[Lindengardens] Two new policies

Thu Jun 10 14:35:35 EDT 2010

I am born of a race of eastern european bohemian anti-soviet diffidents. And
we've had episodes of puniitive paranoia-inducing aggression toward our own
citizens in this country, too (see eugenics, around 1920s'; it's popularity
as a movement at harvard).

My inflammatory rhetoric is how I communicate; jousting discourse is not
meant personally, merely as a legalistic search for precedents and
counterexamples. Not that I am a lawyer yet, so no doubt I do it poorly, but
I doubt I was making false analagoies and irrational leaps. I can write you
personally on the more subtle points of comparisoni between anything in
present situation and those I compared it to at length, if you length if you
like, onc eI'm done job-hunting. That you are distiurbed by my feeling of a
need, as you put it, doesn't relaly affect me or any of us. If I sat down
and told you my family history and involvement in the massacres of Siberia
and how my grandfather won vice-presidentship of a free lithuania from the
totalitarian soviets perhaps your jaw would drop too. All I know is: my
parents warned me that it's the little freedoms that get taken away first,
and the internal guilt that builds uipw tihout being spoken of. I have yet
to see someone cite a medical study on second-hand smoke to convince me (I
mean full-scale, pubmed-available, medical study) and in meantime I have no
compunctions about smoking on the curb right in front of my house with my
assorted medley of friends. Alan Brandt's *The Cigarette Century* as well as
a number of other authoritative historical books on drug prohibition remain
in my apartment for the borrowing, should someone wish to actually talk
about hte issue  on a level interesting.

Lastly: "Nevertheless, as a fellow-resident of our building, I do urge you
abandon your inflammatory rhetoric, even when couched in apologies, and
simply defer to the wishes of the building's great majority of owners." hang
on! I'm not violationg my lease, not at present. so: fuck no! why would I?

love,
-ona k.

On Thu, Jun 10, 2010 at 2:08 PM, Martin Marks <mmmarks at mit.edu> wrote:

