Witnesses were a different story, but there’s a reason why they were shown the plates by an angel. If their testimony was exactly the same as that of the Eight Witnesses, critics could claim that Joseph just manufactured the plates himself and there was nothing miraculous about it. And if all of the testimonies were like that of the Three Witnesses, they could claim that the plates never actually existed and that Joseph made the entire thing up. But this way, it’s a lot harder to account for the two different types of testimony.

Why are visions and supernatural means necessary to see these plates?

They weren’t. They are now, because the plates were returned to the Angel Moroni, but that wasn’t the case in 1829. They needed to pray for permission to see the plates, but they didn’t need to be shown them through miraculous means. The Three Witnesses were shown the plates by an angel to prove as true the Lord’s revelation that they had to see them by faith.
However, the two different types of testimony, one spiritual and one practical, make it that much harder to dismiss their testimonies. I have no doubt that was by design.

Published on Josephsmithpapers.org are the signed statements by the 3 and 8 witnesses. JosephSmithPapers reveals that both statements and all signatures are in the handwriting of Oliver Cowdery. The official statements printed in the Book of Mormon are not signed with original signatures, dated or given a specific location where the events occurred.

The only surviving full copy of the Book of Mormon manuscript is the printer’s manuscript. It’s in Oliver’s handwriting because he copied it from the original manuscript so that they’d have two copies available.
In October of 1841, Joseph put the original copy in the cornerstone of the Nauvoo House. More than 40 years later, Emma’s second husband, Lewis Bidamon, made some renovations to the house and rediscovered it. It was badly damaged by water seepage and mold, and the Witness statements were some of the most damaged because they were at the back of the original Book of Mormon, not the front. Bidamon displayed the pages and gave many away to visitors to the house. Today, only about 28% of it is still intact, and even many of those pages and fragments are damaged. Extensive efforts to conserve them have been undertaken by both the Church and the Wilford Woodruff Museum, the two places where the bulk of the remaining pages survive. Private collectors have other additional fragments.
We have one statement from John Whitmer saying he signed the original copy, and three accounts of Joseph F. Smith saying that David Whitmer said he signed it as well (here, here, and here). There’s also a fourth David Whitmer account saying that Oliver copied their names onto the printer’s manuscript. Whitmer initially believed he had the original manuscript, which had previously been in Oliver’s possession until his death, but later came to accept that he had the printer’s copy.
Aside from the John Whitmer account, these are all secondhand reports, some given several decades later. As such, they should be treated with some skepticism. But, as most of them come from a prophet, I do personally lend them some weight and consider them to be pretty solid sources.
It’s true they’re not dated, but we know approximately when the experiences happened (in June of 1829) and where they happened. The Three Witnesses were shown the plates by the angel in the woods near the Whitmer home, while a few days later, the Eight Witnesses were shown them in the woods near the Smith home in Palmyra.
It should be noted that in John Whitmer’s final interview, published after his death, the details differ from the other accounts. He’s quoted as saying that he was shown the plates inside Joseph’s home, in two groups of four rather than all at once. However, this does conflict with other accounts, and David Whitmer publicly disputed the accuracy of the interview when it was published.

These are not 11 legally sworn statements; rather it seems possible that they are simple accounts pre-written, pre-signed and agreed upon at some later time.

This is a comment ripped straight out of the CES Letter. No, these are not legally sworn statements, but who on earth ever claimed that they were? Why would anyone think that? There’s no notary information on the statement.
And obviously, the printer’s manuscript was pre-written and pre-signed, since it’s not the original manuscript. But nothing other than the content of the statement was agreed upon at a later time. They all declared repeatedly, until the end of their lives, that they experienced the things they testified in those statements that they experienced.

In addition, consider the statement by Martin Harris (one of the 3 witnesses): “…and also that the eight witnesses never saw them and hesitated to sign that instrument for that reason, but were persuaded to do it.”

And, as we covered in the beginning of this post, that statement is suspect. It’s not a direct quote, it’s a summary from a hostile source’s letter—and that same letter said that Harris disavowed this statement.
Also, it’s worth pointing out that Martin Harris was not present when the Eight Witnesses handled the plates. He didn’t know what they experienced any more than we can. All any of us has to go on is their signed statement and the other comments they made about their experiences over the years. It’s not our place, and it’s certainly not Harris’s place, to redefine their experiences for them.

Reportedly this source document is printer’s manuscript and the original was only partially ruined, however the Church has never been able to produce the original.

Oh, good heavens. Yes, this is the printer’s manuscript, as we went over, and yes, the original was mostly damaged. The Church has produced the original on the Joseph Smith Papers Project. However, they did not obtain it until 2017. Prior to that, it was owned by the RLDS/Community of Christ Church, and the Church could not publish it in full color due to copyright reasons. There was a black and white copy copyrighted to the Community of Christ available on the website before that point.
So, in wrapping this all up, there was a clear, consistent theme running throughout this entire post. Vet your sources, guys. People lie, they twist the facts, and they have agendas. Be aware of that, and do your homework. Yeah, it can take a long time to do that, I get it. But the truth is important. When we hear slanted rhetoric like this, it’s not always obvious what the truth really is. We have to put in the work to figure it out. The Lord rewards us when we do. Remember, it’s after the trial of our faith that the witness of the truth comes to us.

I am looking to change out old crouse hinds explosion proof fixtures with led. The base of the old fixtures is 3 in with 16 tpi. The new fixtures are 3/4 in. Do they make an reducer for such box? The picture is for a standard size box.

Download Link :- https://www.heavy-equipmentmanual.com/products/bomag-mph100-mph-100-soil-stabilizer-asphalt-recycler-spare-parts-catalog-manual
Language: English
Format: PDF
Fast Download Speeds
Online & Offline Access
Access PDF Contents & Bookmarks
Full Search Facility
Print one or all pages of your manual

I'm trying to restore the look of my '85 Axstar, and since I couldn't find any original pickup covers, I bought replacements, but they don't have the white "Axstar" on them.
Was wondering if anyone is replicating these (probably could be done w/ a Cricket, but don't have one of those).
You can see what I'm talking about in this brochure: http://www.hoshinogakki.co.jp/pdf/ibanez/catalog/1985Axstar2.pdf

Instruction link is here: https://www.us.kohler.com/webassets/kpna/catalog/pdf/en/1337913-2.pdf
Are 2 separate electrical lines carrying power needed? 1 for the light switch and then one coming from a GFCI outlet to the internal outlet? Or is the power coming from a GFCI and that powers both the internal outlet and the mirror light, which then goes to a switch to turn it on and off?
I know I can also open the box and wire the thing up, but I'm trying to prevent doing that since it's heavy and expensive.

