Should SUV Driving amount to Drunk Driving?

[Tom Sherman]

George Conklin wrote:
> "smn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:HaD8j.32$hQ3.8@pd7urf3no...
>> bicycle crowd?
>>
>> Compared to bicycles, cars are not outnumbered but we do pay all your
> bills.
>> hope you don't hurt your finger tips banging out your BS
>>
>>
>
> How many dollars do you pay per mile to build and maintain roads for
> bicyles? Zero.

Local roads (in the US) are built with funds that do NOT come from motor
fuel taxes or other motor vehicle related fees. But one would not expect
a smug cager to have a clue.

--
Tom Sherman - Holstein-Friesland Bovinia
"Localized intense suction such as tornadoes is created when temperature
differences are high enough between meeting air masses, and can impart
excessive energy onto a cyclist." - Randy Schlitter

 

[Jym Dyer]

>> Would you rather have a car in front of you or a bicycle
>> in front of you as you approach a hard-to-find free parking
>> space?
> You will never get there if the bicycle crowd has its way.

=x= How is that so, George? He was describing a specific
situation and your answer, as always, is, "Nuh-uh. Is not.
Is not. Is not. Nuh-uh." Got anything of actual substance
to contribute?
<_Jym_>

 

[Jym Dyer]

> Compared to bicycles, cars are not outnumbered but we do
> pay all your bills.

=v= Sorry, I'm having trouble parsing this sentence. Am I
to understand that you think cars subsidize bicycles? If
so, you've got it exactly backwards.

=v= Motorists do pay an awful lot, and there's a labyrinth
of funding schemes to confuse matters, but when you tally
it all up, motorists don't cover their actual costs. The
shortfall is made up for from general funds, which are
largely from property taxes. The places with the highest
property values are generally also the places with the most
carfree residents, so the carfree are disproportionately
funding the most car-addicted.

=v= Motorists drive at a deficit. So instead of parroting
nonsense about paying all our bills, you should be grateful
that public transit users, bicyclists, and pedestrians are
subsidizing your wasteful transportation mode.
<_Jym_>

P.S.: The above doesn't even take the staggering-high
environmental costs of cars into account.

 

[Bike guy Joe]

On Dec 14, 8:58 pm, Tom Sherman <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
> Local roads (in the US) are built with funds that do NOT come from motor
> fuel taxes or other motor vehicle related fees.

Unless you consider lisence plates a "vehicle related fee", which
most do.

 

[drydem]

On Dec 10, 5:43 pm, donquijote1954 <[email protected]>
wrote:
> Are SUVs' tinted windows a sign of shame? Or are they a sign of
> misanthropism? I know their wanton disregard for the environment and
> their isolation from others causes a lot of problems. I can never read
> what they are up to, for one. And I feel terrorized in my bike or
> scooter. I just know I better get out of their way, just as from drunk
> drivers.
>


SUV
------
Beyond few select hybrid SUVs, e.g. Ford Escape Hybrid, all SUVs are
gas guzzlers.

Tinted windows
----------------------
Tinted windows on motor vehicles have two purposes of
which the main use is privacy. A secondary purpose in
temperate regions when the vehicle is equiped with
an air conditioner is to make it easier for the air conditioner
to cool the vehicle. Certain states have laws restricting
the level darkness/opaqueness of a tinted windshield
but these laws are rarely enforced. When I was growing
up tinted windshields was either associated with
secret agents and drug dealers - however, today
in the Washington DC area - tinted windows are very
commone - especially on SUVs. With respect to
the driver's intentions, many cars also have
tinted windows - such that the driver is not visible from
the outside. In certain areas, that means if the
police stops a car with tinted windows rolled up
the officer will have his side arm drawn until the
driver rolls down the window. Drivers who act
suspiciously or too quickly as the roll down their
tinted windows might invoke an officer to think of
firing his side arm. So drivers with tinted windows
should acted very slowly and cautiously as the
roll down their tinted windows for the police officer
- better yet drivers with tinted windows might
consider rolling down their tinted windows on
the drivers door before the police officer arrives
to the side of their car. With vehicles where one
can't see the driver because of tinted windows, the
vehicle's size, or other obstructions - other drivers must
judge another vehicle's intentions by how it is being
driven ( its direction, speed, lights, position in the
road). As the roadways become more congested,
there is a greater likelihood the roadway will see
more aggressive driving as well as drivers who
ignore safety and local traffic laws. Safe driving
means watching out for everyone and everything
out on the road - be the sane or insane.

