View Poll Results: Helmet wearing habits?
I've never worn a bike helmet
178
10.66%
I used to wear a helmet, but have stopped
94
5.63%
I've always worn a helmet
648
38.80%
I didn't wear a helmet, but now do
408
24.43%
I sometimes wear a helmet depending on the conditions
342
20.48%
Voters: 1670. You may not vote on this poll
The helmet thread
#7251
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,978
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,538 Times
in
1,047 Posts
Responsible Hazard Analysis and Risk Management Plans are evaluations and subsequent plans to deal with hazardous events and their credible results. The risk evaluation process and its results are worthless if only the worst case scenario (catastrophic severity of injury) is considered as the only credible outcome, no matter what the probability. The resulting recommendations are even less than worthless when the recommended control (bicycle helmet) is incapable of mitigating the severity of that worst case scenario.
Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 03-21-14 at 10:04 AM.
#7252
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914
Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Nobody, except you, is claiming what is "thought to be impossible".
Responsible Hazard Analysis and Risk Management Plans are evaluations and subsequent plans to deal with hazardous events and their credible results. The risk evaluation process and its results are worthless if only the worst case scenario (catastrophic severity of injury) is considered as the only credible outcome, no matter what the probability. The resulting recommendations are even less than worthless when the recommended control (bicycle helmet) is incapable of mitigating the severity of that worst case scenario.
Responsible Hazard Analysis and Risk Management Plans are evaluations and subsequent plans to deal with hazardous events and their credible results. The risk evaluation process and its results are worthless if only the worst case scenario (catastrophic severity of injury) is considered as the only credible outcome, no matter what the probability. The resulting recommendations are even less than worthless when the recommended control (bicycle helmet) is incapable of mitigating the severity of that worst case scenario.
(1) A severity rating for each violation shall be determined by the Compliance Officer on the basis of the degree of injury or illness which is reasonably predictable. If more than one injury or illness is reasonably predictable, the Compliance Officer will determine the severity based upon the most severe injury or illness.
https://www.orosha.org/pdf/rules/divi...203.pdf#page=2
https://www.orosha.org/pdf/rules/divi...203.pdf#page=2
...Step 2. The most serious injury or
illness which could reasonably be expected
to result from the type of accident or health
hazard exposure identified in Step 1...https://www.osha.gov/Firm_osha_data/100007.html
illness which could reasonably be expected
to result from the type of accident or health
hazard exposure identified in Step 1...https://www.osha.gov/Firm_osha_data/100007.html
If we want to preclude bicycle/auto collisions, then we look at different types of management strategies. These, if you accept the Hierarchy of Controls, would be engineering controls by separation of bicycles from traffic. Those types of engineering controls are very expensive, and are best put into place at the design phase of a project. This is called Prevention through Design (PtD), and is one of the best practices for safety. Administrative controls could also be used, but are less effective. These include training, bike lanes (which cars ignore sometimes), and rules (passing at three feet, for instance). The lowest level of control is PPE, and bike helmets fit here. But in auto/bike collisions, because other types of injuries can be life-threatening in these cases, they may be less effective; however, in leu of other controls, bicycle helmets can help. Someone above described being hit by a car on his back wheel, thrown for 20 feet in the air, and not having a head strike--that is the luck of the draw. He could easily heave been killed by that accident too.
By the way, no more pronouncements from you...if you have documentation to back up your assertions, show them, link to them; otherwise, your input here is useless.
John
Last edited by John C. Ratliff; 03-21-14 at 04:26 PM.
#7253
Senior Member
What a reputable hazard analysis must take into account when determining the likely results of a hazard are the credible probabilities of various types of injury severity that would result from various events. Not just the worst case scenario; this is not a chemical plant or nuclear reactor being evaluated.
.
.
say 100 that result in going to the emergency or
say 10 deaths or brain injury sufficient to alter ones life...?
#7254
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,978
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,538 Times
in
1,047 Posts
You can "say" anything you like with any numbers that come to mind and you might come up with the right ones. You might even guess a perfect bracket on basketball pool. When your mind is made up before hand what the conclusion AND solution should be, you probably qualify for the Ratliff School of Hazard Analysis Smoke Screens.