Corporate Action allowed broker-dealers an exception to Rule 15c211 to start the quotation and trading.
The company could have stopped it at halt, but decided to go through with deletion.
The Corporate Action was written so that shorts were not forced to close and allowed short positions in Next Bridge.
Next Bridge has private shares (unlisted) in a publicly reporting company that follows the rules of public companies, not private. As a result, Next Bridge shares can trade.
"As an Next Bridge is an independent public reporting company. "The registered shares are freely tradeable under federal law. ........... If Next Bridge were to obtain a CUSIP number, that would facilitate secondary market trading."
​
Too bad they have awful inexperienced management or none of this would have happened.
https://www.finra.org/investors/insights/FAQ-MMTLP-corporate-action-and-trading-halt
FINRA has received a number of questions relating to a corporate action and trading halt in the Series A Preferred Shares of Meta Materials, Inc. (Meta Materials) that traded under the symbol MMTLP. This Investor Insights article provides general information about how corporate actions and trading halts are processed as well as specific information related to MMTLP.

Corporate Actions—FINRA’s Role

A corporate action occurs when a company makes a change that has or could have an impact on its stock and shareholders. Corporate actions include issuing a dividend, engaging in a stock split, or effecting a merger.
When a company decides to engage in a corporate action that affects a security listed on a national securities exchange, the company must provide notice to the listing exchange and comply with all applicable listing standards and rules of the exchange concerning that security. In contrast, when a company decides to engage in a corporate action that affects an unlisted security that trades in the over-the-counter (OTC) market, federal law requires that the company submit notice of the corporate action to FINRA, and FINRA reviews the submission and publishes a notification about the corporate action to the marketplace (unless the submission is deemed deficient by FINRA). This function helps to keep investors and the market informed of corporate actions affecting OTC securities and of relevant dates.
A company can have both listed and unlisted securities, so different rules can apply to the same company depending on which security is the subject of a corporate action. In any event, FINRA does not initiate, approve, or conduct the underlying corporate action that the company is making, and the company itself is responsible for making sure the corporate action complies with all applicable laws and regulations.
FINRA regulates broker-dealers that facilitate investor access to the securities markets, including the OTC market. However, unlike securities exchanges that list securities, FINRA does not establish listing standards or otherwise regulate the companies that issue OTC securities.

