Excuse me? Could you just elaborate on that??
(And do you see at all where that statement of yours is heading to?)
A bit annoyed: vaping indoors all of a sudden upset ONE coworker
- Thread starter CoastalCreature
- Start date
- th_trl_thread_readers 0
- Status
(And do you see at all where that statement of yours is heading to?)
Yep, so: People who just think it's their priviledge to vape wherever they want, e.g. in a bar with _only_ "No Smoking" signs with little to no remorse or concern of others inside the establishment.
And where exactly is it heading to, as as far as I know this is all my "delusional" and "ANTZ-influenced nonsense" rambling with a slight bit of me being concidered an idiot and inconciderate douche?
Edit: But, as I said,feel free to message me about this whole thing if you feel I didn't fully express my own opinion about this whole thing. Also: I'm gonna head to some other threads and not continue this idiotic ideology of me and trying to make you understand my idiotic, inconciderate rambling and making you angry.
Yep, so: People who just think it's their priviledge to vape wherever they want, e.g. in a bar with _only_ "No Smoking" signs with little to no remorse or concern of others inside the establishment.
And where exactly is it heading to, as as far as I know this is all my "delusional" and "ANTZ-influenced nonsense" rambling with a slight bit of me being concidered an idiot and inconciderate douche?
Edit: But, as I said,feel free to message me about this whole thing if you feel I didn't fully express my own opinion about this whole thing. Also: I'm gonna head to some other threads and not continue this idiotic ideology of me and trying to make you understand my idiotic, inconciderate rambling and making you angry.
Ah haa, so we're entering now into the privilege / oppreshun olympics...
Do you think the non-vapers are oppressed?
Since vaping does not endanger, compromise or incapacitate others' health and well-being, there's zero cause for concern or remorse.
Your only argument for 'concern' can be that witnessing vaping may cause them 'emotional discomfort' due to their irrational, misinformed thinking. Which is, my friend, pandering to ignorance and catering to the habitually offended. Therefore your concern is misguided, therefore malicious even.
Yes, by their own intolerance of others and refusal to acknowledge facts, such as the one in the first sentence of the quote below... But you can't fix stupid. You can't fix rigidly moralistic either, as it's a virulent form of "stupid." You also can't fix some people's pathological need for "permission."
As I said... the whole problem is with those people who just can't stand to see people enjoying something that they themselves don't enjoy, would never even consider doing (and so no one else should enjoy it either!); they are so angered by it, they hold their breath like sulking children, so it's no wonder that they "can't breathe!" If they got over themselves they could probably breathe just fine.
Andria
Don't take me wrong, it's not your personal stance on 'vaping etiquette' i have an issue with. (I must confess i don't vape in public spaces either - call me a chicken for that..)Edit: But, as I said,feel free to message me about this whole thing if you feel I didn't fully express my own opinion about this whole thing. Also: I'm gonna head to some other threads and not continue this idiotic ideology of me and trying to make you understand my idiotic, inconciderate rambling and making you angry.
What makes me worried is your attitude towards media/societal brainwashing. You appear to be a young fellow - and that's what gives me a pause. You're not the only one like that, far from it... and that's what makes me despair.
As I read this thread what I see is the clash of two different mindsets: libertarian vs socialism.
One is concerned with personal rights and the other is all about group think.
Not a bad way of putting it.
What I see is more simple. Some that are okay with it being allowed (in public indoors) and some who are convinced that vaping is hurting itself and that deserves to be made known. Perhaps that's just another way of saying what you said, but I feel it really is as simplistic as: allowance and should be forbidden, which is clashing.
I actually do understand the should be forbidden position, but cannot see rational reason for supporting it. And yet, I do hear that side (loud and clear) strongly suggesting that forbidding it, can only help vaping over the longterm. I'd have to deny existence of anti-rhetoric, policy and influence for that to make even the slightest sense, to me.
Anyway, let the discussion continue.