Biking
--------
When I was young I tried to get to my high
school using my bike along the main major
road in my neighborhood but I got ran off the
road by speeding cars. I also got killed trying
to do that - so I never tried it again. In
those days, the shoulder of the road was
a rough gravelly surface such that a bike
at any speed would tip over if one tried
to ride over it ( there was no such thing as
a mountain bike in those days). At the time,
there weren't any bike paths along any of
the major roadways and the shoulders
were unusable for biking. The lanes in the
roadway were not wide enough to accomodate
bikes or pedestrians an the rushing oncoming
motor vehicles. At one time, I missed the last
bus to my home and I had to walk home
on the side of the road at night to get home
as I was walking home some of the cars almost hit
me. A police officer came by later that night
and gave me a lift home that night - because
someone had called the police - citing I was
a road hazard. Today my area has a bike/pedestrian
pathway along the major roads and road shoulders
are a smooth surface - so its actually safer to
walk or bike along the road. However, motorized bikes
need to be able to go at about 50 mph at certain
times to keep up with the traffic on some parts
of the major roadway - so scooters are not
viable option in my area if you want to go
on the major roadways. Other problems with
biking is that the local shopping centers prohibit bikes
(as well as skateboards, roller skates, etc)
The owner of the local shopping center told me
that he prohibits the use of bikes on his
property due to insurance reasons.
So the only place in the center of town with
a bike rack to park your bike is the local public library.

 

[donquijote1954]

On Dec 15, 12:19 pm, drydem <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Dec 10, 5:43 pm, donquijote1954 <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > Are SUVs' tinted windows a sign of shame? Or are they a sign of
> > misanthropism? I know their wanton disregard for the environment and
> > their isolation from others causes a lot of problems. I can never read
> > what they are up to, for one. And I feel terrorized in my bike or
> > scooter. I just know I better get out of their way, just as from drunk
> > drivers.
>
> SUV
> ------
> Beyond few select hybrid SUVs, e.g. Ford Escape Hybrid, all SUVs are
> gas guzzlers.
>
> Tinted windows
> ----------------------
> Tinted windows on motor vehicles have two purposes of
> which the main use is privacy. A secondary purpose in
> temperate regions when the vehicle is equiped with
> an air conditioner is to make it easier for the air conditioner
> to cool the vehicle. Certain states have laws restricting
> the level darkness/opaqueness of a tinted windshield
> but these laws are rarely enforced. When I was growing
> up tinted windshields was either associated with
> secret agents and drug dealers - however, today
> in the Washington DC area - tinted windows are very
> commone - especially on SUVs. With respect to
> the driver's intentions, many cars also have
> tinted windows - such that the driver is not visible from
> the outside. In certain areas, that means if the
> police stops a car with tinted windows rolled up
> the officer will have his side arm drawn until the
> driver rolls down the window. Drivers who act
> suspiciously or too quickly as the roll down their
> tinted windows might invoke an officer to think of
> firing his side arm. So drivers with tinted windows
> should acted very slowly and cautiously as the
> roll down their tinted windows for the police officer
> - better yet drivers with tinted windows might
> consider rolling down their tinted windows on
> the drivers door before the police officer arrives
> to the side of their car. With vehicles where one
> can't see the driver because of tinted windows, the
> vehicle's size, or other obstructions - other drivers must
> judge another vehicle's intentions by how it is being
> driven ( its direction, speed, lights, position in the
> road). As the roadways become more congested,
> there is a greater likelihood the roadway will see
> more aggressive driving as well as drivers who
> ignore safety and local traffic laws. Safe driving
> means watching out for everyone and everything
> out on the road - be the sane or insane.

The tinted windows only aggravate the danger they pose to others,
including police.

But they often go together with less than desirable activities like
talking on the phone, and even be entertained by the gadgets present
in the SUV: GPS maps, DVD players, etc.