The MMTLP Corporate Action

Meta Materials’ Series A Preferred Shares were issued in connection with the June 2021 merger between Torchlight Energy Resources and Metamaterial Inc. While the company that resulted from the merger—Meta Materials—had common stock that became listed on Nasdaq, the Series A Preferred Shares were unlisted. These unlisted shares were freely tradeable under federal law and began trading in the OTC market under the symbol MMTLP (further discussion below).
On July 15, 2022, the company filed a Form S-1 registration statement with the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) to register the common stock of Next Bridge Hydrocarbons, Inc. (Next Bridge), which at that time was a wholly owned subsidiary of Meta Materials. As disclosed in the registration statement, Meta Materials would distribute to MMTLP shareholders one share of Next Bridge common stock per one share of MMTLP held, and would cancel the Series A Preferred Shares trading under the symbol MMTLP. According to the Form S-1 filed, immediately after the corporate action, Next Bridge would be an independent public reporting company. After several amendments, the registration statement for the Next Bridge shares became effective on November 18, 2022.
On November 23, 2022, Meta Materials issued an announcement regarding the Next Bridge / MMTLP corporate action, stating that each holder of its Series A Preferred Shares—MMTLP—as of December 12, 2022, would become entitled to receive one share of the common stock of Next Bridge for every one share of MMTLP held. Meta Materials also stated that the Next Bridge shares would be distributed to MMTLP shareholders on December 14, 2022, at which time all MMTLP shares would be automatically cancelled and MMTLP holders would cease to have any rights with respect to those shares. In addition, the company stated that the Next Bridge shares received in the distribution would not be eligible for electronic transfer through The Depository Trust Company (DTC) (or through any other established clearing corporation).
As required by federal law, Meta Materials also notified FINRA of the Next Bridge / MMTLP corporate action. Consistent with the information provided by Meta Materials, on December 6 and 8, 2022, FINRA provided public notice of the corporate action on FINRA’s website. FINRA’s corporate action notice stated that the Next Bridge shares would be distributed to those MMTLP shareholders with settled positions as of December 12, 2022, and further clarified that any purchasers after December 8, 2022, (i.e., those with trades due to settle on or after December 13, 2022) would not be entitled to receive Next Bridge shares in the corporate action distribution. FINRA’s corporate action notice also stated that the MMTLP symbol would be deleted effective December 13, 2022 (i.e., when an issuer cancels shares, FINRA will likewise delete the symbol; see the company’s announcement stating that the MMTLP shares were to be cancelled as of the December 14, 2022, distribution date of the Next Bridge shares).
On December 9, 2022, FINRA halted trading in MMTLP. One of FINRA’s roles in regulating the activities of broker-dealers trading OTC equity securities is exercising the authority to require such firms to halt quoting and trading activities when FINRA determines that doing so is necessary to protect investors and the public interest. Since imposing the halt, FINRA has received questions regarding the MMTLP trading halt and its impact on investors. Below are answers to some questions FINRA has received.
1. Why did FINRA halt trading in MMTLP?
FINRA is permitted under its rules to impose a quoting and trading halt in an OTC equity security where FINRA determines that an extraordinary event has occurred or is ongoing that has had a material effect on the market for the security or has caused or has the potential to cause major disruption to the marketplace or significant uncertainty in the settlement and clearance process. FINRA made such a determination for MMTLP and halted trading on December 9.
Among FINRA’s concerns were the facts that, after December 12, the MMTLP shares would cease to be DTC-eligible; MMTLP shares would be cancelled at the time of the distribution (i.e., December 14); and Next Bridge common stock was not expected to be DTC-eligible—raising uncertainty regarding how transactions executed after December 8 would settle in an orderly manner in relation to these dates. Had MMTLP continued trading after December 8, there was the possibility that investors buying MMTLP during that time period may not have realized that those shares were about to be cancelled by Meta Materials, that they may not receive MMTLP shares before they were cancelled, and that they would not be recorded on December 12 as MMTLP holders eligible to receive Next Bridge common stock in the distribution.
2. Why did FINRA halt trading on December 9 if shareholders as of December 12 were entitled to receive the Next Bridge distribution?
FINRA halted trading in MMTLP on Friday, December 9, because securities transactions typically must settle within two business days in accordance with SEC rules. This means that trades in MMTLP executed on December 8 typically would settle on December 12, while trades executed on December 9 or December 12 typically would not settle until after December 12. This is important because a seller ceases to be a holder of shares and a purchaser becomes a holder of shares only after a transaction settles. Therefore, for purposes of the Next Bridge / MMTLP corporate action, only those trades in MMTLP that were executed on or before December 8 typically would have settled in time to establish the purchaser as a new holder of the shares as of December 12.
In addition, after December 12, the MMTLP shares would no longer be DTC-eligible (and the Next Bridge shares were not expected to be DTC-eligible). This means that, after December 12, any unsettled trades in MMTLP would have needed to be handled through broker-to-broker processes outside of DTC. Thus, there was uncertainty about whether trades executed after December 8 would settle in an orderly manner, including whether they would settle before the MMTLP shares were cancelled on December 14.
In other words, for trades in MMTLP executed after December 8, the seller of MMTLP shares would still have been recorded as the holder eligible to receive Next Bridge shares as part of the corporate action distribution, and the buyer would not be recorded as eligible to receive Next Bridge shares in the distribution. Moreover, the buyer would have purchased shares that would be cancelled on December 14, and there was uncertainty as to whether these trades would be settled in an orderly manner before the cancellation date. See also Question # 7 below.
3. Has the MMTLP trading halt ended?
Yes. As stated in the MMTLP trading halt notice published on December 9, the MMTLP halt ended concurrent with FINRA’s deletion of the MMTLP symbol, which occurred on December 13, 2022. FINRA’s website was updated on February 16, 2023, to reflect the December 13 end of the trading halt (this update occurred later than normal due to a coding issue introduced in connection with a system migration). The MMTLP shares were cancelled by the issuer on December 14 and therefore it has not been possible to trade them since that time, irrespective of the halt status displayed on FINRA’s website.
4. How were MMTLP shares publicly quoted and traded in the first place?
The answer to the question of whether a security is freely tradeable is determined by the application of federal law, including any applicable SEC rules. In this case, the issuer filed with the SEC a Form S-3 registration statement for the offering of MMTLP shares and obtained a CUSIP number. Thus, the registered MMTLP shares were freely tradable and were not subject to public trading limitations. Where a security is freely tradeable, a public market for the security may develop—as it did with MMTLP.
FINRA does not approve a company’s issuance of securities or approve or determine when broker-dealers or customers may begin trading those securities. However, once a broker-dealer executes a transaction in an unlisted security, the firm is required by FINRA rules to report the executed transaction to FINRA. And where a symbol does not yet exist for the security, the broker-dealer must request a symbol from FINRA. Because the Series A Preferred Shares had a CUSIP number, FINRA assigned the MMTLP symbol in 2021 upon request by a broker-dealer to facilitate electronic reporting of an executed transaction that occurred in the security.
This trade reporting process is separate from the process by which a broker-dealer begins quoting a security in compliance with SEC Rule 15c2-11. Rule 15c2-11 requires a broker-dealer, prior to quoting a security on its own behalf, to review specified information about the company that issued the security (unless an exception applies). In some cases, a broker-dealer also must file a form with FINRA—a Form 211. In this case, FINRA did not receive a Form 211. Instead, broker-dealers relied on an exception to SEC Rule 15c2-11 that permits broker-dealers to publish a quotation for unsolicited customer orders.
5. Did FINRA cancel the MMTLP shares? Did FINRA delete the MMTLP symbol?
FINRA did not cancel the MMTLP shares. The issuer, Meta Materials, cancelled the shares effective December 14. In fact, FINRA does not and cannot cancel any securities that are issued by a company—this was an action of the issuer. However, just as FINRA assigns symbols to unlisted securities, FINRA also can unassign or “delete” a symbol, for example, where it is no longer needed to quote or trade a security. In this case, FINRA deleted the MMTLP symbol on December 13 in light of the imminent cancellation of the shares as announced by the company in connection with the Next Bridge / MMTLP corporate action.
On December 8, FINRA amended its original December 6 corporate action announcement to clarify, among other things, that it would be deleting the MMTLP symbol on December 13 rather than cancelling the shares (because the issuer itself was responsible for cancelling the Series A Preferred Shares). Because the MMTLP shares have been cancelled by the issuer, they can no longer be traded, and the symbol can no longer be reinstated.
6. What happened to investors who did not sell their MMTLP shares prior to the trading halt?
Investors who had settled positions in MMTLP on December 12 were holders entitled to receive shares of Next Bridge as part the Next Bridge / MMTLP corporate action. Thus, applying the standard settlement cycle of T+2, an investor who did not sell MMTLP by December 8 would receive Next Bridge shares in the distribution—and this would be the case even had FINRA not halted trading on December 9.
As described in the Next Bridge prospectus filed with the SEC, Next Bridge anticipated that the distribution process for the Next Bridge shares would take about two weeks and would be effected by its transfer agent, American Stock Transfer & Trust Company LLC. Transfer agents work for securities issuers to record changes of securities ownership, maintain security holder records, cancel and issue certificates, and distribute dividends. SEC rules and regulations include registration and other requirements for registered transfer agents. FINRA does not regulate transfer agents and does not have a role in distributing securities as part of a corporate action.
See also Question #10 regarding what investors should do if they have not received their Next Bridge shares and Question #11 regarding whether the Next Bridge shares are tradeable.
7. What would have happened to any trades executed after December 8 had FINRA not halted trading in MMTLP?
As mentioned above, applying the T+2 settlement cycle, trades executed after December 8 would not have settled in time for the purchaser to become a holder of the MMTLP shares by December 12. Any trades in MMTLP not settled by December 12 would have needed to be resolved through broker-to-broker processes outside of DTC. There also was concern that the MMTLP shares may have been cancelled by the issuer before broker-to-broker settlement occurred. In addition, there was the potential for confusion and disagreement in the settlement process among the parties with respect to which security should be delivered to the buyer. For example, an investor entering a buy order in MMTLP on or after December 9 may not have understood that they would not be a holder entitled to receive the Next Bridge shares in the corporate action distribution (because the seller of MMTLP shares during that time period would have received Next Bridge shares as part of the distribution), and that the MMTLP shares purchased would imminently be cancelled.
8. Is there public data concerning short sale activity in MMTLP?
Yes, there are several data sets published by FINRA and the SEC about short sale activity that include data for MMTLP.
Short Interest Data: “Short interest” in a security is a snapshot of the total open short positions existing on the books and records of broker-dealers for that security on a given settlement date. FINRA’s short interest reports reflect short positions held both in customer and proprietary accounts and are published twice each month. FINRA published short interest reports for MMTLP from October 15, 2021, through November 30, 2022 (the last short interest reporting settlement date available for MMTLP). These reports are available on FINRA’s website. Short interest reports for Next Bridge are not available on FINRA’s website because firms report short interest by security symbol and Next Bridge does not have a symbol. FINRA is considering how it might enhance the usefulness of the short interest information available to investors, which could include changes to the content and frequency of the short interest reporting.
Short Sale Volume: FINRA also publishes daily short sale volume data by security for OTC equity securities. Importantly, while the two data sets are related in that short sale volume activity may ultimately result in a reportable short interest position, they are not the same. In fact, a particular short sale will not necessarily result in a short position that is later reported in FINRA’s short interest report. For example, while the total short sale volume for transactions in MMTLP that settled from November 16, 2022, through November 30, 2022, was 7,413,679 shares, the published short interest for MMTLP on settlement date November 30, 2022, was 4,658,068 shares.
Differences in the two data sets are expected and occur for a variety of reasons; for example, where a short sale has been covered (either on the same day or at another time prior to the short interest reporting settlement date), which means that there is no longer a short position to report as short interest by the reporting settlement date. As another example, the daily short sale volume may reflect the execution of a short sale transaction by a firm solely to facilitate an immediate execution of a customer long sale, such that the short sale does not and was not intended to result in a short position. FINRA encourages investors to review information on the differences between these data sets. Importantly, the daily short sale volume does not equate to an end-of-day short position and should not be confused with short interest.
Fails-to-Deliver: The SEC publishes data on the total quantity of “fails-to-deliver” per security as of each reporting settlement date. As the SEC has explained, a fail-to-deliver can occur as the result of either a long or a short sale. For example, a fail-to-deliver can result from a “naked” short sale—where the seller does not borrow or arrange to borrow shares in time to make delivery to the buyer within the standard settlement period. A fail-to-deliver also may result from a long sale where there was a delay in the delivery of shares within the standard settlement period.
Among other things, SEC Regulation SHO imposes close-out requirements for fails-to-deliver in equity securities. These requirements include close-outs of fails-to-deliver in threshold securities. A “threshold security” is a security that meets defined criteria designed to address concerns regarding large and persistent failures to deliver and potentially abusive “naked” short selling. Regulation SHO’s threshold security criteria include quantitative standards that apply to the securities of issuers that are SEC-reporting companies. FINRA has a separate rule, with a different quantitative threshold, for the securities of issuers that are not SEC-reporting companies.
Due to a systems coding issue, FINRA incorrectly classified MMTLP as the security of a non-SEC-reporting company and, as a result, incorrectly published its “Threshold Securities List” showing that MMTLP met the FINRA threshold standard from October 22, 2021, through January 4, 2022, and from October 17, 2022, through December 13, 2022. While MMTLP did meet the quantitative criteria under FINRA Rule 4320, it was subject to the Regulation SHO standard instead because MMTLP was issued by an SEC-reporting company. Since it began trading in October 2021, MMTLP did not have fails-to-deliver of the size or duration that would have rendered it a threshold security under Regulation SHO, and it was therefore an error to publish it on the Threshold Securities List. FINRA has now removed MMTLP from the Threshold Securities List.
9. What happens if short positions in MMTLP were not closed out before FINRA halted trading?
Broker-dealers have operational conventions in place for adjusting short positions following a corporate action. In this instance, FINRA understands that firms have adjusted short positions in MMTLP to reflect an equal size short position in Next Bridge (i.e., an account with a short position of 100 shares of MMTLP now reflects a short position of 100 shares of Next Bridge). In other words, the corporate action did not compel short positions to be closed or extinguish any obligations associated with outstanding short positions.
10. What should investors do if they believe they have not received their Next Bridge shares?
If you held a settled position in MMTLP on December 12, 2022, your account should reflect your position in Next Bridge. Your broker-dealer is required to maintain possession or control of your shares in compliance with federal law. You also may request a transfer of shares from the broker-dealer’s name to your name; however, this transfer may take time to achieve and your broker-dealer or the transfer agent may charge a fee for this service. If you believe that your shares are not properly reflected in your account or your broker-dealer has not been willing to transfer your shares pursuant to your instructions, you should contact your broker-dealer to understand the status of your Next Bridge shares.
Your broker-dealer may reflect your Next Bridge shares in your account using a numeric or alphanumeric identifier. Different firms may use different identifiers because an official CUSIP number, which is an identifier assigned by CUSIP Global Services at the request of the issuer—not FINRA— has not, to date, been assigned to Next Bridge common stock. The absence of an official CUSIP number does not affect the status of the Next Bridge shares reflected in your account. If you believe that your broker-dealer has not provided a satisfactory explanation to your questions, you may submit an investor complaint to FINRA.
11. Are the Next Bridge shares tradeable?
As discussed above, Next Bridge filed a Form S-1 registration statement with the SEC to register 165,523,363 shares of common stock, which became effective on November 18, 2022. According to the prospectus, Next Bridge is an independent public reporting company. The registered shares are freely tradeable under federal law.
As of the date of this article, the Next Bridge shares neither have a CUSIP number nor a security symbol. If Next Bridge were to obtain a CUSIP number, that would facilitate secondary market trading. Broker-dealers would be able to request that FINRA assign a symbol to the Next Bridge shares in connection with quoting and trading activity (where such request is consistent with FINRA rules and policies and with federal law). However, even without a CUSIP number, any trades in Next Bridge shares executed by a broker-dealer must be reported by the firm to FINRA for regulatory purposes through a file submission process.

