For reals this time! I was on there for 11 years. I didn't quit out of privacy concerns: I'm fine with my information being out there. It did bug me, enough, ultimately, that people besides me were making so much money from my information, though. And Mark Zuckerberg flailing around on the front of the New York Times provided a fun occasion. "Outside" forces meddling with the election? Meh. Our system has enough problems that I'm sure that was a minor factor in our gross "new" moment. There's nothing high-minded about this departure. I was just sick of it. It was an addiction, and it was more painful and annoying than it was life-affirming and socially enriching. No big deal. I will miss posts by Kathy Osborn, Keeanga Yamahtta-Taylor, Emily Sanders Hopkins, David Auerbach, and Katelyn Van Haitsma. Shiny floofs!
I became a $5/mo WDET supporter this morning (I'm also a Grey Wolf Chapo subscriber at the same rate). I like the Poynter daily newsletter as a source of news through a media lens. I'm already enjoying the quiet. One should have to travel a bit to the watering hole in order to remember to enjoy it responsibly.
In a wonderful essay for Harper's, Rebecca Solnit wrote that the present may be defined as "all that is remembered by those who are currently alive," which, as she goes on to elucidate, includes the living's memories of the memories of all those they have known, alive and dead. Thus the present of the 21st century contains something of World War I, Vietnam, the creation of the interstate highway system, the planting of salmon in the Great Lakes, the invention of the birth control pill, the heartbreak and trauma and intense fear and hatred surrounding the AIDS epidemic, and the way it killed the promise of "free love" for some of us.
As I go through boxes and albums and read the letters and daily planners and look at snapshots of my ancestors, I am curious about how their lives epitomized the ideas and technologies of their time. Were they early adopters of the automobile and television, or did they hold off as long as possible, as I tried to do with the smartphone? Were they feminists and freethinkers before or after those ideas emerged into mass awareness? I find myself being pleased by forward-seeming thought and action when I find it in these documents, even when the idea or gadget in question is something I sometimes feel never should have happened, like the automobile. And it makes me wonder: if a descendant of mine should read my diaries ever, or hear a story about me, will they be similarly pleased?
It interests me to look at what lens the future will bring to examine this time, and what will be revealed as awesome about now, as I am here, now, amid all the things that seem so wrong. What does it mean to take full advantage of whatever tools and notions our time in history has provided, is providing, could provide?
This is William E. Votruba’s report to the Department of the Army about his service in Unit 591 of the U.S. Army Ambulance Corps. A pdf of the entire document is here. A summary of its contents, edited by his son David C. Votruba, is below. To submit a servicemen's story to the United States World War I Centennial Commission, go here.
William E. (“Bill”) Votruba was a 25-year-old sophomore at the University of Michigan when the United States declared war on April 6, 1917. He knew without question that he should—and would—willingly enter the service, but wrestled with how best to proceed. Should he volunteer or be drafted? Thinking first to apply for training as an officer, he was dissuaded by flat feet. Then, hearing a new unit was forming at the University of Chicago to augment and/or replace volunteers providing ambulance services at the fronts, he thought this might be a good fit. He jumped a train to get there as fast as possible but, on arrival, learned the recruitment quota for the unit was already filled. His disappointment was short, though, as he was informed by the recruiting officer that a companion unit was being raised at that very moment back at the University of Michigan, in Ann Arbor. He rushed there in time to enlist in that unit. As it happens, the Ann Arbor unit (Section 591, U.S. Army Ambulance Corps) was one of the very few USAAC units to make it to the war.
The following are excerpts from a 1980 U.S. Army Military History Institute questionnaire completed by my father, then age 88. It is substantially in his own words.
Part I – General Military Service
From June 1917 to June 1919, I served as PFC in Unit 591 of the U.S. Army Ambulance Corps (USAAC), under the command of Lt. R.V. Ellis. This unit was headquartered in Paris and, from October 13, 1914, was further attached to the French Army Division No. 4, then under the command of General Gouraud.
What do you recall about entering military service (initial reactions and experience)?
Arrived at [Camp Crain] Allentown, Pennsylvania, after a night and day on the train. We were given some tea, poorly cooked food on dirty unwashed tin dishes. Many were sickened. Because of crowded conditions, several had to sleep on cots under big trees. That night there was a heavy rain that turned clay to mud in a jiffy and we were soaked and covered with mud.
Describe your training
We were vaccinated—given shots for malaria and just about every other disease or sickness. We did some marching—worked on small Ford cars—changing tires, etc. Drove around on a dump ground, around piles of garbage, to show we could drive the car under difficult conditions. [As for specialized training,] there were some lectures on first aid but no training.
At Saint-Nazaire, France, were given the job of assembling Ford ambulances that had come crated for overseas shipment. We were trained to operate these Ford cars. On the 13th of October, 1917, our first day in the war, we were given Italian Fiats, two drivers to each ambulance.
At what posts were you stationed for your service overseas? 
There were four outlying posts in the forest of Hesse. Avocourt B2, B1 up North, and P1 and P2. The wounded were brought to us by “Bancairies” [stretcher bearers] through the trenches. At B1 and P2, we got wounded from Hill 304. We took our sick and wounded to B4, a clearing station and then French drivers took them to hospitals south of the battlefield. Outside of being busy, the work didn’t change.
What was your opinion of the weapons and equipment you saw or used?