Yeah, I've been labeled many things in this whole thread already. But here we go: I actually witnessed a person get thrown out of a bar for vaping without permission. Don't you think that it affects the vaping in Finland especially? No, but if it happens multiple times, and always without permisson, it will affect every single vaper in Finland.
Let's make an analogy: Cannibalism is allowed in many countries, even in Finland. But do people see it as "allowed" even though there is no law against it? I'm pretty sure many many many people will say it's against every morality out there.
Why do you insist that vaping in places, where smoking isn't allowed, is "good" for vaping? I see it as if you do things that others might see in different light enough times, it will be eventually be banned or regulated there.
Surely vaping is "allowed" in many places, like coffee stores, but do you think clouding up a coffee store is acceptable in the social aspect?
But, alas, I share different moralities and common sense as you do, so I must be "in the wrong" and delusional for thinking this way? I have my own ideologies and what's seen as acceptable and what's not.
I'm more than willing to bet that many are against me, but I still stand behind what I have said.
And yes, I'm young. But not too young not to know that there are moralities that affect my personal life and knowledge of multiple things.
Let's sum up this whole thing:
I personally see vaping closer to smoking than just breathing air.
I personally think that there should be "vaping etiquette".
I personally think that vaping in public premises, e.g. in a library is more harmful to the vaping industry as a whole than vaping in smoking areas or outdoors in the city area etc.
I personally see this whole labeling a person as something quite ridiculous, as I've been labeled multiple things during this whole thread.
I personally will not tolerate other vapers I see vaping in public premises or in private businesses without permission!
If anything is unclear, as I have already said multiple times: Approach me by a private message to clear this whole thing up.
Only if they let it.
Do you rely on the permission-makers to give permission on every aspect of your daily life? No? Where do you draw the line?
Enjoy the police-state you're striving for.
(PS - too much ideology is harmful for the brain. No offence meant, only concern.)
How close is bathroom? at the end of the day you are in a better place dezpite your coworkers embelished drama. If you ask her, surely she would agree " there ought to be a law" against this kind of thing...then realize this type of thinking requires infinite funding and is not sustainable, breathe a sigh of relief and enjoy as you surely hedged against negative interest (rates) and her kind of ilk lol
I have to remind myself that we are in New Members Forum, cause the first few rhetorical questions are what those of us in Media and General News forum discuss every other post.
IOW, it's not you, it's me. LOL.
I would say this is half of it, and visibly important half. But not really what is at crux of the matter. IMO, you are downplaying the shaming aspect which is intended to lead down two paths: that all use should be minimized / eradicated (even if that is forever unrealistic) and secondly, that all shaming should lead to excessive taxation and more (paid) research to further establish the powers that seek eradication.
I somewhat doubt that all of media is aware of it in these terms, and IMO it is obvious. I think what you are purporting is what popular media latches onto when it sees a story, any story, has legs and will draw attention. And that negative news for vaping could very well benefit certain players by way of financial gain for their business endeavors.
And again, what I feel your position is consistently overlooking is the inherent bias to shame. Perhaps it's a bit of chicken and egg thing, if looked at more objectively. I think bias against comes first, leading to desire to consistently express: FUD, and in turn play to audience, sponsors / benefactors who have vested interest in the attack on vaping. At this point it then becomes about finding vapers who fit the role of poster child to bring the point home further. I feel your position would, if I give benefit of doubt, accept that some of this comes first, but that media could be persuaded to be otherwise neutral about vaping were it not for bad / obnoxious vapers who only make things worse by vaping in locations that civilized society has essentially agreed are bad places to use the product. And that non-smoking places are pretty good guidance for what those places are or ought to be.
I think the bias creates the situations and then presumes that its bias is between righteous and indisputable. Like how could anyone thing of vaping in a particular place, without seeking permission? Dare to answer that question and you've lost a segment of the audience that thinks an answer equals being inherently disrespectful.
Except in the places where these people vape (or do whatever, honestly doesn't matter) and permission is not sought. Like vaping outdoors. Or indoors in certain places. Were it not for the billion and one exceptions we make to the (not so firm) rules we have set up, it would be easier to understand the other side's argument. Perhaps. As I have literally zero experience with that, I just see it as vaping is being attacked based on emotion rather than reason, and that to fall in line, I have to forget/downplay reason and accept emotion as best guidance for all involved.