>
> Biking
> --------
> When I was young I tried to get to my high
> school using my bike along the main major
> road in my neighborhood but I got ran off the
> road by speeding cars. I also got killed trying
> to do that - so I never tried it again. In
> those days, the shoulder of the road was
> a rough gravelly surface such that a bike
> at any speed would tip over if one tried
> to ride over it ( there was no such thing as
> a mountain bike in those days). At the time,
> there weren't any bike paths along any of
> the major roadways and the shoulders
> were unusable for biking. The lanes in the
> roadway were not wide enough to accomodate
> bikes or pedestrians an the rushing oncoming
> motor vehicles. At one time, I missed the last
> bus to my home and I had to walk home
> on the side of the road at night to get home
> as I was walking home some of the cars almost hit
> me. A police officer came by later that night
> and gave me a lift home that night - because
> someone had called the police - citing I was
> a road hazard. Today my area has a bike/pedestrian
> pathway along the major roads and road shoulders
> are a smooth surface - so its actually safer to
> walk or bike along the road. However, motorized bikes
> need to be able to go at about 50 mph at certain
> times to keep up with the traffic on some parts
> of the major roadway - so scooters are not
> viable option in my area if you want to go
> on the major roadways. Other problems with
> biking is that the local shopping centers prohibit bikes
> (as well as skateboards, roller skates, etc)
> The owner of the local shopping center told me
> that he prohibits the use of bikes on his
> property due to insurance reasons.
> So the only place in the center of town with
> a bike rack to park your bike is the local public library.

In other words, the bicycles are discriminated against just because
they are associated with people that don't spend money. That's why I
say the first strategy in dealing with a "hungry lion" (metaphorically
speaking) is not to feed him...

Who will put the bell on the cat? Well, only you can:
-DO NOT FEED THE LION* (we are confronting a Hungry Lion, so he's most
vulnerable to boycott)

But, of course, it has be done by many people...

-CRY LION! (the lion's success depends on camouflage, so your alarm
may save others)

 

[Amy Blankenship]

"drydem" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:e5bef98f-8180-441b-920e-e706448c9926@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
....
> I also got killed trying
> to do that - so I never tried it again.
....

Well, that is logical enough. But you're a good typist for a ghost.

 

[George Conklin]

"Tom Sherman" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> George Conklin wrote:
> > "smn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> > news:HaD8j.32$hQ3.8@pd7urf3no...
> >> bicycle crowd?
> >>
> >> Compared to bicycles, cars are not outnumbered but we do pay all your
> > bills.
> >> hope you don't hurt your finger tips banging out your BS
> >>
> >>
> >
> > How many dollars do you pay per mile to build and maintain roads for
> > bicyles? Zero.
>
> Local roads (in the US) are built with funds that do NOT come from motor
> fuel taxes or other motor vehicle related fees. But one would not expect
> a smug cager to have a clue.

Our city streets get significant money from the gasolene tax, but I would
not expect you to admit to that fact.

 

[George Conklin]

"Amy Blankenship" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "drydem" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:e5bef98f-8180-441b-920e-e706448c9926@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> ...
> > I also got killed trying
> > to do that - so I never tried it again.
> ...
>
> Well, that is logical enough. But you're a good typist for a ghost.
>
>

I understand. He is a ghost writer.

 

[[email protected]]

On Dec 15, 1:48 pm, "George Conklin" <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
> Our city streets get significant money from the gasolene tax, but I would
> not expect you to admit to that fact.

Even if they do get "significant money," they don't get sufficient
money.

Society bears huge costs to support drivers, and it's no way covered
by the paltry gas taxes. One frequently neglected example: Most cops
spent the bulk of their time dealing with traffic infractions, because
those laws are the ones most frequently broken. If driving were
reduced, the police force could be reduced.

But the typical auto enthusiast doesn't consider the cops' salaries to
be related to his driving in any way. In fact, he'd prefer being left
alone to violate traffic rules without penalty, even though his
behavior seriously endangers and irritates others.