I’m currently feeling very lost in the job search, and have been considering going back to college for a masters, but I’m not sure what degree I would be able to go for is the best way of putting it.
I graduated with an IDIS (industrial distribution and information systems) from A&M and am currently in a position of leadership which I enjoy a lot, however I hate the company I work for and can’t seem to get a similar job anywhere else.
Outside of management/leadership, I’m also interested in system admin jobs and finance, all of which I wouldn’t mind working, so I’m just curious what masters y’all think I would qualify for and would be a potentially good idea. (I guess I could always do another bachelors and call it a double major? But if possible I’d rather just do a masters)
I’m also not sure how to post and imagine in here, so here’s a link to the degree planner for the major I graduated with
https://engineering.tamu.edu/etid/_files/_documents/_content-documents/ACC-IDIS-Catalog-143-202031-13Dec2020.pdf
The eset classes are electrical engineering and the mmet are mechanical engineering, everything else I think is straightforward

Let's talk about caring for your gear
Part 2.1: Material deep dive and caring for your gear.
In an effort to stay on topic strictly of gear care please keep your environmental comments/concerns for my future posts on DWR etc. This is not the place for those discussions.

Problem:

Being outside in a climate that our bodies cannot handle alone without the help of clothing and an understanding of therm o-regulation.

Series Purpose:

Understand our bodies, To assess against your full clothing system and put your understanding against your real world expectations and results for all scenarios. Knowing many of these things are already understood they are still outlined as a larger picture discussion.
Part 1: Part 1: our bodies, training and diet https://www.reddit.com/arcteryx/comments/rn8ajp/layering_choices_deep_dive_part_1_cross_post/
Part 2: Material Data: https://www.reddit.com/arcteryx/comments/ruii7o/layering_series_deep_dive_part_2/
2a (wool)
https://www.reddit.com/arcteryx/comments/slflsq/lets_talk_about_wool/
2.1: Material deep dive and caring for your gear
Part 3: General theory of application of material in purpose
Part 4: Material choice

Preface: to understand materials in technical clothing and how care of them will impact the intended performance/outcome of each.