#7255
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,401
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
13 Posts
Well, it obviously went completely over my head, and still does. In the past, I have often felt that you are wrong but still well-intentioned. Now, I don't know. One of us has taken a turn off into some pretty outrageous territory, and in all candor, I don't think it's me. As always, you are welcome to whatever protective gear you feel appropriate, but as an argument for everyone else to use it, I think you are farther away than ever.
#7256
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,401
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
13 Posts
So what the pro-helmet crowd is actually doing is not "worst case" analysis but rather "particular case" analysis. IOW, "If an accident happens in a very particular way, with not too much energy involved, but not too little either, and really just for certain kinds of blunt (not too acute, now!) impacts, where rotational forces aren't significant, and the face, neck, vital organs, etc. are not involved, a bicycle helmet can help, maybe, not that you'll really be able to prove it one way or another. Therefore, you are an idiot if you don't use one."
I personally find this less than compelling, especially when accompanied by the usual ration of smug helmeteer bull****.
But hey, maybe another study will finally convince me.
#7257
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Posts: 6,401
Mentioned: 2 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 2 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 13 Times
in
13 Posts
Responsible Hazard Analysis and Risk Management Plans are evaluations and subsequent plans to deal with hazardous events and their credible results. The risk evaluation process and its results are worthless if only the worst case scenario (catastrophic severity of injury) is considered as the only credible outcome, no matter what the probability. The resulting recommendations are even less than worthless when the recommended control (bicycle helmet) is incapable of mitigating the severity of that worst case scenario.
I mean, hell, it was on a chart and everything, right?
#7258
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914
Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Worst case is being hit by a semi at freeway speeds. So in worst case, using a bicycle helmet as mitigation is laughable.
So what the pro-helmet crowd is actually doing is not "worst case" analysis but rather "particular case" analysis. IOW, "If an accident happens in a very particular way, with not too much energy involved, but not too little either, and really just for certain kinds of blunt (not too acute, now!) impacts, where rotational forces aren't significant, and the face, neck, vital organs, etc. are not involved, a bicycle helmet can help, maybe, not that you'll really be able to prove it one way or another. Therefore, you are an idiot if you don't use one."
I personally find this less than compelling, especially when accompanied by the usual ration of smug helmeteer bull****.
But hey, maybe another study will finally convince me.
So what the pro-helmet crowd is actually doing is not "worst case" analysis but rather "particular case" analysis. IOW, "If an accident happens in a very particular way, with not too much energy involved, but not too little either, and really just for certain kinds of blunt (not too acute, now!) impacts, where rotational forces aren't significant, and the face, neck, vital organs, etc. are not involved, a bicycle helmet can help, maybe, not that you'll really be able to prove it one way or another. Therefore, you are an idiot if you don't use one."
I personally find this less than compelling, especially when accompanied by the usual ration of smug helmeteer bull****.
But hey, maybe another study will finally convince me.
Originally Posted by John C. Ratliff
Concerning these ways of thinking, you can state that they don't apply to bicycling, but there are many of us who feel otherwise. What is the worst case injury which could reasonably be expected from a bicycle accident? Heads do hit the pavement, and that is a reasonable outcome from a worst case fall off a bicycle.
If we want to preclude bicycle/auto collisions, then we look at different types of management strategies. These, if you accept the Hierarchy of Controls, would be engineering controls by separation of bicycles from traffic. Those types of engineering controls are very expensive, and are best put into place at the design phase of a project. This is called Prevention through Design (PtD), and is one of the best practices for safety. Administrative controls could also be used, but are less effective. These include training, bike lanes (which cars ignore sometimes), and rules (passing at three feet, for instance). The lowest level of control is PPE, and bike helmets fit here. But in auto/bike collisions, because other types of injuries can be life-threatening in these cases, they may be less effective; however, in leu of other controls, bicycle helmets can help. Someone above described being hit by a car on his back wheel, thrown for 20 feet in the air, and not having a head strike--that is the luck of the draw. He could easily heave been killed by that accident too.
Emphasis added for this rendition.