- Frank Krygowski

 

[Claire Petersky]

"George Conklin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
> "smn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> news:lId8j.4678$ox1.1584@pd7urf3no...
>
> . Cyclists are doing you a favor
>> but are grossly unloved.
>
> Right. By slowing a whole road down to 10 mph, they are doing no one a
> favor. You are causing huge amounts of congestion.


Ha ha ha ha ha! This is so funny! I can just imagine George's eyes twinkling
when he wrote this one.

As we all know, the cause of congestion is cars. Several times this last
month I've had to drive to work, and I didn't see thousands of bicycles in
front of me on I-90, slowing the freeway down to a halt. They were all
nicely pedalling along on the I-90 bicycle trail, merry and free, while I
was shut into my malodorous steel box, creeping along in stop-and-go
traffic.

There were one or two I had to pass on suburban streets on my way to the
freeway, but if I lost more than a second or two getting around them, I
don't remember one way or the other.

--
Warm Regards,

Claire Petersky
http://www.bicyclemeditations.org/
See the books I've set free at: http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky

 

[Jym Dyer]

George Conklin purports:

> Our city streets get significant money from the gasolene [sic]
> tax, but I would not expect you to admit to that fact.

=v= Nobody disputes that. The real issue is that "significant"
money still falls short of the actual costs, which is paid for
by the rest of us.
<_Jym_>

P.S.: For somebody whose opinions are so heavily influenced by
huffing the exhaust from gasoline, you should have figured out
how to spell it.

 

[donquijote1954]

OK, here's a plan that won't cost you a penny (I know how penny-
pinching Republicans are for issues other than the war), so it should
be given serious consideration (as if they give a damn). Anyway here
it goes...

ENFORCE LANE DISCIPLINE, yes like in civilized countries slower
traffic keeps to the right, so here's where the bicycles belong...
Hey, I haven't finished yet. The bicycles are entitled to TAKE THE
LANE, because they are vehicles too, and everybody else must pass on
the other lanes. Put signs to the effect, and hand out hefty fines to
all those who break the law. They are the ones paying for future bike
lanes and other bike facilities.

 

[Pat]

On Dec 16, 12:32 pm, donquijote1954 <[email protected]>
wrote:
> OK, here's a plan that won't cost you a penny (I know how penny-
> pinching Republicans are for issues other than the war), so it should
> be given serious consideration (as if they give a damn). Anyway here
> it goes...
>
> ENFORCE LANE DISCIPLINE, yes like in civilized countries slower
> traffic keeps to the right, so here's where the bicycles belong...
> Hey, I haven't finished yet. The bicycles are entitled to TAKE THE
> LANE, because they are vehicles too, and everybody else must pass on
> the other lanes. Put signs to the effect, and hand out hefty fines to
> all those who break the law. They are the ones paying for future bike
> lanes and other bike facilities.

Just two quick comments:

First off, it assumes you have roads with more than two lanes. Most
roads don't. Heck, around here we have lots of dirt roads that are
about 1 1/2 lanes wide.

Second off, it assumes that the bikes can travel near road speeds,
which may be possible where you live but not here.

BTW, just out of curiosity, if my son was riding his bike to the ski
slopes, would you strap the board to his back or mount the front tire
on it? What about wind resistance? What about the occasional piece
of dry pavement? Hmmmmm.

 

[drydem]

On Dec 15, 9:42 am, "Amy Blankenship"
<[email protected]> wrote:
> "drydem" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:e5bef98f-8180-441b-920e-e706448c9926@s19g2000prg.googlegroups.com...
> ...> I also got killed trying
> > to do that - so I never tried it again.
>
> ...
>
> Well, that is logical enough. But you're a good typist for a ghost.


LOL. Yes - I should've proofed it. ;-)
Should have type "almost" rather than "also."

