# That's just not fair CK Haven. **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [August 6, 2005, 2:03pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871 "2005-08-06T14:03:59Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![Podkayne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/p/edb3f5/32.png) [@Podkayne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Podkayne)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 10:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/301 "2005-08-10T22:11:14Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > The more I think about that, the more it makes sense to me. Just posting this to let you know. Thanks. I’m really glad that I said something that was helpful. It certainly was a helpful realization for me. 🙂 Now, even when I’m embroiled in intense debates, it doesn’t become this all-consuming THING in my life like it did before, because I know I can walk away from it if need be. I don’t post because I _have_ to, I post because I _like_ to, and it’s a much more pleasant experience. > [@](#): > > t isn’t just a hot-button word. It is a word chosen specifically for its destructive power. When it comes to the point that someone says he hates capitalists, and you cannot explain why capitalists hate him back because it is a hijack, then it has gone beyond mere mudslinging to a deliberate bandwagon attack. It is as though the writer in that thread thought to himself, “Okay, in what way can I most damage Lib for commenting on my remark? Hey, I know. I’ll sling that same word that a couple of other posters do and contribute to the repetition of it.” Do you and **commasense** have some history? Because I gotta tell you, **Lib** , that sounds like disturbingly complex paranoid fantasy. If **commasense** set a trap with the capitalism remark, then deliberately used the word “off-topic” _specifically to hurt you,_ well, then that’s just bizarre. And it’s still troubling if it only _feels_ like that to you. It seems that you’re posting from a kinda scary place. If anyone accusing you of hijacking or going off-topic and it feels to you like “nigger” to a black man, then . . . whoa. We’re either going to need a sticky that tells posters not to use those words to you (fat chance!), or you need some time away from the boards until those words no longer have that kind of power, over you. People _are_ going to say them to you, usually not with the intention of hurting your feelings. Almost every regular poster is asked from time to time not to take a thread off-topic, myself included. That you have a reputation (earned fairly or not, applicable to your persent posting habits or not) means you’re going to hear it more often. If it is really that hurtful to you, you need to get away from it. You asked me to try to put myself in your place, and I have to say, in your place, I would step away from the Boards for a while, in order to cool your feelings, and also the feelings that others have toward you. Your fortunes on the board seem like they’re cylical; I think this is a time when things are getting to be too intense, and a vacation might be in order. I don’t at all mean to try to chase you off, but the Board should be a fun place you go to learn and play, not a place to be tormented, to feel that no matter what you do, you’ll be abused and scorned. That’s just my 2 cents. ---
**Author:** ![EddyTeddyFreddy](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/eddyteddyfreddy/32/18796_2.png) [@EddyTeddyFreddy](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/EddyTeddyFreddy)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 11:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/302 "2005-08-10T23:05:32Z")
**Lib** , take this as coming from someone who does _not_ hold you in contempt or wish harm to you: I believe that what **Podkayne** just said is a superb analysis of what’s going on with you and the SDMB. I echo the suggestion that you take some time off and regain some perspective. You’re reading way more into what other people are saying to you than is there. Yeh, you annoy the piss out of me at times, but I would hate to see you go over the edge into a meltdown that led to your permanent departure. There’s a nasty gut feeling I’m getting from what you’re saying lately that you are heading that way. You’re smart enough to see it too; I very much hope you’re smart enough to act on the warning signs. ---
**Author:** ![Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/spectre_of_pithecanthropus/32/12343_2.png) [@Spectre\_of\_Pithecanthropus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Spectre_of_Pithecanthropus)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/303 "2005-08-10T23:09:45Z")
Seeing CKDH addressed personally in the title, I can’t help but think of that scene from _Philadelphia Story_ where a drunken Mike Connors (J. Stewart) staggers toward CKDH’s house bellowing, “C.K. Dexter Haven!! C.K. Dexter Haven! C.K. Dexter HAVEN!!!” And shortly thereafter comes the observation that champagne is a great “levelleler” ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 11:09pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/304 "2005-08-10T23:09:54Z")