If we want to preclude bicycle/auto collisions, then we look at different types of management strategies. These, if you accept the Hierarchy of Controls, would be engineering controls by separation of bicycles from traffic. Those types of engineering controls are very expensive, and are best put into place at the design phase of a project. This is called Prevention through Design (PtD), and is one of the best practices for safety. Administrative controls could also be used, but are less effective. These include training, bike lanes (which cars ignore sometimes), and rules (passing at three feet, for instance). The lowest level of control is PPE, and bike helmets fit here. But in auto/bike collisions, because other types of injuries can be life-threatening in these cases, they may be less effective; however, in leu of other controls, bicycle helmets can help. Someone above described being hit by a car on his back wheel, thrown for 20 feet in the air, and not having a head strike--that is the luck of the draw. He could easily heave been killed by that accident too.
Emphasis added for this rendition.
This is what I am trying to do here, prepare people for the worst-case scenarios for bicycling. There are many things that can be done, as outlined in the quote above. But wearing a bicycling helmet helps avoid what to me is unnecessary injury potential in the event of a fall, whether it is because of a bicycling mistake, equipment failure, fellow cyclist's bump (happened to my son while racing--threw him into a fence and onto the ground, which broke his helmet), or a car/truck interaction.
When I was in the USAF, we wore helmets all the time except on water missions (where we went into the water). They really do help in numerous situations.
John
#7259
Senior Member
You can "say" anything you like with any numbers that come to mind and you might come up with the right ones. You might even guess a perfect bracket on basketball pool. When your mind is made up before hand what the conclusion AND solution should be, you probably qualify for the Ratliff School of Hazard Analysis Smoke Screens.
1; no need to worry, something like 1,000,000+ people ride every month.?
2; 10,000+ fall but nothing happens so no need to worry.?
3; 100 people go to emergency...? Not nessearially a problem?
4; 10 deaths or brain injury sufficient to alter ones life...? 10 deaths out of a 1,000,000 is nothing,(more people die in the shower)?
Last edited by 350htrr; 03-22-14 at 01:47 PM. Reason: spelling
#7260
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,978
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,538 Times
in
1,047 Posts
That is not how Oregon OSHA and Federal OSHA look at things:
Concerning these ways of thinking, you can state that they don't apply to bicycling, but there are many of us who feel otherwise.
By the way, no more pronouncements from you...if you have documentation to back up your assertions, show them, link to them; otherwise, your input here is useless.
John
Concerning these ways of thinking, you can state that they don't apply to bicycling, but there are many of us who feel otherwise.
By the way, no more pronouncements from you...if you have documentation to back up your assertions, show them, link to them; otherwise, your input here is useless.
John
Here is documentation of controls implemented by people "who feel otherwise" just like you, and as relevant (actually more relevant) than your insertion of a OSHA "documentation" smoke screen into the discussion.
Last edited by I-Like-To-Bike; 03-22-14 at 01:19 PM.
#7261
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914
Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Is that so? And if I don't comply with your command to not critique half backed baloney from people "who feel otherwise" about sticking to the subject?
Here is documentation of controls implemented by people "who feel otherwise" just like you, and as relevant (actually more relevant) than your insertion of a OSHA "documentation" smoke screen into the discussion.
Here is documentation of controls implemented by people "who feel otherwise" just like you, and as relevant (actually more relevant) than your insertion of a OSHA "documentation" smoke screen into the discussion.
By the way, the OSHA Cowboy has been around at least since the early 1980s. Posting the OSHA Cowboy shows that you really don't have a serious point of view; you'd rather mock things than discuss them. The OSHA Cowboy is somewhat off the subject too.
John
https://www.thirdage.com/files/origin...-louis-528.jpg
Last edited by John C. Ratliff; 03-22-14 at 07:25 PM.
#7262
Been Around Awhile
Join Date: Oct 2004
Location: Burlington Iowa
Posts: 29,978
Bikes: Vaterland and Ragazzi
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 12 Post(s)
Liked 1,538 Times
in
1,047 Posts
There is no compliance, and no command; simply logic. Some cowboys are now using helmets too.
By the way, the OSHA Cowboy has been around at least since the early 1980s. Posting the OSHA Cowboy shows that you really don't have a serious point of view; you'd rather mock things than discuss them. The OSHA Cowboy is somewhat off the subject too.