Until I realize, as I often do, that 99% of the people I encounter, really couldn't care less whether or not I (or you) vape around them.
It is interesting to come on a vaping forum though, and pretend like lots of people truly care about this particular activity and having firm rules in place. And that shaming has nothing to do with it, but instead that some vapers are acting inherently disrespectful by exhaling their vapor, indoors.
It's not that it's unclear. It's that it is inconsistent and based on emotion. If going to speak on open forum then I'm going to respond on open forum.
How would it be banned or regulated without there being bias against? Again, you are suggesting there isn't a bias against it (in what I read) and then the obnoxious vaper creates the bias against by being obnoxious and vaping. And that our guidance ought to be places where smoking isn't allowed.
I'd love to know if THAT is unclear or unfair to how your position is (routinely) expressed.
If accurate, I don't understand why you don't think vaping in same places couldn't be done respectfully? Cause, in pretty much all your posts or the ones that support your position it needs to paint picture of obnoxious vaper to hold ANY water. Thus the shaming aspect is built right into point you are making, and then the rhetorical question is, "how is this not obnoxious?" Or put another way, "please explain to me how the obnoxious vaper is good for vaping?"
But in what situation in civilized society is the hypothetical obnoxious person good for that activity?
Vaping doesn't need to have permission sought to equal respectful vaping. Say you are outdoors, would the same hold true? Can't wait to get answer to that rhetorical set up.
No, but I'm convinced from my experience that it would be far more likely to vape in a coffee store (or wherever) and not cloud up the place.
Your question comes off to me like, "surely drinking coffee is 'allowed' in a coffee store, but do you think spilling your coffee cup intentionally is acceptable in the social aspect?" If not, then why would we even allow anyone to drink coffee from a cup in a coffee store? Are you allowed to drink beer in that store? No, then neither should you be drinking coffee.
That's fine. It's also what ANTZ happens to believe. Hope you don't mind me pointing this out. Not necessarily meant as a knock anymore than you claiming your use of common sense is more attuned to social reality. Me, I understand exhaled human breath contains vapor. So, if you are really stating that our exhaled vapor is closer to exhaled smoke than exhaled vapor, let that be your perspective.
...based on anti-smoking laws/guidance. Yes?
Wouldn't this depend, for you, on whether permission was sought and granted? Like if person asked in library and was granted permission to vape there, but person in outdoor area was denied, then I would think what you just worded would be backwards. But because of the bias thing, I guess we could just assume that it's always okay in certain areas and not okay in other areas. And that all will agree on "vaping etiquette."
You had me at "will not tolerate." Really, what more needs to be said?
Surely there is bias against it, due to these regulations taking place all over the globe? Have I denied that? No. Let's carry on then.
How is that rhetorical? Isn't it obnoxious to cloud up a place or vape somewhere without permission and then whine when the place gets "No Vaping" signs?
I'm stating that in a visual aspect in my eyes, and hundreds of non-vapers, it's extremely similar to tobacco smoke. And I have said that multiple times in my posts in this thread already.
Let's just give you something to read here, even though it's in Finnish, some might be old, but they are still on the websites of two of the Finland's largest news companies:
Sähkötupakka vaaraksi terveydelle - "Voi johtaa hapenpuutteeseen sisäelimissä"
"ECigs are dangerous to your health"
Nokian Uutiset | Varoitus: 7 kuukautta sähkötupakkaa vei sairaalaan
"Warning: 7 months of ecig use winded up in the hospital"
Suomalaismiehen sähkötupakka räjähti keskellä yötä - tuhosi firman kirjanpidon
"Exploding eCig destroyed accounting papers"
Sähkötupakka räjähti suuhun
"Ecig exploded in the mouth"
Sähkötupakka syttyi yöllä ilmiliekkeihin - mies heräsi hirveään pamaukseen
"Ecig lit up in flames during night"
Räjähtänyt sähkötupakka teki ikävää jälkeä - katso kuvat
"Exploding ecig did nasty things - See the pictures"
Sähkötupakka aiheutti tulipalon Linnanmäellä
"Ecig started a fire in Linnanmäki(Finnish amusement park)"
BBC: Sähkötupakka räjähti - mies kuoli
"BBC: Ecig Exploded - Man died"
How's that for "no bias" thing going on? There are dozens and dozens of similar news articles here, and I sure don't want to be a part of another biased news article.
