While it is true that all mortar joints will allow water to enter the cavity the type of mortar and how the joint is tooled will make a substantial difference in the amount of water that enters the cavity. Because the escape of water from the cavity depends so much on how clean the cavity is, the type of brick ties and how carefully they were installed, how well the cavity was flashed, and how good the weep holes are, it is best to minimize the amount of water entering the cavity. There can be no disagreement regarding what kind of joint limits water in the cavity.

Thank you laxsupermom for following up on patma's comments here and elsewhere. I'm certain this has been mentioned for years but it would be most useful for those searching the threads if people raving or complaining about their flooring would include the brand, name and model of the flooring they are talking about. There are SOOO MANY brands around and even those can have manufacturing changes over the years. Not all cork will fail with UV exposure just like not all cork will fail when exposed to water. There are many companies which promote their protective coatings with UV inhibitors. Unless someone spells it out here, one needs to do their homework to figure out which brand will work best in their particular setting. Most major manufacturer's put out good / better / best product offerings to meet market price points and distribution goals. Just saying cork or 'product X' is good/bad really doesn't help anyone. There is a reason cork has been used as flooring for centuries. The point of these forums seems to be figuring out which ones work best in different situations. laxsupermom is the only person responding to this thread (including me) who comes close to giving a useful answer. Basically, glue downs for wet areas - no floating floors. UV protective coating will help but not eliminate the sun damage problem. If it was me, I'd look into getting the floor you want but also investigate UV window films to protect the interior. There have been amazing advances in recent years - the weird tints are gone and you can get very good protection from light colored ceramic films that don't even look like they are on the window.

Absolutely get rid of that plastic. Plastic as a "weed" barrier is the worst material there is to use in any landscape. Plastic keeps moisture and air from getting into the soil and can cause that soil to become anaerobic and smell putrid. While plastic has been touted as being somewhat better at keeping "weeds" from growing a thick (4 to 6 inches) mulch will do a better job but still allow thye moisture to drain off and air to infiltrate the soil. kimmq is kimmsr

There have been a lot of advances in building science and construction techniques over the years. Engineers, architects and building trades have worked together to evolve the technology and know-how to significantly enhance energy efficiency. Newer but larger houses properly built provide much greater temperature comfort using substantially less energy than much smaller homes built as recently as 20-40 years ago. Structures older than 20-25 years that haven't had work done to add properly sealing windows and doors, enhance insulation, and seal wall and ceiling passages (like electrical switches and sockets and boxes for ceiling lights) are an energy use nightmare. Such problems can be partially ameliorated with retrofit work to provide what's lacking (better windows and doors, air sealing and insulation) and to replace older energy hog HVAC equipment and appurtenances (like leaky ducts) with the substantially tighter and more efficient equipment that's sold today. So it's not true "the larger the house, the larger the carbon footprint". Rather, it's "the older the house, the larger the carbon footprint". And many will say, "well, that doesn't apply to my house" but if it's older and mostly in "as originally built" condition, it does.