John
https://www.thirdage.com/files/origin...-louis-528.jpg
By the way, the OSHA Cowboy has been around at least since the early 1980s. Posting the OSHA Cowboy shows that you really don't have a serious point of view; you'd rather mock things than discuss them. The OSHA Cowboy is somewhat off the subject too.
John
https://www.thirdage.com/files/origin...-louis-528.jpg
I previously decided that discussion with the dingier posters on this thread a waste of time. I think I gave you too much credit.
#7263
Senior Member
Join Date: May 2002
Location: Beaverton, Oregon
Posts: 1,914
Bikes: Rans Stratus, Trek 1420, Rivendell Rambouillet
Mentioned: 0 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 0 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 0 Times
in
0 Posts
Perfect! Off the subject? ha,ha. As if YOUR introduction of OSHA Compliance rules for job sites, and worst case scenarios for Industrial complexes with an almost unlimited capacity for colossal disaster in the discussion of bicycling risk was not weird enough. Now it is helmets for riding Bulls in the rodeo.
I previously decided that discussion with the dingier posters on this thread a waste of time. I think I gave you too much credit.
I previously decided that discussion with the dingier posters on this thread a waste of time. I think I gave you too much credit.
John
#7264
Friendship is Magic
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Sacramento, CA
Posts: 22,985
Bikes: old ones
Mentioned: 304 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 26427 Post(s)
Liked 10,383 Times
in
7,211 Posts
#7265
Banned
Join Date: Apr 2010
Location: Lincoln Ne
Posts: 9,924
Bikes: RANS Stratus TerraTrike Tour II
Mentioned: 46 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 3352 Post(s)
Liked 1,056 Times
in
635 Posts
It Monday. I still believe the ave cyclist is safer if they wear a helmet. It time for the usual anti helmet types to post their personal insults towards me. Have at it boyz make yourselves look silly!!!
Last edited by rydabent; 03-24-14 at 05:23 PM.
#7268
Senior Member
Join Date: Feb 2014
Location: Kent Wa.
Posts: 5,332
Bikes: 2005 Gazelle Golfo, 1935 Raleigh Sport, 1970 Robin Hood sport, 1974 Schwinn Continental, 1984 Ross MTB/porteur, 2013 Flying Piegon path racer, 2014 Gazelle Toer Populair T8
Mentioned: 12 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 396 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 8 Times
in
7 Posts
I wear a helmet when cycling because the law says I have to, but probably wouldn't if it wasn't mandatory. I understand wearing a helmet is about mitigating risk, not eliminating it. I also know from my personal experiences riding motorcycles a helmet can provide useful protection if you go down, and always wear one by choice.
That said, I can't see any reason or logic in the arguments against wearing a helmet other than simply not wanting to.
That said, I can't see any reason or logic in the arguments against wearing a helmet other than simply not wanting to.
#7269
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,728
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5793 Post(s)
Liked 2,593 Times
in
1,437 Posts
BTW- I know that many here would put folks who pass on helmets on the spot and ask us to justify not wearing one. IMO- this turns logic on it's head, because not having a helmet is the status quo, so the burden is for helmet advocates to demonstrate the risk level, and the reduction that helmets offer. For my part, I don't concern myself with the 2nd part because I don't feel the first hurdle has been cleared.
OTOH- this is a strictly personal decision based on an assessment of my own risk levels. When folks ask if they should wear a helmet, my standard answer is that if they're asking, then they don't know, so they should wear a helmet until they decide that they're safe enough without one.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
#7270
Senior Member
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: SF Bay Area, East bay
Posts: 7,663
Bikes: Miyata 618 GT, Marinoni, Kestral 200 2002 Trek 5200, KHS Flite, Koga Miyata, Schwinn Spitfire 5, Mondia Special, Univega Alpina, Miyata team Ti, Santa Cruz Highball
Mentioned: 53 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 1612 Post(s)
Liked 2,594 Times
in
1,225 Posts
That's funny, nobody here really has to prove anything, just posting personal choices. I'm thinking the anti-helmet crusaders just want to keep that right. I'm ok with that.
Last edited by curbtender; 03-25-14 at 03:02 PM.