 

[drydem]

On Dec 15, 11:33 am, "Claire Petersky" <[email protected]>
wrote:
> "George Conklin" <[email protected]> wrote in message
>
> news:[email protected]...
>
>
>
> > "smn" <[email protected]> wrote in message
> >news:lId8j.4678$ox1.1584@pd7urf3no...
>
> > . Cyclists are doing you a favor
> >> but are grossly unloved.
>
> > Right. By slowing a whole road down to 10 mph, they are doing no one a
> > favor. You are causing huge amounts of congestion.
>
> Ha ha ha ha ha! This is so funny! I can just imagine George's eyes twinkling
> when he wrote this one.
>
> As we all know, the cause of congestion is cars. Several times this last
> month I've had to drive to work, and I didn't see thousands of bicycles in
> front of me on I-90, slowing the freeway down to a halt. They were all
> nicely pedalling along on the I-90 bicycle trail, merry and free, while I
> was shut into my malodorous steel box, creeping along in stop-and-go
> traffic.
>
> There were one or two I had to pass on suburban streets on my way to the
> freeway, but if I lost more than a second or two getting around them, I
> don't remember one way or the other.
>
> --
> Warm Regards,
>
> Claire Peterskyhttp://www.bicyclemeditations.org/
> See the books I've set free at:http://bookcrossing.com/referral/Cpetersky


In Washington DC area, the number of cars on the road during
rush hour is due to the number of residential units allowed to
be built in particular *residential* clusters and the location of
commerial/employment centers.

In generall, day to day one way commuting is best kept to less
than 30 minutes. For pedestrians than means less than
3 miles from residential to shopping and employment centers.
For biking this means less than 6 miles. For bus routes
it means less than 12 miles. If bus routes have their own
designated road - that they don't have to share with other motor
vehicles - their effective range can be increase to that of
a rail route. For rail routes it means less than 20 miles.
For motor vehicles, it can mean less than 32 miles
if one is using a super highway with a 65 mph speed limit.
A hi speed ( +120 mph ) rail lines when used as employment
commuting transportation and increase the employment
radius to over 60 miles. Hi speed rail development cost
is very costly and requires national economic support.
Thus the motor vehicles allow for the largest local
development planning radius. Because of the cost
of operating a sea going vessel and air transport,
they are exclude as an employment commuting
option - albeit in some areas water ferries are
sometimes used for employment commuting.

On the local level, synchronizing the density of residential
and commerical development with the transporation
infrastructure via an area growth policy or by zoning
ordinance can reduce or limit traffic congestion.
Hailed as *Smart Growth* local planner promised
to center and synchronize development around
*transportation hubs.*

However, local politics is often swayed by local
developer to increase development density before
there funding for additional adequate infrastructure -
hence over development and traffic congestion
basically brothers spawned by local politics.
My personal experience with trying to limit
overdevelopment at the local level rather difficult
if not impossible - often rationality goes out
the window when the term *future economic
growth* is put in the same sentence. (9_9).
Over development is then disguised as being
part of a *smart growth* economic plan.
( since *smart growth* is the current
politically correct and acceptable term)
Later *planned* growth can be used to justify
increasing taxes to fund the needed additional
infrastructure when congestion occurs
due to the lack of investment in the local
infrastructure. However, because the
tax base can't be increased dramatically
at any given time - funding for relief from
the resulting congestion will have to
wait. The result is that the average
day to day round tripcommuting time
increases to over 120 minutes. This
may go on for a lengthy period of time
until the local economy improves such
that enough public funds become available
to support the needed infrastructure
that previously were ignored.

 

[DougC]

donquijote1954 wrote:
> On Dec 11, 12:13 pm, John Everett
> <[email protected]> wrote:
>> I find the tinted windows in my SUV (Mercedes-Benz ML 320) do a
>> pretty good job of hiding the fact that I'm hauling my bikes, which
>> are standing upright in the back courtesy of a Bike-Tight Glider
>> Board.
>
> At least that's an smart and smaller SUV. I'm talking about Supersized
> Unnecessary Vehicles here.

Sure, you know waste when you see it, and it's something that other
people do. I understand perfectly.

-------

I would rather just see fuel prices rise, myself. It would encourage
conservation at all levels. After all, what good is it for a person to
trade-in a huge SUV for a tiny car, and then have to drive the tiny car
as many trips to move what they were using the SUV for? Unless they
should have to get permission from YOU to pick a big car, and if that's
the case, go eat a ****.

It's rather like the problem with low-flow toilets: if you just have to
flush them multiple times to do the job, then what was the point?

