Content last edited 01/18/22 .::. Note: This is a bit old (but still informative). Please visit my main advocacy website: holypsych.org

Note: I often set links to external websites to open in a new tab or window.

I've set up this domain as a protest as well as part of my advocacy for human rights and support of the rights of the vulnerable & marginalized. Despite the guidelines published by a local social media platform I have been badgered and even had subtle threats made against me, i.e., I was told that I needed to be euthanized when I argued that the city needed to keep the ban on pit bulls and was labeled a "rat" (see sixth screen capture below) when arguing that it was important to abide by the city's building code. (Anonymized exhibits included here in conformance with fair use in this criticism.)

There are users who take advantage of the restriction of it being only local, maybe without realizing that, but a reasonable & intelligent adult that is capable of using the technology should be aware of the potential disadvantage for someone engaging in political type debates with limited support or they should make a decent attempt to adhere to posting guidelines. I may not be the only one who has felt deliberately intimidated and ganged up on using the platform.

This is a sociology presentation (work in progress) about a young lady's post on a local social media platform concerning an issue with the title transfer of a real property. I eventually determined that the property didn't meet the requirements to have a stove in the basement since that would make it a separate living space and so it would need two egresses. There was no separate door or egress window for the basement living space so the seller had to remove the stove to make it legal to sale. The seller lost the sale since it wasn't prepared correctly and then posted on the platform complaining that a neighbor must've "snitched" on her. (It's more likely that the buyer's lender or the insurance underwriters backed out after scrutinizing the property's documents.)

One of the things that's been instilled on me is that there are policies, regulations, procedures, etc. that need to be adhered to for the benefit of safety. There can be a degradation or decadence of a social system (or institution) when people in a position of power over others, even by popularity (which is a measure of acceptance), promote a lenient attitude regarding policy or rules; that can be further exacerbated with an included message that the leniency is beneficial for the people in the subaltern class - a veiled threat is used as coercion. There is a demoralization pressure where the differentiating of right & wrong becomes murky or reversed and often entails exaggeration in order to be plausible. If a concession is made by the subaltern class on the morality then a new delimitation (or threshold) is set that can become a detriment (slippery slope) for that disadvantaged class in the future.

• screen capture of a Facebook post of the seller's announcing her leasing of the property
• Building and Fire Code. City and County of Denver Residential Housing Regulations (note: I figured that it's Section 2-202 Egress D. is what's pertinent for this case. The separate basement living space unit would require a second egress.)
• an inquiry about similar property in forums of real estate investing resources website - biggerpockets.com
• copy of presentation by Congressman Jacob K. Javits of articles by the lawyer & housing expert, Charles Abrams to the U.S. Congress on June 30, 1952 regarding unsafe housing in New York (provides background history for the two egresses requirement)
• update: Someone pointed out that Denver Zoning Code Article 11 Use Limitations Section 11.8.9 is the applicable zoning regulation.
• new update: There is a new (so it's a duplicate) post regarding the house where the person is reiterating her rant about gov't. (If the basement 'unit' had emergency lighting then it would at least reflect a concern & awareness of the spirit of the law but I'm not about to ask if it does!)
• Note: after doing some research I found that in July, August of 2019 there was an emergency egress window installed. Apparently that wasn't enough to get the house re-zoned for it to be legal.
• update: Someone commented with a blunt explanation & I can no longer access the post now.

main points... (work in progress)

• gender issues - double standards eminent - feminine cultural appropriation of skilled trade work while dismissive of mechanical deterioration
• demoralization - ambiguous morals - both for the real ethics and social media platform abuse & intimidation (scoff & rebuff)
• self-aggrandizing (& appeal to authority) - demand of only expert counterargument to legitimize their position
• encroachment - exploitation - entitlement - example
• scapegoating - misdirection - deflection of responsibility

With its intricacies and people involved, this issue is a bit overwhelming for me but from a social science perspective it is absolute gold. There is an underlying gender issue (entails a double standard in that the question would be: if roles were reversed would it be so culturally acceptable to badger the person making a counterargument?). In this case my argument is that the building code requirement (the word "zoning" is also used by other participants) serves a purpose for safety; and not only that but the appliance in question is an example of what the legal requirements for the title transfer of the property are designed to catch.

Although there is an insistence that the appliance is safe (to the point where my assertion that it is not has opened me up to abuse from other users of the social media platform) - there was never any mention by the seller (OP) that the appliance has, at the very least, been reconditioned to meet current code requirements for appliances of this type. Other people commenting are insisting the appliance is as completely safe to use as it could possibly be as it is right now. It is unknown to me if it is a gas stove or electric. If it's gas: is it one that needs to be lit with a match?, is another legitimate question since an expert points out that should be upgraded (at the end of the article there's the statement): "WARNING: Safety Systems provide additional safety features besides automatic lighting, and can be installed on most vintage stoves. It should be clear from all the above that match-lit ovens should not be installed in situations where proper use of the oven by a knowledgeable operator cannot be assured (as in vacation properties, rentals, homes with frequent babysitters, etc.)." (Note: after looking closer at the picture the OP included it's obvious that it's gas. It is possible to connect to gas and be in violation of plumbing code, though. I admit I didn't look very close at the picture but it was a moot point under the circumstances.)