To truly understand how to care for your technical gear you first need to understand the materials used to make them.
We are going to go pretty deep into a number of items here to get a base understanding to apply the easiest logic possible in the care process.
For the sake of trying to limit the scope of this we are going to stick to the Major types of synthetics. Will touch on wool but knowing that most all wool in performance items today have a synthetic element in core and coatings to the thread.

Glass transition temperature of amorphous polymers

https://www.materialssquare.com/blog/glass-transition-temperature-in-polymers-en
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/chemistry/glass-transition-temperature
https://polymerdatabase.com/polymer%20physics/Polymer%20Tg.html
The glass transition temperature (Tg) is the temperature of amorphous polymers at which increased molecular mobility results in significant changes in the thermal properties. Plastic products molded with oriented molecules expand differentially, as long as the glass transition temperature is not reached. increased molecular mobility also results in significant changes in the thermal properties of an amorphous resin.
Above the glass transition temperature, the polymer tends to expand isotropically, and hysteresis is noted in the expansion or dimensional changes upon cooling, when the material will be rubbery and ductile.
Rough Tg temps of common textile material

Polyester 155°F 68.33°C

https://homework.study.com/explanation/what-is-the-glass-transition-temperature-of-polyester.html#:~:text=Answer%20and%20Explanation%3A,polyester%20becomes%20soft%20and%20pliable.

Nylon 6 140°F 60°C

https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/004051756803800504#:~:text=Conclusions%20based%20on%20these%20data,starting%20at%2070%C2%B0C.

Nylon 66 122°F 50°C

https://polymerdatabase.com/polymers/nylon66.html

Acrylic 220°F 104°C

https://www.acrylite.co/resources/knowledge-base/article/what-are-the-glass-transition-temperatures-for-acrylic-sheet?category=product-properties#:~:text=The%20glass%20transition%20temperature%20for%20ACRYLITE%C2%AE%20cast%20acrylic%20sheet,212%2D239%C2%B0F
PTFE: this gets a bit more attention. The indepth information is much easier found for PTFE.
The MAF (Mobile amorphous fraction becomes pliable) is 153°F -103°c
And the Tg of 258°f 126°c
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0014305713002164#:~:text=Dynamic%20mechanical%20and%20tensile%20tests,%E2%88%92103%20%C2%B0C.
Polyurethane: this one can get very wide, polyurethane is a very broad category. For the sake of this topic, I found a few different data sheets on textiles.
They average from 110°f to 240°f for their Tg
https://polymerdatabase.com/polymer%20classes/Polyurethane%20type.html
"Polyurethanes (PUR) are one of the largest classes of polymers with properties that can be tailored over a wide range for a large number of application."

Drying

Tumble drier Temps max around 145-155°F /65°C
https://www.homesandgardens.com/kitchens/tumble-dryer-temperature-guide

laminated

If we talk laminated materials we need to understand how they are constructed.
For some Gore PTFE laminated materials they do not use any adhesive, but rather heat as a process to bond the face material to the PTFE.
https://cool.culturalheritage.org/coolaic/sg/bpg/annual/v11/bp11-33.html
"The Sontara fabric is bonded to the Gore-Tex film with a process that includes heat, so no additional adhesive is in the material we use. It is composed only of a thin film of Gore-Tex that has been attached to the fabric Sontara. White Gore-Tex, it should be noted, has no colorants in it. Pigments can be added to Gore-Tex to color it but white is the color of the basic material."
But in most applications there are 3 types of glue used.
https://adhesive.intercol.eu/en/textiel-lamineren-lijmen-composieten/index.html
PUR Hot Melt: breaks down under heat, stress and use.
https://youtu.be/kIectDvZ-V8
Water based PU: breaks down quickly causing premature delamination
Solvent based PU: best performing extending time to delamination
Most PUL fabric is made by laminating lightweight polyester interlock knit fabric to a 1 mil thick film of polyurethane. There are two main processes used for lamination: solvent lamination, which fuses the fabric and polyurethane film into a single monolithic fabric, and hot melt, which uses heat-activated glue to adhere the fabrics together.
https://www.chemixguru.com/polyurethane-laminating-adhesive/
https://www.google.com/amp/s/www.chemixguru.com/textile-industry-fabric-lamination-adhesive/amp/
https://youtu.be/SECFx7gPl9w
https://youtu.be/_zH0Qejcvfw

Chemicals and detergent

The detergent conspiracy: neat little read
https://www.atsko.com/the-detergent-conspiracy/
Important paragraph:
The distinctions between green, natural and free, or between detergents and soaps are relatively small. Every washing agent should contain chemicals to separate soil from fabric and carry it away with the water. These are called surfactants and they do whatever cleaning occurs. All the other ingredients are there to help the surfactants or to make you believe your clothes are clean, and these must remain in your clothes to be effective
Washing: always keep in mind the impact washing has on the original treatment of the yarns or fabric.
https://www.thespruce.com/how-laundry-detergent-ingredients-work-2146619
Top level how does soap/detergent help release the grime?
For the part that most think of when talking a detergent in the way that it removes dirt and oils. surfactants are dipole meaning the head of the molecule is attracted to water (oleophobic/hydrophilic) and the tail is attracted to grease and dirt (hydrophobic/oleophilic).
https://www.york.ac.uk/res/sots/activities/soapysci.htm#:~:text=How%20do%20detergents%20work%3F,grease%20and%20dirt%20(hydrophobic).
To get the best results from any laundry detergent, there is a three-fold process of chemical energy, thermal energy, and mechanical energy that must be used when washing clothes.
When talking detergents and technical clothing you should be using a detergent that is formulated to work at cooler temps.<80°f. This will keep the damage to any initial treatments lower.
There are variables that are unique to the water being used as well. The pH of your water will impact how a particular detergent will work, more on this after detergents.
Surfactants:
Surfactants are the major component of laundry and cleaning products. In washing machines, surfactants work by lifting dirt and oils off the fabric and attaching it to the water, so the dirt gets rinsed away when the water drains out of the machine.
Dipole, meaning one end is hydrophilic and the other hydrophobic and lipophilic. (One end attracted to the dirt and oils and the other attracted to the water)
If you have hard water, you will get better cleaning results with a non-ionic surfactant
https://aradbranding.com/en/non-ionic-detergents-examples/
Alkalies:
Alkalies, a major component in most laundry detergents, are soluble salts and a base that reacts with an acid to neutralize it.
Mild alkali is baking soda (sodium bicarbonate).
Moderate alkalies include household ammonia, borax, and trisodium phosphate (TSP).
Strong alkalies include washing soda (sodium carbonate) and lye (caustic soda).
These affect the pH of the water as well.. more below.
Enzymes:
Most biological laundry detergents contain lipase and protease enzymes, both of which are found in the body. Lipases break down fats and oils, while proteases work to break down protein chains.
https://www.persil.com/uk/laundry/laundry-tips/washing-tips/enzymes-in-biological-detergents-the-facts-about-laundry-detergents-and-how-they-work.html#:~:text=Most%20biological%20laundry%20detergents%20contain,to%20break%20down%20protein%20chains.
These are good for breaking down oils, they will impact treated fabric and should never be used on 100% wool.
Amphoteric surfactant
Amphoteric detergents are a type of detergent that can be used in both hard and soft water.
They are also called "dual-action" detergents because they can clean in both acidic and alkaline conditions.
In the past, there was not a lot of need for amphoteric detergents because most water was hard.
https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/chemistry/surfactant#:~:text=Surfactants%20are%20also%20classified%20depending,that%20are%20soluble%20in%20lipids.
Danish research paper on the biodegradability of amphoteric surfactants and betaines
https://www2.mst.dk/udgiv/publications/2001/87-7944-596-9/html/kap06_eng.htm#:~:text=The%20amphoteric%20surfactants%20in%20this,amines%20(e.g.%20aminoethylethanol%20amine).

