Letters to the Editor
-
Hey ololon
I did read. LW did his neighbor two favours (fixing his car twice) and allowed his son to get away with not being punished for vandalising his property. Instead of gratitude, what he got in return were threats of physical violence and non-payment of a large part of the bill.
If you go back and read the paragraph again, LW states that ex-con agreed to pay, but asked for an extension (actually two), which LW gave him (another favour). There’s no indication that ex-con felt the LW was charging too high a price. What does appear to be the case is ex-con trying to weasel his way out of paying by using bully tactics. And judging from his past behaviour, it appears he is most likely to follow-through with real violence if further provoked. By the way, threatening someone is NOT acceptable behaviour for anyone.
LW has already "turned his cheek" to ex-con several times. Would you turn your cheek again and again to someone who has "slapped" you each and every time? Then again, maybe you like being slapped...
-
Ouch!
Cary-
You are a genius and have a profound insight into human nature which is why I read your advice column.
I've never thought your column was very far off the mark until I read the advice you gave to the person who was taken advantage of by the ex-con.
Not for nothing but that type of personality views the tack you suggest as a sign of weakness. Though I agree in principle with the spirit of reconciliation you suggest, it is he that should be making that offer! Of course, he has absolutely no intention of doing so and will probably call again when his car breaks down -- really!
I'm afraid that your observation about not getting paid is dead-on but the notion that this person is on the same page as most of us and will therefore respond as we might is - can I really say this to you? - hopelessly naive.
Come back to us, Cary!
-
Why so hostile?
Let me begin by pointing out that I did not say the LW should turn the other cheek. Not even close.
Now I will address Anonymous' impersonal points, if only because his inability to read critically is interesting. That he is making it personal is just silly, so I won't address that at all.
First, LW was paid for his services the first time. No favour. None. As a mechanic trying to drum up business, charging less than the going rate is not a favor, it's a necessity. Again, no favour. LW may want to call it so, but that does not make it true.
Second, what is this about the LW allowing the son to get away with something? There was minor vandalism, which LW didn't report. LW never says he could or should have reported it, emphasizing the fact that this was MINOR. What he did say, however, is that he didn't like the fact that the father didn't ground the kid. Says nothing about monetary restitution, so I am assuming there was no actual damage. Just says he didn't like seeing the kid out after making his complaint. So what was the favour? LW had no power in this situation, so he had no favours to give out.
Third, I'd say refusal to pay in full constitutes a pretty big indication that the neighbor is not happy with the cost of repair. Allowing him to pay such a large sum off is not a favour, but the only way LW was going to get any money. What other choice did LW have? If LW ran a fully legitimate business, he'd have had options, but he probably doesn't. And we don't know how much is left, only that LW thinks it sizeable. Not a majority, but "sizeable". Big difference.
Fourth, and last, there was precisely one bully tactic -- a threat after being accosted. We don't know what LW did before the threat was uttered. We do know there has not been any physical violence whatsoever. Yelling at a girlfriend on the phone is unpleasant, but many do it who have never raised a hand to another human. Far as I can read, the neighbor has never done anything violent. Ever. So what past behaviour is it to which you refer? Is there more of this letter than I can see on my screen? Or are you simply assuming violence because the LW claims the man is an ex-con?
What the kid does with a BB gun -- if indeed he is running rampant, injuring the neighborhood fauna without a single person reporting it -- does not make the FATHER violent.
The LW made it very clear what bothers him -- the money. Not the threats. LW is thinking about running the guy out of his home, for goodness sake, and I'd call that a hell of a lot more pointedly malicious than the simple, throwaway threat to kick someone's ass. For money. My response was to do what Cary said because it was best for the LW's fledgling business, as that seemed to be his real concern -- money, his business, and being able to stay in his inexpensive location.
I'll leave this be. Sorry for being so judgmental to everyone for trashing the neighbor, but you guys just jumped all over him and I cannot see why. Again, Paris Hilton is an excon.
-
Enough is Enough
Yesterday, after reading Cary's response, I seriously thought about registering to post. The request to see the world through Mr. Tennis's eyes was so obviously either cherry-picked (if not openly made up) merely to give Salon's would-be writer an opening to indulge in his meandering reflections on the world. I decided not to do so since Mr Tennis's endless floggings of his book, and letter selections--if not open fabrications--seemed ethically challenged but not dangerous since no one was asking for real advice. Today is different.
Letter Writer, a famous financial columnist just handled this question. She said that many con artists start out with small loans, mostly paid back, and escalate to requests that they have no attention of paying. Her advice seeker lost $2000--and the columnist said that it was a cheap life lesson. So it is for you.
Ololon, we are not being fake liberals, or trembling hysterics, when we say that your advice, and Mr. Tennis's advice, is full of it. A "pocket of peace", indeed. This man or his child have vandalized the neighborhood and terrorized anamals. The debtor IS potentially dangerous. If Mr. Tennis would get over his dreamy contemplation of his kitchen and actually pick up a newspaper, he would realize this could be a tragedy in the making.
Letter Writer, your fiancee is correct. Let the money go. Do not engage with your neighbor. Smile and give him another number when he asks for more help. He thinks he's "straightened you out" so he will try to use you some more. If you have a neighbor you really trust, you may make an occasional call to the police if there is a real reason. Be careful. It may get back to him--especially if a weak person anxious to curry favor with him or another shady type--tips your hand. Besides, if you are doing work that you're not zoned for, you could be in trouble, too.
In the end, your position in the neighborhood is probably untenable. Let's just hope he gets evicted--but that takes a long time. Yeah, the money hurts, but just chalk it up to experience and forget it. Your fiancee is a wise woman--marry her.
I think we need a new advice columnist here at Salon--someone who actually wants to help people instead of viewing any posting for help as just another exercise in self-indulgent tripe. In MY mind's eye, I see Mr. Tennis's typing away as he wonders how his musings will look in Volume II of his self-published nonsense--to join the dusty pile of Volume No I, no doubt. I vote for "Fairy Dust" or "GirlSix" to take over his job. Any takers?