#7271
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,728
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5793 Post(s)
Liked 2,593 Times
in
1,437 Posts
For that reason I consider the concept of anti-helmet a nonsense way to try to put people on the defensive here. It's akin to call those who aren't 100% anti-abortion pro abortion.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
#7272
Senior Member
I wear a helmet when cycling because the law says I have to, but probably wouldn't if it wasn't mandatory. I understand wearing a helmet is about mitigating risk, not eliminating it. I also know from my personal experiences riding motorcycles a helmet can provide useful protection if you go down, and always wear one by choice.
That said, I can't see any reason or logic in the arguments against wearing a helmet other than simply not wanting to.
That said, I can't see any reason or logic in the arguments against wearing a helmet other than simply not wanting to.
There's a big difference between cycling and motorcycling, between bicycle helmets and motorcycle helmets. I don't compare the protective qualities of one against the other because it would be ludicrous. I wore a bicycle helmet out of habit because I came from a motorcycling background, but was soon here disabused of the notion that bicycle helmets provided even a fraction of the protection a MC helmet does.
Still, what meager protection a bicycle helmet might afford in the rare case that I crash on a bicycle, and in the rarer case that said crash involves a headstrike, is worth it to me.
#7274
Cycle Dallas
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Land of Gar, TX
Posts: 3,777
Bikes: Dulcinea--2017 Kona Rove & a few others
Mentioned: 1 Post(s)
Tagged: 0 Thread(s)
Quoted: 197 Post(s)
Likes: 0
Liked 10 Times
in
5 Posts
...
BTW- I know that many here would put folks who pass on helmets on the spot and ask us to justify not wearing one. IMO- this turns logic on it's head, because not having a helmet is the status quo, so the burden is for helmet advocates to demonstrate the risk level, and the reduction that helmets offer. For my part, I don't concern myself with the 2nd part because I don't feel the first hurdle has been cleared.
...
BTW- I know that many here would put folks who pass on helmets on the spot and ask us to justify not wearing one. IMO- this turns logic on it's head, because not having a helmet is the status quo, so the burden is for helmet advocates to demonstrate the risk level, and the reduction that helmets offer. For my part, I don't concern myself with the 2nd part because I don't feel the first hurdle has been cleared.
...
...
OTOH- this is a strictly personal decision based on an assessment of my own risk levels. When folks ask if they should wear a helmet, my standard answer is that if they're asking, then they don't know, so they should wear a helmet until they decide that they're safe enough without one.
OTOH- this is a strictly personal decision based on an assessment of my own risk levels. When folks ask if they should wear a helmet, my standard answer is that if they're asking, then they don't know, so they should wear a helmet until they decide that they're safe enough without one.
With maybe an exception here and there, I don't think the term anti-helmet applies to anyone. Those dubbed anti-helmet, simply aren't pro helmet, or not pro helmet enough.
For that reason I consider the concept of anti-helmet a nonsense way to try to put people on the defensive here. It's akin to call those who aren't 100% anti-abortion pro abortion.
For that reason I consider the concept of anti-helmet a nonsense way to try to put people on the defensive here. It's akin to call those who aren't 100% anti-abortion pro abortion.
#7275
Senior Member
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: New Rochelle, NY
Posts: 38,728
Bikes: too many bikes from 1967 10s (5x2)Frejus to a Sumitomo Ti/Chorus aluminum 10s (10x2), plus one non-susp mtn bike I use as my commuter
Mentioned: 140 Post(s)
Tagged: 1 Thread(s)
Quoted: 5793 Post(s)
Liked 2,593 Times
in
1,437 Posts
I may be wrong here, and may be projecting the constant (more than once per day in season) harangues from cyclists met on the road onto this thread. But without scrolling back, I'm fairly confident that more than one posters here has characterized "anti-helmet" posts very negatively.
__________________
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.
FB
Chain-L site
An ounce of diagnosis is worth a pound of cure.
Just because I'm tired of arguing, doesn't mean you're right.
“One accurate measurement is worth a thousand expert opinions” - Adm Grace Murray Hopper - USN
WARNING, I'm from New York. Thin skinned people should maintain safe distance.