Fabric softeners (specific surfactants)

N-alkyl ethylbenzyl dimethyl ammonium (C12-C14) for example is the active chemical that is used in Downey.
https://smartlabel.pg.com/00037000826675.html
The active ingredients that make up fabric softeners are also surfactants but they are specifically designed to be attracted to the fibers of the clothing as opposed to dirt and water. These surfactants are made to have a pH of at or near 7 and have a ionic charge to them to help with static.
Fabric softeners are often incorporated into detergents, Fabric conditioner coats your clothes in a perfumed lubricant, making them slipperier and reducing friction.
It is important to identify detergents that have the chemicals that will coat your clothing. It will change how performance textiles act, ultimately making them not act as intended by the manufacturer.
For the deeper dive on this. Jump down to #Hydrophilic coatings and modifications of material by chemical process
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652617313835
"Non chlorine" bleach
Sodium bicarbonate once mixed with water releases hydrogen peroxide Ash.
https://www.everydaycheapskate.com/three-generic-cleaners-same-as-brand-names-but-way-cheape#:~:text=To%20be%20clear%2C%20sodium%20percarbonate,Completely%20natural%20and%20non%2Dtoxic.
Sodium carbonate is used in several cleaning products, including green cleaning ones, due to its disinfectant properties and ability to cut through grease and soften water.
https://www.chemicalbook.com/Article/Everything-About-Sodium-Carbonate.htm#:~:text=Cleaning%20Uses,through%20grease%20and%20soften%20water.

Disinfecting

https://www.phonesoap.com/blogs/how-to/how-to-sanitize-laundry
https://www.cdc.gov/niosh/topics/phenol/default.html#:~:text=Phenol%20(C6H6,%2C%20muscle%20aches%2C%20and%20pain
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phenol
You can use disinfectant liquids to help remove odors from your clothing, most have a form of hydrogen peroxide to them. It's what is commonly referred to as "color safe" bleach. Though Lysol and Clorox have other iterations of it that are supposed to be easier on textiles and better on "bacteria". Although it is not known it's impact on odoriferous bacteria.
Wool specific
Lanolin additives:
https://twigandhorn.com/blogs/news/65351875-why-lanolize-your-wool-garments
In my previous write up on wool we went through how all lanolin is removed from wool in processing. This is in part for performance, monetary, and simply a result of the process. Most wool especially the types we see in performance wear it is needed to be removed so that the Fabric can take on moisture. Most wool performance fabrics also have synthetic components.
But for your outerwear wool garments made from boiled wool or like can benefit from lanolin, think of it as waxing a cotton jacket of sorts. Many dress or over coats have this done in the manufacturing process.
Detergent specific information

Large repository of data on laundry detergents

https://fortheloveofclean.com/product-love/indexes/laundry-product-index/

Excellent database to quickly find ingredients of detergents

https://www.whatsinproducts.com/types/index/TypeLanguage.search:cat_search/TypeLanguage.lang_id:1/TypeLanguage.category_id:3/TypeLanguage.type_id:23/TypeLanguage.filter:No
Common detergent MSDS
Grangers:
https://www.vandernet.com/tuotetiedostot/GRF87/GRF84%20GRANGERS%20PERFORMANCE%20WASH%20-%20SDS4785%20-%20EN.pdf
Atsko:
https://images.homedepot-static.com/catalog/pdfImages/5c/5c4e0cd9-9221-49e7-877e-1a01ce7032dd.pdf
Old atsko MSDS: https://www.uww.edu/riskmanagement/msds/data/sport-wash_atsko_inc._5.19.86.pdf
Scent killer:
https://www.wildlife.com/uploads/sds-949.pdf
Nikwax:
https://www.rockymountainatvmc.com/docs/MSDS_Nikwax%20Tech%20Wash.pdf
Nikwax TX. Direct https://www.rockymountainatvmc.com/docs/MSDS_Nikwax%20TX%20Direct%20Wash-In.pdf
Tide pure clean https://www.whatsinproducts.com/types/type_detail/1/21089/standard/p%20class=%22p1%22%3ETide%20purclean%20Liquid%20Detergent,%20Unscented-10/21/2016/p%3E/16-033-538
Woolite http://www.rbnainfo.com/getmsds/74082e62-6db3-4021-a2e1-67f82a4ac816

Fabric softener:

Downy https://facilities.ofa.ncsu.edu/files/2016/07/SDS_DOWNY_FABRIC_SOFTENER_.pdf
Dry cleaning: not really relevant to tech clothes so I'll keep it short
Nationwide, 60–65% of dry cleaners use PERC as their primary solvent (1) and most of the remainder use a high-flashpoint hydrocarbon. Other solvents currently used in the US include butylal, siloxane, liquid carbon dioxide, glycol ethers, and water (professional wet cleaning).
http://www.ciscochem.com/assets/perchloroethylene-sds.pdf

pH levels in Washing: neutral pH is 7

Now there is more to how Washing clothing effects the performance. The pH of your water and the detergent have a noticeable impact on clothing.
https://acleanerworld.com/blog/ph-levels-your-laundry-products
A simple set of pH strips will help you understand where your water is at as well as your detergent.
https://youtu.be/3yfIHGlG6fE
Knowing what your washing water and cleaners are at for pH will help you not only ensure your gear is being left unchanged after washing but can also help you in other facets of life!
The easiest way in a home consumer situation of cleaning to raise the pH you add baking soda, to lower it you add vinegar or hydrogen peroxide. Neither of which will harm your gear if you do so correctly.
Vinegar being around 3 and baking soda around 9.

