Originally Posted by
MSPeconomist
...It's not a matter or being smart or not smart. Smart people smoke too, including some who participate on FT. Some smart people have started smoking as teens, some later in life, and for verious reasons they continue to smoke.
Yes, statistical studies show that smoking is highly correlated with socioeconomic status, including education and IQ, but this doesn't mean that no smart person starts smoking or continues to smoke (regardless of age).
FT shouldn't step into the nanny role that governments already assume.
Why can't those who do not smoke also come to the proposed new forum "to discuss where they can/cannot smoke while traveling"? Would admission require that one certify that one is already a smoker? Would there be restrictions along the lines of how many days and how many cigarettes before gaining access to the forum?
You misunderstood my point -- or read my post too literally. I was simply pointing out that some people wail endlessly about how FlyerTalk might somehow encourage a stranger to start smoking, but it's
never a real person. It's some gullible, easily led fantasy person -- a unicorn, if effect. If such people don't actually exist, then maybe we can stop worrying about them.
You're certainly right that FlyerTalk "shouldn't step into the nanny role that governments already assume." I couldn't agree more. How many people need to lecture smokers? Aren't there enough already?
Finally, it should be obvious -- and maybe that's your point -- that nonsmokers can visit the smokers' forum, too. Just as we cannot, as a practical matter, impose an age screen, we also cannot impose a smoking screen. FlyerTalk has no way to distinguish smokers from nonsmokers, and I hope it stays that way!
Bruce