> [@tomndebb](#): > > **eleanor** , according to the _Columbia Journalism Review_, [you lose](http://www.cjr.org/tools/lc/olderthan.asp). > > I’m sure that folks can find competing citations to back up each side, but your blanket “correction” was in error. > > Sorry. Fair enough-I could see it going either way. I am not about to start duelling citations…blech! ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 11:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/305 "2005-08-10T23:13:45Z")
> [@SlyFrog](#): > > I’m on their side. I remember to this day a college prof noting that the way to figure out this construction is to “complete the thought.” E.g. I drink more wine than he - I drink more wine than he does. I drink more wine than him - I drink more wine than I drink him. > > The second formulation of the second sentence may not be 100% correct, but it certainly made it stick in my memory. Must preview. I learned the same rule and should have waited a moment before I posted. Anyway, our foray into grammar really doesn’t change a thing here. On with the show! ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [August 10, 2005, 11:34pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/306 "2005-08-10T23:34:29Z")
> [@Liberal](#): > > > [@Podkayne](#): > > > > Part of my becoming a happier internet user has been the realization that I never need to make a point on a message board. If I decide not to post, even if my post would have been truly, truly brilliant . . . Well, somehow, life marches on. I’m still the same person I was, just, perhaps, not as visibly. If you seriously think that every point you make needed to be made, well, I think you need to take a step back. > > The more I think about that, the more it makes sense to me. Just posting this to let you know. Thanks. For what it’s worth, this is, I think, a big part of why **lissener** ultimately got banned. I’m friends with him off the boards, and he would regularly ask me how it is that, despite the fact that my opinions are equally as strong as his, not to mention my ability to argue them, I didn’t (and don’t) get sucked into protracted back-and-forth slugfests with intransigent opponents. He kept getting himself into rhetorical quagmires, where the only options were obsessive semantic nitpicking or escalations of intensity, with predictably negative results; and he was genuinely curious to know how I was avoiding it, because he wanted to reduce his own stress level. I told him, more than once, that I make no attempt to directly argue with my adversary with the intent of changing his mind. I recognize that that is a virtually impossible objective, most of the time. People are only partly rational, and most of us believe fervently in things that we _felt_ to be true prior to actually _reasoning our way_ into those beliefs. As such, it’s a pointless exercise to try to reason them into another point of view. And therefore, when I am debating, I am, out of politeness, responding to the other person, but _with a third party audience in mind._ I do not have the goal of forcing the other person into saying, “Yes, you are right, and I am wrong,” because it will never (well, almost never) happen. Instead, I wish only to make what I consider to be my strongest and most important points so that my perspective is clear to an undecided observer, who, I hope, will align himself with my worldview. I have no control over this, any more than I have control over the worldview of the person with whom I’m directly arguing, so all I can do is be clear, strong, and articulate, and then… and here’s the important bit… _stop._ As many times as I explained this, **lissener** never quite got it. He would say, “Yes, I see what you’re saying, and I agree that’s healthy, but I feel like if I just say it again in a slightly different way, or if I’m just clearer, then people will get where I’m coming from,” with the unspoken implication that they will then agree, and he will therefore prevail. I kept telling him that this was a fool’s quest, and he would agree, superficially, but he remained in the grip of the compulsion to respond, just one more time, every time somebody else offered a counterargument. He _needed_ to win the debate, to the point that he was not just willing to undermine his own position by over-arguing it but helpless to do anything else. Food, I hope, for thought. ---
**Author:** ![eleanorigby](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/ee7513/32.png) [@eleanorigby](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/eleanorigby)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 12:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/307 "2005-08-11T00:16:48Z")
Excellent points, **cervaise** and **Podkayne** --I heartily concur. I learned over time that it is pointless to get sucked into a flame war or in butting heads–the Internet is an amazing time suck. Moderation in all things seems to be the best way to enjoy it while keeping my sanity. YMMV. 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Billdo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/billdo/32/315_2.png) [@Billdo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Billdo)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 2:09am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/308 "2005-08-11T02:09:36Z")