Washing in the field:

If you've spent enough extended time outdoors to where you have needed to wash you clothing a lake river or stream you know that it can be quite effective without any soap.
This is in part to natural surfactants and enzymes but the pH of the water compared to the pH of the oils from your skin working to "clean" your gear. If you feel so inclined you can fairly easily find the pH and other data on the water in the area you'll be in.

Process for modifying material to make the either more hydrophobic or hydrophilic

HYDROPHOBIC:

DWR: is the common understood way of making textiles more hydrophobic. I will be doing a deep dive on this so will keep it in context of the intent of the article. I will need to go into the toxicity of it to be in context.

(Keep your environmental comments and concerns for that write up please)

Gore DWR study: The jacket is assumed to last five years.
https://www.gore-tex.com/sites/default/files/assets/Gore-DWR-LCA-summary-report-151215-2.pdf
The results overwhelmingly point to the use phase as the most significant contributor to the jacket’s toxicity potential: meaning, consumeprofessional use of the garment and application of DWR.
Using a non-fluorinated DWR treatment is the single biggest driver for the toxicity potential impact indicators. Confirming that durability of the jacket in general and of the DWR in this case are key factors to reduce the environmental footprint of outdoor apparel products.
The conclusions of this study do not support the assumption that currently available alternative DWR treatments offer a better environmental and health profile when compared to Gore’s fluorocarbon based DWR. Namely due to their inability to meet current performance expectations.
Conversely, the conclusions of this study do suggest that substituting a shortchain fluorinated treatment with a non-fluorinated DWR treatment, whose performance does not provide sufficiently long lasting water repellency in field use conditions, will result in increased adverse environmental and health effects
MSDS:
Nikwax polar proof
https://ehslegacy.unr.edu/msdsfiles/32451.pdf
Nikwax TX direct
https://www.farnell.com/datasheets/1536440.pdf
Grangers performance repel
https://www.partinfo.co.uk/docs/6772
Gear aid revive x
https://www.nrs.com/assets/downloads/msds/revivex_durable_water_repellant_(ghs).pdf
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/339063755_The_effect_of_weathering_on_per-_and_polyfluoroalkyl_substances_PFASs_from_durable_water_repellent_DWR_clothing

Hydrophilic coatings and modifications of material by chemical process.

https://www.eysan.com.tw/what-is-wicking-fabric-how-does-it-work/
Polyester fabric (poly(ethylene terephthalate)) is a hydrophobic polymer. Meaning polyester it self unmodified in inherently not wicking or absorbant. But there is more to it than just wether or not the material used is hydrophilic or hydrophobic.
"However, pure polyester fabrics have extremely poor hydrophilicity and the clothes produced using such fabrics are uncomfortable because of the poor transportation of moisture vapor from the human body (Alakara et al., 2008, Hou et al., 2013."
"The hydrophilic modification of polyester fabric by the synergetic effect of biological enzymolysis and non-ionic surfactant and applications in cleaner production were systematically investigated. Lipase from P. pastoris was purified using ammonium sulfate. The relative molecular weight of the purified lipase was mainly distributed at about 25 kDa. The enzymatic activity was highest at 60 °C, pH 7.5–8."
Surfactant effect on Polyester https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0959652617313835
http://www.unocalchem.com/polyester-hydrophilic-finishing-agent-characteristics/
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/10607442/#:~:text=Surface%20modification%20of%20polyester%20to,be%20used%20to%20modify%20polyester
As you can see, it is the same types of chemicals we use in washing out gear that they use to change the material to be hydrophilic. Just more aggressive and controlled in the manufacturing process of the yarn and garment.

if anyone has successfully found a good way to make a non hydrophilic garment hydrophilic, or found a way to restore factory performance without destroying the garment I would love to hear about it. I will be playing around myself for a bit here shortly.

But there is much more to how a textile or garment acts than the material it's made from or the coatings/modifications to the material.
From my previous post on material data.
https://www.reddit.com/arcteryx/comments/ruii7o/layering_series_deep_dive_part_2/
Based on a study comparing many different textiles there are some better real world numbers that were found that separated the fiber itself from being the sole contributor to dry times.
Although these are dry times in a controlled environment without any heat or cold applied to the fabric as well as no movement or variable air flow.
Material. Thickness Dry time(h)
Cotton duck* 0.66 5.5
Cotton sheeting. 0.41 5
Cotton lawn* 0.28 2.25
Polyester plain weave 0.30 3
Polyester batiste. 0.20 1
Wool plain weave 0.46 3
Wool single knit 0.81 7
Acrylic plain weave. 0.38 2
Acrylic knit 0.69 5
Nylon knit. 1.02 10.5
Nylon tricot knit. 0.25 1.1
Cotton/polyester knit 0.64 8.75
Polypropylene PW 0.64 3
Polypropylene knit. 1.24 8.75
Nylon/tricot Goretex 0.43 2
As always, your experience is the most important data of all! Please comment, question, contradict, and elaborate on anything I wrote above! This is about getting knowledge out there!

As always, use your gear in anger and have fun out there!

Edit at posting: will be editing this for formatting periodically having written it in a word processor.

I have a number of trade catalogs and books as downloadable PDF files on my site. Needless, they are optimized for viewing, not for printing. All are produced by me from the originals in my personal collection. The original files are spec'd to Amazon and Ingram commercial printing requirements: 300 dpi, either Grayscale or RGB, sized to the various trade book dimensions. And typically of a hefty mb.
While I will continue to post such material for public consumption, I'm also going to monetize the hell out of whatever I can. It costs $$$ to maintain the site, domains, security and of course to hunt for and buy new material.
Therefore and forthwith, I will be adding the high resolution, print ready pdf files via my Payhip store for immediate download. Prices will continue to be reasonable, if not dirt cheap.
I will, as always, go my own way.