> Dear Ona,
>
> I have not met you and am sorry for that. Also, I appreciate your queries
> about musical noise.
>
> Nevertheless, as a fellow-resident of our building, I do urge you abandon
> your inflammatory rhetoric, even when couched in apologies, and simply defer
> to the wishes of the building's great majority of owners. All we were
> talking about was smoking in the hallways and immediately outside!
>
> I am particularly disturbed that you felt the need to compare the current
> views of smoking, scientific and otherwise, toward one of the most horrific
> chapters in twentieth-century history, to which few things, if any, can be
> truly comparable. This is how reasoned disagreements are quickly perverted
> into nonsensical flames—by false analogies and irrational leaps.
>
> Like Alex, I will refrain from further emails on any aspect of this matter.
>
> Sincerely,
> *mmm*
> *
> *
> Martin M. Marks
> Senior Lecturer
> MIT, Music and Theater Arts Section, 10-268
> 77 Massachusetts Ave.
> Cambridge MA, 02139
>
> Office phone: 617-253-4967
> Mobile phone: 617-851-8955
> Email: *mmmarks at mit.edu*
>
>
>
>
>
> On Jun 10, 2010, at 11:42 AM, Ona Kondrotas wrote:
>
> Alex,
> I'm glad it was offensive; that was what it was intended to be though I
> think I shouldn't have been aiming for that and got carried away. I
> apologize for getting so fiercely into battble. But by the way, nothing in
> the pharmacokinetics of nicotine and tar when burned, inhaled, and then
> exhaled by various capacities of human lungs in areas of various ventilation
> is 'obvious'. least the cumulative contribution of such air quality to
> carcinogencity in idiosyncratically predispoxsed individuals. I can lend you
> several elucidating books on this subject -- most published by harvard press
> in last few years, thus reliable -- should you be interested. don't make
> asinine remarks regarding topics not in your own area of specialty. it was
> pretty obvious to the nazis that the jews were inferior, too. then think on
> eugenics. much like the current war on our bloodstreams and consumables:
> grounded in 'facts' but largely a political venture.
>
> let's all just try to be decent to one another.
> once again, let me know if my music gets too loud; i suspect i play it
> louder than anyone else in the house.
>
> -ona k.
>
> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 10:40 PM, Alex Ramos <alexisramos at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Wow; that was really offensive.
>>
>> I think it's pretty obvious that any kind of second-hand smoke is
>> detrimental to one's health.  This isn't an exhaustive study but here's some
>> primary literature showing that outdoor secondhand smoke decreases health in
>> children (Figure 2 specifically).
>>
>> -Alex
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 9:29 PM, Ona Kondrotas <ona.faster.k at gmail.com>wrote:
>>
>>> Dear rdhayman,
>>> I am flabbergasted that you even know the word 'balderdash' whilst
>>> misspelling 'stoopid' (correctly spelled 'stupid')(. And sir: I don't ask
>>> stupid questions; I merely encounter stupidity and banal people or, perhaps,
>>> fascist population groups. Thus it was
>>>
>>> Speaking of, I would challenge anyone to show me a conclusive,
>>> exhausative study indicating that outdoor second-hand smoke is in any way
>>> harmful to you. Whether it is 'offensive' or not is irrelevant.
>>>
>>> you all sound like fags, and I don't mAean like the gay friends of mine
>>> who insist on smoking on the roof. at least they're not, say, evegetarians
>>> or nine-to-fivers.
>>>
>>> love to all,
>>> -ona k.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Jun 9, 2010 at 11:04 AM, <rdhayman at aim.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> You don't sound bitchy. I mean, for fuck's sake, "can we smoke on the
>>>> roof?" Balderdash! What a stoopid question. Who gives a shit if most of ur
>>>> friends smoke. Gimme a break.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Candy Malina <candyjoy at earthlink.net>
>>>> To: lindengardens <lindengardens at mit.edu>
>>>> Sent: Wed, Jun 9, 2010 10:50 am
>>>> Subject: Re: [Lindengardens] Two new policies
>>>>
>>>>  No one should be walking on the roof; it is not good for the surface
>>>> of it, and will mean that we have to replace the roof sooner, which is a big
>>>> expense.
>>>>
>>>> Common areas would be the hallways and foyer (and laundry and storage
>>>> rooms), the parking lot and the front yard up to the sidewalk, which I
>>>> imagine is the line of our property.  Your unit is your private area; people
>>>> can smoke in there.
>>>>
>>>> (I am not writing as the "official" word...but I do know that the roof
>>>> is supposed to be off limits, and as an owner, I am invested in its lasting
>>>> as long as it can.  And I am personally very bothered by smoke coming into
>>>> my unit through the windows, or having to walk through cigarette smoke in
>>>> the hallways.)
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for your cooperation!
>>>>
>>>> Candy
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>  -----Original Message-----
>>>> From: Ona Kondrotas
>>>> Sent: Jun 9, 2010 9:54 AM
>>>> To: lindengardens at mit.edu
>>>> Subject: Re: [Lindengardens] Two new policies
>>>>
>>>> Is the roof a common area?
>>>> Where do the delinations of the outdoor common areas end? All my friends
>>>> smoke.
>>>> Yours,
>>>> -ona k.
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, Jun 8, 2010 at 10:30 PM, Charlie Denison <cdenison at comcast.net>wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Hello Linden Gate owners and tenants,
>>>>>
>>>>> As a result of yesterday's Condo Association Annual Meeting, we now
>>>>> have
>>>>> two new policies regarding common areas:
>>>>>
>>>>> 1. Grilling is no longer allowed in the outdoor common areas, except
>>>>> with the permission of the Board of Trustees
>>>>> 2. Smoking is not allowed in the outdoor or indoor common areas
>>>>>
>>>>> If you have any questions, please feel free to contact me or one of the
>>>>> other Trustees. Thanks!
>>>>>
>>>>> Charlie
>>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>>> Lindengardens mailing list
>>>>> Lindengardens at mit.edu
>>>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lindengardens
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>>   _______________________________________________
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Lindengardens mailing list
>>>>
>>>> Lindengardens at mit.edu
>>>>
>>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lindengardens
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> _______________________________________________
>>>> Lindengardens mailing list
>>>> Lindengardens at mit.edu
>>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lindengardens
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>> _______________________________________________
>>> Lindengardens mailing list
>>> Lindengardens at mit.edu
>>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lindengardens
>>>
>>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> Lindengardens mailing list
>> Lindengardens at mit.edu
>> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lindengardens
>>
>>
> _______________________________________________
> Lindengardens mailing list
> Lindengardens at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lindengardens
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Lindengardens mailing list
> Lindengardens at mit.edu
> http://mailman.mit.edu/mailman/listinfo/lindengardens
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://mailman.mit.edu/pipermail/lindengardens/attachments/20100610/bbf9f357/attachment.htm