------

I'm just waiting to catch some Earth-First fruitcake messing with my
SUV. They're going to feel pretty guilty as they're "wasting some of the
Earth's precious resources" down at the hospital emergency room.
~

 

[donquijote1954]

On Dec 16, 2:07 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
> On Dec 16, 12:32 pm, donquijote1954 <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
> > OK, here's a plan that won't cost you a penny (I know how penny-
> > pinching Republicans are for issues other than the war), so it should
> > be given serious consideration (as if they give a damn). Anyway here
> > it goes...
>
> > ENFORCE LANE DISCIPLINE, yes like in civilized countries slower
> > traffic keeps to the right, so here's where the bicycles belong...
> > Hey, I haven't finished yet. The bicycles are entitled to TAKE THE
> > LANE, because they are vehicles too, and everybody else must pass on
> > the other lanes. Put signs to the effect, and hand out hefty fines to
> > all those who break the law. They are the ones paying for future bike
> > lanes and other bike facilities.
>
> Just two quick comments:
>
> First off, it assumes you have roads with more than two lanes. Most
> roads don't. Heck, around here we have lots of dirt roads that are
> about 1 1/2 lanes wide.
>
> Second off, it assumes that the bikes can travel near road speeds,
> which may be possible where you live but not here.
>
> BTW, just out of curiosity, if my son was riding his bike to the ski
> slopes, would you strap the board to his back or mount the front tire
> on it? What about wind resistance? What about the occasional piece
> of dry pavement? Hmmmmm.

Yes, I'm assuming most important roads have more than 2 lanes.

In two or more lane roads, bikes may do little to slow traffic, as the
more cars out there, the fewer cars. In cases like yours I'd build a
separate bike path.

Your son, by the way, can use a bike trailer.

 

[donquijote1954]

On Dec 16, 5:38 pm, donquijote1954 <[email protected]>
wrote:
> On Dec 16, 2:07 pm, Pat <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> > On Dec 16, 12:32 pm, donquijote1954 <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
>
> > > OK, here's a plan that won't cost you a penny (I know how penny-
> > > pinching Republicans are for issues other than the war), so it should
> > > be given serious consideration (as if they give a damn). Anyway here
> > > it goes...
>
> > > ENFORCE LANE DISCIPLINE, yes like in civilized countries slower
> > > traffic keeps to the right, so here's where the bicycles belong...
> > > Hey, I haven't finished yet. The bicycles are entitled to TAKE THE
> > > LANE, because they are vehicles too, and everybody else must pass on
> > > the other lanes. Put signs to the effect, and hand out hefty fines to
> > > all those who break the law. They are the ones paying for future bike
> > > lanes and other bike facilities.
>
> > Just two quick comments:
>
> > First off, it assumes you have roads with more than two lanes. Most
> > roads don't. Heck, around here we have lots of dirt roads that are
> > about 1 1/2 lanes wide.
>
> > Second off, it assumes that the bikes can travel near road speeds,
> > which may be possible where you live but not here.
>
> > BTW, just out of curiosity, if my son was riding his bike to the ski
> > slopes, would you strap the board to his back or mount the front tire
> > on it? What about wind resistance? What about the occasional piece
> > of dry pavement? Hmmmmm.
>
> Yes, I'm assuming most important roads have more than 2 lanes.
>
> In two or more lane roads, bikes may do little to slow traffic, as the
> more cars out there, the fewer cars.

CORRECTION: The more bikes the fewer cars.

 

[George Conklin]

"DougC" <[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
> donquijote1954 wrote:
> > On Dec 11, 12:13 pm, John Everett
> > <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> I find the tinted windows in my SUV (Mercedes-Benz ML 320) do a
> >> pretty good job of hiding the fact that I'm hauling my bikes, which
> >> are standing upright in the back courtesy of a Bike-Tight Glider
> >> Board.
> >
> > At least that's an smart and smaller SUV. I'm talking about Supersized
> > Unnecessary Vehicles here.
>
> Sure, you know waste when you see it, and it's something that other
> people do. I understand perfectly.

What is interesting is how many people who post on Usenet do nothing
practical themselves. Thus a vehicle will will allow you to carry home a 4
x 8 piece of plywood is called "Unnecessary" by those who always have to let
someone else do anything other than blab.