Yea, I would say so too. Only ALOT older. :) Funny you would see that Patti. Maybe because its about taking alot of pictures in different ways. I like the mirror picture. I didn't even notice it right off although I saw two images. Kinda cool affect.

Terribletom, I appreciate your caution in responding, and I thank you for your diplomatic concern for my feelings. I certainly can understand your fear that I might rip haphazardly into wiring I don't fully comprehend, then go about my business till the house burns down. But I've come here to learn, and my skin is thick, so forgive me if I press ahead. "I (or others) could shoot from the hip about some of your specific questions." And I thank you for your interpretation of the cut red wire. You apparently are right about the PO using a piece of 14-3 when he actually needed 14-2; had I noticed that the red wire was clipped on the switch box side as well, I would have realized the red was just a short span of dead wire--and that would have answered my question about why it was cut short instead of being capped off like the white wire. And I suspect at some point somebody would have suggested that my confusion about why the PO used a single-pole switch (note my question mark in my initial description) might be because it isn't a single-pole, that perhaps 3-way switches in the 1980s looked like single-pole switches with a wire coming out of their backsides. So that clears up THAT question. "Without fully mapping out the circuitry and assessing the whole situation, any answer or set of answers would be pure conjecture--potentially dangerous guesswork." I understand that. And I realize that by describing the circuitry rather than posting my diagram of it I managed to scare and confuse people, possibly making my wiring project sound more complicated than it is. I HAVE mapped out the circuitry and have presented it all here as concisely as I could so that more knowledgeable heads than mine could assess it. The only piece I've left out is the origin of the 12-2 from Junction box 2. I know the wire to the basement has to connect back to the circuit box, but I assume that it also connects to the switch by the front doorway (the one inside the wall that I'm leaving alone)--because it HAS to. For one thing, in order for all 3 switches to work together, that front switch cannot be an island; for another, that switch has to connect to the second light source (whether it be the overhead or the side lights), because I only have 1 set of K&T wiring exposed, and clearly the overhead functions independently from the side lights. I can (and should) go down to the basement and trace that connection. But it has to be there. Otherwise, why involve junction box 2 in this at all? "Moreover, your description of the problem(s) betrays a lack of understanding of the basics of house wiring." Could you please elaborate? If it is because I used the terms "positive" and "negative" instead of hot and neutral, I apologize. I'm also aware that I used "beam" instead of "stud" at one point. And, having had my "eureka" moment, I am relieved to realize there are no single-pole switches involved here. I've tried very hard to be clear but know that precise vocabulary is important in technical explanations. I need to know what I'm missing, because I'm obviously not explaining myself adequately. "you're planning to move some switch boxes and rework what they control. That raises the issue of 'abandonment'." I am planning to move 2 switches, but I'm not sure I have the wherewithal to rework what they control, nor is that my goal. There will be no abandonment here. I'm not moving either junction box 1 or 2 (nor do I really want to fiddle with their contents)--just including them in my explanation in order to present "the whole situation." I need to place a switch by the door to the outside, connect it to another switch 3 feet away on the same wall (by the door to the back hall), move the 14-3 coming thru the floor from its current location to the new wall, extend the new wiring around the corner back to the 2 junction boxes, insulate the wall with the new switches before the carpenter (he didn't get to that wall last Sunday) drywalls that short section. No drywalling is being done at this time on the wall with the junction boxes. "And make no mistake about it: that's exactly what is at issue--a rewiring of the room and, perhaps, adjacent dependencies." But if I don't alter the contents of the junction boxes, I can't affect dependencies, right? The only function coming thru junction box 1 is some of the overhead lighting. I don't believe any of the outlets or the back hall light would be affected by moving the 12-2 out of junction box 2 (which might well be the most sensible thing to do, given how crammed that box is), but right now we intend to leave that box alone--just lengthen the run of 12-2 so it can reach the new switch. "But re-routing and re-working K&T is a perilous business at best." I've noticed that mentioning K&T does seem to make folks nervous. I would LOVE to get rid of the K&T in this room, but that's a much bigger project than we can manage at this time. All I want to do is to confine the K&T in junction box 1. And in order to do that, I have to understand what's going on with the "white wire" leg of this circuit. What I want more than anything is to replace the existing mess coming out of the bottom of junction box 1 with a single 14-2 (or 12-2, if that is the better option) and feed it, along with the 12-2 from junction box 2 thru the holes in my studs over to the new switch box locations. But I can't do that until I make sense of the current configuration. I don't own a camera. My DS took the pictures of the existing wiring. Would it help if I asked him to take a picture of the diagram I made in order to explain all this? Would you feel more comfortable if I went down into the basement and traced the path of the 12-2 back to the switch by the front doorway (yes, I know I need to do this anyway--and yes, I KNOW it would make you most comfortable if I said "I'm hiring a licensed electrician")?

Well I'm still smiling, Glenda. I thoroughly enjoyed talking with Parke today and it was a real hoot. (I admit that I did "play" with him a bit.) First of all, I want you to know that I think Parke is a charming young man and a son for a Mom to be proud about. I'd seen him several times over the past month or so as he whizzed past my office and I knew that he looked familiar to me. Today was actually the first chance that I had to stop him and we had a long talk. I thought I recognized him from photos that you posted but decided today that I wanted to confirm it. So...I had a very pleasant break in my day and a visit with a very nice and polite young man. That was a treat for me too and I hope you pass that along to Parke. And honestly Glenda, I thought you 'd mentioned here or either told me at some point that Parke used to post at the KT. In any case, when he kept blushing (Parke blushes!) and asking today how I knew him and you...I did tell him to ask him Mom to explain. So I dont think I divulged any "secrets" and you can breath easy. LOL

Happy belated birthday Rita! I hope you finally got warmed up - I've been away from the computer for 2 days and the last I heard you were trying to stay warm. I hope you were ble to celebrate your birthday.