hi.

i told you my name was jason, and that is legally correct, and thus the right answer in context, but i'm also transgendered and thus communicate informally as jessica. basically, i still need to sign things like leases and rent checks as jason...

as mentioned, i had been finding the second-hand smoke moving downstairs to be an increasing nuisance and had taken various steps to counter it. the issue comes and goes with the weather, often reaching the worst states in sudden weather shifts that increase the temperature gradient. so, it was really bad on that night last week where it dropped 30 degrees over night. the stubborn refusal for spring to set in is making the problem linger.

i've put a couple of fans at the foot of the stairs, and while it helps to keep it away from the very front of the door on all but the worst days, it's not good enough.

the next thing i tried was some open vinegar, and it had a larger effect. but, i wanted to make use of some carbon, as well, as it is very effective at adsorbing odors.

so, last night, i placed about $8.00 worth of coal around the front of the lobby. it was portioned out into used plastic strawberry containers and also into used, hole-y socks. the coal was in out of the way places, and it is very hard to believe that it was bothering anybody.

briefly, and i don't understand it perfectly myself, but coal is a very strong adsorbent because it has 4 open electrons (it's adsorbent properties can be increased by increasing it's surface area). so, volatile compounds (with open hydrogens) stick to the coal when they come into contact with it. the purpose of the coal was to clear the air of second hand smoke.

coal filters are also used for drinking water and in air furnaces. your father no doubt has a coal filter in his unit. some cigarette brands also use coal in their filters. so, coal is widely used for this purpose, and seen as of no harm to human health - unlike second hand smoke, which is known to cause a wide number of illnesses.

apparently, the tenants upstairs complained about the coal. the claim appears to be that it upset their stomach, but this is frankly absurd given everything in front of us, including their habit of heavy smoking. does filtered water upset their stomach? does air from the furnace upset their stomach? does the filter on their cigarette upset their stomach? i think that what is closer to the truth is that the sight of the coal hurt their feelings. while i understand that smokers have the right to smoke, they also need to understand that their actions cause harm to others and that their feelings cannot be the dominant priority, here.

the coal was then removed by **** in an angry fit of irrational rage. he also unplugged my fan, which i've since plugged back in.

the reality is that coal was a non-invasive solution to the problem of second-hand smoke, and i am going to insist that some kind of carbon filter be installed to absorb the pollution and purify the air in the lobby. in my mind, i even think that they are obligated to pay for it, but i will not push the point - although i would like **** to give me my $8.00 back for the coal that was thrown away.

moving forwards, i would like to sit down and have a discussion about ways to clean the air in the lobby that includes the upstairs tenants and balances their presumably aesthetic concerns with my health concerns. i thought the coal was a non-invasive way to clear the air. but, i picked coal because it was cheap. if there is some aversion to coal because it hurts their feelings or makes them embarrassed when they see it, perhaps we can mount some furnace filters on the wall or find some other way to install some carbon in the area to bind to the pollutants and suck them out of the air. i'm not picky about *how* the carbon is placed, but i am insistent that it *is* placed and do not think there is any serious grounds to oppose it, other than refusing to acknowledge the effects of their smoke - which i think is unacceptable.

other than requesting that **** refund me for the coal he discarded, i would prefer a collaborative approach at this time to a confrontational one and will leave it at that.