Hello, everyone
i was wondering which one of these 5 ram sticks would be the best for my laptop lenovo Legion 5 15ACH6(rtx 3050, ryzen 5 5600H) i want 2 sticks of DDR4, 8 GB of ram with 3200 MHz speeds
https://www.teamgroupinc.com/en/catalog/act.php?act=2&index_id=85
https://www.crucial.com/memory/ddr4/ct8g4sfra32a
https://www.newegg.ca/corsair-8gb-260-pin-ddr4-so-dimm/p/N82E16820236810
https://www.gskill.com/product/2/197/1594019108/F4-3200C22D-16GRS
https://www.kingston.com/datasheets/KF432S20IBK2_16.pdf

I’ve just started learning how to crochet and I’ve never followed a pattern before. I’m trying to make this baby blanket (linked below), but the wording of the instructions confuses me. Can someone help and break it down to more simple terms?
For example, I don’t have any idea how to work this “*Ch 1. Skip next ch. 1 sc in next ch. Rep from to end of chain. Turn. 49 sts.”
https://www.yarnspirations.com/on/demandware.static/-/Sites-master-catalog-spinrite/default/dw58e13a93/PDF/BRC0202-000814M.pdf

The following best practices will help your data management process stay on track:

1. Prioritizing Compliance and Security

Effective data management strategies must incorporate a solid data governance program, especially in companies with distributed data environments comprising various systems. It’s worth noting that IT and data management teams can’t always handle data quality and governance on their own, especially as data security becomes increasingly more important in the 21st century.
To comply with data protection regulations and avoid fines, you’ll need to ensure that the quality of your data remains top-notch and that everyone from executive to junior levels understands the ins and outs of data privacy.

2. Managing Data Access

Verizon’s 2022 Data Breach Incident Report found that 82% of data breaches involve human error, such as phishing attacks or credential theft. The statistics are even worse when remote working is involved, with 20% of organizations admitting they’ve suffered a breach due to a remote worker or remote working practices.
Although employees don’t intentionally put sensitive assets at risk, it still happens. Mitigation strategies include taking a zero trust approach to restrict employees’ access to data assets and assigning permissions only to the data they need. For example, you can assign data team users and business users different access privileges based on their responsibilities, authority, and department.
Access control involves two key components: authentication (verifying the user’s identity) and authorization (determining the user’s level of access). For data access management to work effectively, you’ll need to define a strategy, apply it consistently, and make sure every single employee understands what data access management is and how it affects their daily operations. Collaborating with your entire organization and communicating employees’ role-based clearance levels also improves data governance.

3. Making Your Data Discoverable

Modern organizations use large volumes of data in different formats across multiple roles and locations, which only makes the subject of discoverability more difficult to navigate. Your organization as a whole needs a single source of truth that all departments can rely on. Without discoverability, users cannot be certain that the data is reliable, accessible, and up-to-date. Siloed and inaccessible data is not only a barrier to productivity, but it often lacks context, meaning that employees and business leaders can’t rely on it for effective decision-making. ‍
Data discovery can easily become a labor-intensive task, which is why data teams use data discovery tools to help clear away the mist. These tools provide the scalability to support increasing data volumes and read requests and give employees visibility over accurate data in a unified, easy-to-understand format, such as Data Catalog. Advanced data discovery tools have comprehensive tagging and filtering capabilities to deliver quick NLP search results, so you can access the data you need for dashboards, BI and analytics.

4. Selecting the Right Solution for Your Use Cases

You can get much-needed assistance in gaining visibility over all your data, tech stack, and additional technologies from a single data management software. While it might take some time to research the right one for your business, it is worth the evaluation effort, as data management software brings together all your data pipeline in one place.
Data management platforms like Aggua provide data teams with an all-in-one view of your data flow and centralize catalog, lineage, cost metrics, governance, observability, and more. Aggua enables you to see all changes to your data, who made them, and when they occurred to provide complete visibility over your data as a single source of truth.

Aggua: Enhancing Visibility Over Data Management

By enhancing operational effectiveness and facilitating improved decision-making, a data management strategy can assist organizations in gaining a competitive advantage in their industry. Well-managed data may help organizations become more efficient, flexible and enable them to recognize market trends and act more rapidly to seize new business opportunities. A high level of data management helps transform organizations into data-driven entities that better leverage their data and analytics to move at speed of light towards their business goals.

Hello! Divine Right's Trip by Gurney Norman is currently free in the Last Whole Earth Catalog [Link]. I originally moved it into PDF format for my Southern Literature class because I found it difficult to read in the original catalog. Hopefully this post might help others who had similar issues when reading this story. Let me know if there are any issues accessing it!
Original Catalog: https://archive.org/details/B-001-013-719/page/n3/mode/1up?view=theater
Divine Right's Trip by Gurney Norman Free PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mlrOx4VQh3q1GQQ-8NeQVBLA13BzlYP_/view?usp=sharing
Google Doc version: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZwgWTqIHcKKo_qQQ86zoDs023ro6aqOWr4w0DnVD5CE/edit?usp=sharing

Hello! Divine Right's Trip by Gurney Norman is currently free in the Last Whole Earth Catalog [Link]. I originally moved it into PDF format for my Southern Literature class because I found it difficult to read in the original catalog. Hopefully this post might help others who had similar issues when reading this story. Let me know if there are any issues accessing it!
Original Catalog: https://archive.org/details/B-001-013-719/page/n3/mode/1up?view=theater
Divine Right's Trip by Gurney Norman Free PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mlrOx4VQh3q1GQQ-8NeQVBLA13BzlYP_/view?usp=sharing
Google Doc version: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZwgWTqIHcKKo_qQQ86zoDs023ro6aqOWr4w0DnVD5CE/edit?usp=sharing

Hello! Divine Right's Trip by Gurney Norman is currently free in the Last Whole Earth Catalog [Link]. I originally moved it into PDF format for my Southern Literature class because I found it difficult to read in the original catalog. Hopefully this post might help others who had similar issues when reading this story. Let me know if there are any issues accessing it!
Original Catalog: https://archive.org/details/B-001-013-719/page/n3/mode/1up?view=theater
Divine Right's Trip by Gurney Norman Free PDF: https://drive.google.com/file/d/1mlrOx4VQh3q1GQQ-8NeQVBLA13BzlYP_/view?usp=sharing
Google Doc version: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ZwgWTqIHcKKo_qQQ86zoDs023ro6aqOWr4w0DnVD5CE/edit?usp=sharing

Clare Area Spring Tree Sales 2023
Buy bare root tree seedlings, shrub seedlings, fruit trees, and native wildflower seeds. Order deadlines are usually late March to Early April.
Clare County's plants this year include: red pine, white pine, red cedar, white cedar, white spruce, black spruce, American larch (tamarack), sugar maple, silver maple, white oak, tulip poplar, black walnut, papewhite birch, black cherry, sycamore, eastern redbud, common elderberry, ninebark, red-osier dogwood, winterberry (holly), apples, crabapple, cherries, prune, and nectarine.
Unusual plants: Gladwin County has strawberries and horseradish. Isabella County has peaches, tuliptree, and magnolia. Midland County has spicebush, witch-hazel, and ginkgo.
​
Clare CD website , order form
Gladwin CD website , order form
Isabella CD website , order form
Midland CD website , order form
Crawford-Roscommon CD website , order form
Mecosta-Osceola CD website , order form
Missaukee CD website , order form