**Liberal** , looking at that [“stores that rearrange themselves”](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showthread.php?t=329541) thread, I think I see some of the reason that some of your posts tend to drag threads away from their topics. The way I read that thread, and the way that most of the other posters appeared to view it based on their posts, was that it was about bitching about (or possibly defending) stores that rearrange their merchandise. It wasn’t about politics, it was a gripe session. As part of the griping, in post 15, his third post in the thread **commasense** made a throw-away line about hating capitalists. I, and I believe most people, didn’t see that line as an invitation to discuss the relative merits of various politico-economic systems, but just a disgusted line in a bitch about the thing that pissed him off that day. Indeed, commasense confirmed that in his response to you in post 24. In post 19, however, you took that throw-away about capitalists as a serious comment, and undertook to defend the capitalist system. In response, commasense clarified in post 24 that he wasn’t interested in a political debate and indeed was quite happy in a capitalist system. You shot back in post 31, angrily suggesting his comment was “off-topic bullshit” and calling him a “sanctimonious twat.” The reason that the problem developed, in my opinion, is that you misjudged the thrust of the thread, and made a post outside that general area of thrust. Admittedly, commasense brought up capitalism as a topic, but that wasn’t what the thread was really about. When commasense pointed out that he didn’t intend to introduce capitalism as the general topic of discussion, you got frustrated. So far, the thread has stayed on the main topic, rearrangements of store merchandise, with your comment on a marginally related topic not having drawn much discussion. All too often, however, you make comments about topics that are somewhat connected with the topic or posts of a thread, but have nothing to do with the direction that the prior posters (and particularly the OP) seem to be taking the thread. Quite frequently, this shifts the direction of the thread either to the point you raised, or more annoyingly, to a discussion of whether your post was appropriate in the thread. The thread linked in the OP is a good example of this. Before you were involved, the posters were having a Cafe Society discussion of the humor and presentation of the Daily Show. Your post number 21 vividly introduced the, admittedly related, topic of the politics of the Daily Show. Although a discussion of the politics of the Daily Show can be an interesting topic (for those who aren’t sick to death of such discussions), and might perhaps be appropriate for Cafe Society, that wasn’t what all of the previous posters were having. Ultimately, this derailed the thread and took it (via a temporary lockdown) from Cafe Society to Great Debates, which is what many of the earlier posters wished to avoid. In both of those cases, and numerous others, you saw issues that you wished to discuss that touched on but were outside what the other posters were discussing. Rather than understanding the thrust of where the other posters were going and confining your posts to the general direction of the thread – or starting a new thread if you felt the need to bring in your area – you posted an eye-catching post to bring the conversation to your point. Frequently, your comments are vibrant enough that the discussion quickly shifts to your point, or you yourself. Although there is nothing that requires threads to go where the early posters want, and hijacks have caused some of the most hilarious moments here on the boards, it seems a basic rule of politeness to respect the subject and thrust of a thread that is going along nicely. When someone repeatedly posts comments that change the direction of a thread (especially if those comments are on a limited range of subjects), people start getting frustrated. **Liberal** , I don’t know whether you see as I do that quite a few of your posts tend not to fall in the general parameters of threads established by the early posters, and how disruptive that can be. Although there is no rule requiring us to post along the lines that the prior posters have established, repeatedly and intentionally pulling threads in new directions is, in my view, discourteous at the least. If you do not see how disruptive some of your posts can be and why they seem to derail threads, I would suggest you look harder at where posters seem to be going before you post, and when your comments seem to draw fire, ask yourself whether they they were a necessary digression from the prior discussion, or could have been more profitably been made elsewhere (or not at all). ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 2:37am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/309 "2005-08-11T02:37:43Z")
> [@Cervaise](#): > > I told him, more than once, that I make no attempt to directly argue with my adversary with the intent of changing his mind… > > As many times as I explained this, **lissener** never quite got it. He would say, “Yes, I see what you’re saying, and I agree that’s healthy, but I feel like if I just say it again in a slightly different way, or if I’m just clearer, then people will get where I’m coming from,” with the unspoken implication that they will then agree, and he will therefore prevail. I kept telling him that this was a fool’s quest, and he would agree, superficially, but he remained in the grip of the compulsion to respond, just one more time, every time somebody else offered a counterargument. He _needed_ to win the debate, to the point that he was not just willing to undermine his own position by over-arguing it but helpless to do anything else. Another way of thinking about it: It really shouldn’t be about people getting where you’re coming from. It would be better to attempt to focus on the underlying issue, comparing your perspective to other hypothetical ones. Think about whether the gap is do to differences in underlying assumptions or values and whether empirical evidence might settle the matter, at least for a disinterested third party. Check your ego at the door. You look better if you can adapt your POV to new information anyway, as opposed to tediously defending a fixed position. ---
**Author:** ![Guinastasia](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/guinastasia/32/5751_2.png) [@Guinastasia](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Guinastasia)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 2:59am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/310 "2005-08-11T02:59:15Z")
**Lib** , listen to **Billdo** and **Cervaise** , for they are wise. And what **Podkayne** and **EddyTeddyFreddy** suggested. If you’re so emotionally involved, to the point that someone asking you politely (or even not so politely) to stay on topic, that it makes you feel stabbed and wounded and hurt-then you need to step back. This place is supposed to be fun and hopefully, we’ll learn something. If it starts making you feel hurt and angry, well, is it really worth it? ---
**Author:** ![dps\_reality](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/258eb7/32.png) [@dps\_reality](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dps_reality)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 4:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/311 "2005-08-11T04:27:40Z")
Regarding the aisle-switching thread: it seems to me that\*\* Liberal’s\*\* comment was more off-topic than **Commasense’s,** even though the latter was the first to bring politics into it. Allow me to explain. Sorry, no time to explain, i’ll sum up. The topic: certain retail outlets sometimes put thier customers though hell. **Commasense** brings up capitalists (not capitalism) to point out that they are the reason certain retail outlets sometimes put thier customers though hell. From my POV this is still on-topic. Whether or not this phenomenon results from the actions of capitalists is tangential, but not quite off-topic. **Liberal** points out that said customers would be put through a much more acute version of hell if they lived in a communist society. He then insults anyone who might still prefer communism or disparage capitalists. I can see how this is slightly on-topic. \*\* Commasense \*\*criticised capitalists, so it’s only fair that someone should criticise communists. Nevertheless, we’ve now lost the context of the discussion, therefore we’ve crossed that fine line into off-topic territory. Some responses that address the tangential remark while staying on-topic might be: - this phenomenon doesn’t exist, therefore cannot be brought on by capitalists - this phenomenon is antithetical/unrelated to capitalism, therefore it was not brought on by capitalists - this phenomenon was indeed brought on by capitalists, but it is a good thing - etc. Some responses that address the tangential remark while going off-topic might be: - this phenomenon was indeed brought on by capitalists, but a communist society would be a very bad place to live - people who criticise capitalists are communists, and communists suck - etc. Just my 2 cents (which proabably make no sense). I have no opinion about\*\* Liberal \*\*in general. I’m just sayin’. I guess that means I’m the one who’s going off-topic here. ---
**Author:** ![wring](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/w/838e76/32.png) [@wring](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/wring)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 4:30am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/312 "2005-08-11T04:30:31Z")
the glue from the dead horse has dried up and degenerated. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 4:33am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/313 "2005-08-11T04:33:18Z")
My last post actually veared away from the pitting either Lib or Dexter. Apologies. ---
**Author:** ![treis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/bc79bd/32.png) [@treis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/treis)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 5:27am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/314 "2005-08-11T05:27:14Z")
This is like the Star Trek episode where the Enterprise was caught in a time loop and experienced the same collision each time until they figured out how to prevent it. We have been down this road before and it leads to the same ending. We are just coming upon the **Liberal** coming to an understanding with his antagonists and promising to change for the future part. Next is the 3-6 month period of good **Liberal** followed by another month or two of slowly worsening behavior. Then about 6 months from now this same pit thread will re-emerge and the cycle will begin again. Perhaps this will be the time the cycle is broken but I am not keeping my hopes up. ---