Police-state? More like common politics. Not all politicians are what they seem like they are: One particular politician was stating that he doesn't propose any cuts on study funds for students. And he got a place in the Parliament: Woah, what a shock. He turned his coat and was one of the first persons to propose cuts on study funds for students.
Politics isn't black and white as you make it seem like. Sorry to say that.
But, as I already stated multiple times, this whole conversation is useless on both ends as far as I've seen, I keep on clearing up what I've said and you keep on taking small snippets of my text and basing that as labeling the person I'm like. I'm getting labeled left and right as "socialist" amongst many other labelings.
If you want to have a more in-depth conversation why I think this way and why I've said the things I've said: Feel free to approach me by PM. And as you've said, this conversation belongs somewhere else than the "New Members" forum.
"I personally will not tolerate other vapers I see vaping in public premises or in private business without permission!" ..........How will you know they have permission or not? What action will you take if they don't have permission?
When did calling someone a "douche" become socially acceptable......and name calling of any kind allowed in one's home? Seems like our society has become not only less informed but "cruder" as well. We're growing our own barbarians?
When did calling someone a "douche" become socially acceptable......and name calling of any kind allowed in one's home? Seems like our society has become not only less informed but "cruder" as well. We're growing our own barbarians?
I think this conversation should be a sticky right at the top of it.
I do not need anyone's permission to vape. It doesn't harm anyone.
Some day when the world starts showing concern for me I might on a good day
return the favor. In the meantime I will not be holding my breath.
Regards
Mike
Some people are gonna get theatrical about vaping. Who knows why ... For some it's a real allergy to PG/VG and for the rest it can be a hate game for smoking or anything that resembles it.
Highly flavored juices can be an in your face aroma for some. I finally settled on Dekang and Hangsen juices years ago just because I can vape those anywhere and no one seems to mind. They are lightly flavored juices with low level vapor compared to just about anything with high VG content. At 10 watts I get something like a cigarette on exhale. The vapor disappears in a few seconds unless I lung hit.
It's worth a try to see if she tolerates it. Hoosiers sells 90pg/10vg Dekang and Hangsen. Madvapes sells 80pg/20vg in the Hangsen brand. You have to search for Hangsen instead of clicking on the juice menu selection. For some reason they don't list it in the Juice Menu. It's also cheap. Under $15 for a 50ml bottle.
Highly flavored juices can be an in your face aroma for some. I finally settled on Dekang and Hangsen juices years ago just because I can vape those anywhere and no one seems to mind. They are lightly flavored juices with low level vapor compared to just about anything with high VG content. At 10 watts I get something like a cigarette on exhale. The vapor disappears in a few seconds unless I lung hit.
It's worth a try to see if she tolerates it. Hoosiers sells 90pg/10vg Dekang and Hangsen. Madvapes sells 80pg/20vg in the Hangsen brand. You have to search for Hangsen instead of clicking on the juice menu selection. For some reason they don't list it in the Juice Menu. It's also cheap. Under $15 for a 50ml bottle.
A Devil's Advocate might argue you're "hearing" a dissenting opinion only after running it through a Straw Man's Fallacy filter.Here is what you just said sounded like when I read it...That's how I hear it anyway.
I see a lot for "forum scientists" that seem 100% positive that second hand vape is 100% safe.
Does anyone have some REAL evidence of this? And if so can you please post the source I'd like to read it.
Does anyone have some REAL evidence of this? And if so can you please post the source I'd like to read it.
- Status
Similar threads