**Author:** ![Hunter\_Hawk](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/50afbb/32.png) [@Hunter\_Hawk](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Hunter_Hawk)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 8:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/315 "2005-08-11T08:00:59Z")
> [@treis](#): > > This is like the Star Trek episode where the Enterprise was caught in a time loop and experienced the same collision each time until they figured out how to prevent it. We have been down this road before and it leads to the same ending. We are just coming upon the **Liberal** coming to an understanding with his antagonists and promising to change for the future part. Next is the 3-6 month period of good **Liberal** followed by another month or two of slowly worsening behavior. Then about 6 months from now this same pit thread will re-emerge and the cycle will begin again. Perhaps this will be the time the cycle is broken but I am not keeping my hopes up. Ia! Ia! **Liberal** fhtagn! ---
**Author:** ![tnetennba](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/7993a0/32.png) [@tnetennba](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/tnetennba)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 1:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/316 "2005-08-11T13:22:38Z")
> [@treis](#): > > This is like the Star Trek episode where the Enterprise was caught in a time loop and experienced the same collision each time until they figured out how to prevent it. We have been down this road before and it leads to the same ending. We are just coming upon the **Liberal** coming to an understanding with his antagonists and promising to change for the future part. Next is the 3-6 month period of good **Liberal** followed by another month or two of slowly worsening behavior. Then about 6 months from now this same pit thread will re-emerge and the cycle will begin again. Perhaps this will be the time the cycle is broken but I am not keeping my hopes up. Another recurring Star Trek episode on this board is The Trouble with Tr… ibbles. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 6:52pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/317 "2005-08-11T18:52:29Z")
Spot on, **treis**. That people keep dispensing well-intentioned advice to **Lib** , only shows the inherent good nature of those doing the advising. In the end, it won’t make a bit of difference in the vicious cycle you mention. Seen it once, seen it ten time. Same old, same old. Meanwhile, someone is basking in their internet “fame.” _:::shrug:::_ ---
**Author:** ![Lord\_Ashtar](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/l/7ea924/32.png) [@Lord\_Ashtar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Lord_Ashtar)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 7:06pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/318 "2005-08-11T19:06:40Z")
> [@ElvisL1ves](#): > > You desperately need to get a fuckin’ life, dude. This board is no substitute, nor is anywhere else on the Web. Shut the computer off, go outside, have a walk, enjoy the fresh air, maybe even meet somebody. You never know until you try. Says the guy with 8,600 posts. ---
**Author:** ![Cervaise](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/cervaise/32/16693_2.png) [@Cervaise](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Cervaise)\ **Post date:** [August 11, 2005, 9:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/319 "2005-08-11T21:26:06Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > That people keep dispensing well-intentioned advice to **Lib** , only shows the inherent good nature of those doing the advising. The careful reader will note that my long post above, while in response to something he posted, is not, in fact, addressed directly to him. The additionally careful reader will observe that this is directly in keeping with the subject matter of my post. ---
**Author:** ![Billdo](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/billdo/32/315_2.png) [@Billdo](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Billdo)\ **Post date:** [August 13, 2005, 12:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871/320 "2005-08-13T12:49:56Z")
> [@RedFury](#): > > That people keep dispensing well-intentioned advice to **Lib** , only shows the inherent good nature of those doing the advising. In the end, it won’t make a bit of difference in the vicious cycle you mention. Seen it once, seen it ten time. As one of those advice dispensers (though I see myself as more grumpy than good-natured), I figure I owe a polite explanation of what I see as wrong before I start bitching about it. I’ve been stumbling on **Lib** thread derailings for a long time, and it has taken me a while to figure out just why they could be so irritating. I realize that I’m posting at the end of a seven page thread, which means that only the totally engaged or terminally bored will read it, but I hope that Lib will see it and it will help him. If not, it is available for linking the next time (if ever) I get moved to post about Lib’s antics. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/thats-just-not-fair-ck-haven/315871.md?page=17)