We did not have guns. The French 75 cannon was a remarkable cannon. It could fire very rapidly. The steel helmets slipped on our heads. There was very little chloroform or drugs to relieve pain. Gas masks were not much good. I have the one issued to me. We did not get enough warm clothing for some time. I personally got sweaters, some full length wool underwear and a wool lined coat from home. The French did not like the civilian clothes we were wearing. Wrap-around leggings hurt the calves of our legs and were not always neat.
Opinion of leadership…
For a month or two, there was a French lieutenant assisting our lieutenant. After that, we were on our own. As far as I know, we had no problems. There was a French cook.
In May 1918, while evacuating wounded on the right bank of the Meuse, north of Verdun, the French general in charge was [Charles] Mangin, called “The Butcher of Verdun.” Some of his orders were ruthless, and obeying them actually meant a death sentence to those concerned. We thought his discipline very harsh. Evidently his orders produced results regardless of those sacrificed who went to their death feeling they were doing so for the Glory of France.
One of our ambulance company was outspoken in his criticisms and wrote criticism in his letters. He was court-martialed for this and given a reprimand and small cash penalty besides having it on his record. I think 85 or 90 percent of our unit felt as he did but of course we obeyed the censorship rules and were careful of what we wrote home to our friends and relatives.
At one time, one of our outfit, W——— H———, objected to a small serving our French cook gave to him. There were words and some blows struck. W——— pulled a knife and for that he was arrested and confined. There was a court-martial trial in Paris. About six of us who had witnessed the argument and fight went to Paris to testify. [The offender] was given a term in the labor department. It was a U.S. Court.
Was there any desertion? Theft?
No problems of this kind in our outfit.
What did you think of the medical and supply services in the service?
After four years of war, chloroform and painkillers in France were exhausted. Blankets to cover the wounded were torn or patched. When staying at our pointes de secours overnight, we used these blankets for our own needs even though they were covered with blood.
During the winter of ’17, the Forest of Hesse–Avocourt Sector was very cold and, as mentioned before, we did not have enough warm underclothing. There were lots of cooties, vermin, and rats, and many suffered deep colds, bordering on pneumonia. In September and October, 1918, there was much flu; many were hospitalized and two died. I was sick for about two weeks.
What did soldiers use their pay for?
Wine, cheese, chocolate, or other food could be found to buy. The French gave us a daily ration of Pernod, a cheap wine, and sometimes a bit of yellow whiskey. The French at the posts were good cooks and made much out of lentils, vegetables, horse meat, cheese or rice. All meals included soup of some kind.
Was drinking a problem?
No. Here and there in villages could be found an épicerie—a little shop where some wines could be bought. Brandy was available, but for other liquors one had to go to a large town.
The wage of the common French soldier was 5 cents per day. One could not gamble much with that. As for members of our unit, we were glad to rest after our duties at the front.
Do you recall any songs that were popular during your military service?
We sang and played all UofM songs as well as those of Harvard, Yale, and some of the others. I am sure we played all popular U.S. songs. Our group loved music and when I was away from the base, they took good care of my violin for me.
Do you recall any military slang words or phrases peculiar to those times?
“Oh, the Ambulance! The Ambulance with blood behind our ears! Not infantry or cavalry or G.D engineers! We’ll get the Kaiser by the ——— and cut his ——– off too and put it in the Ambulance and bring it back to you!”
From what port did you leave the U.S.?
Hoboken. Our boat was the Baltic. We followed the East short to Halifax where we waited for a convoy of many loaded ships and their protective destroyers. The Baltic was very crowded, maybe 5,000 people. Considering wartime conditions, it was very good. The hold and lower decks smelled bad. There were complaints of moldy bread and wormy cheese. We were on the Baltic four weeks. Coming in to Liverpool, were struck a glancing blow on our port side by a submarine’s torpedo.
The railroads were excellent. Then from Verdun to Soissons, we drove our ambulances.
What sort of country and people did you expect to find? What were your first impressions and how did they change?
Driving through towns, civilians were very kind and greeted us. At the front, soldiers were exhausted after years of war. They were very tired; ready to give up. They thought the U.S. was too late in coming and by coming so late, were just delaying the surrender to the Germans. But those we met personally were very good to us—opened their homes to us. I think our members were all gentle minded too.
Perhaps our being there early [e.g., this unit came in with the earliest deployments, ahead of the main U.S. force and was attached to the French army] caused people to get used to us; we were common place, “old shoes.” There were never any severe arguments or hard feelings on either side.
Consorting with local women? Looting?
Two of our unit picked up a disease and, we understood, were discharged dishonorably from the army. No one I knew was aware of any looting or other misbehavior by our soldiers.
Morale? News coverage? Postwar histories?
Most of us received many letters from family and friends. Also, as many magazines as possible; many gifts of food, chocolate and candy. Daily wartime bulletins were posted at headquarters and at some bases; however, much information came from newspapers sent from home.
Items that I have read and studied on the war since returning I have found very good and very well informed.
Did you take part in any combat operations?
Only as ambulance drivers.
Did you participate in cooperative operations with sister services?
[Dad misunderstood the Army Department's question, but the French nurses would have been called soeurs ("sisters").] Arriving at Le Havre we found women ambulance drivers taking wounded from trains to boats. There were no women at the front for ambulance service or any other duties. There were women nurses in some of the hospitals, three or four miles from the front.
Was your unit ever attached to an Allied command? If so, were there any special procedures, training, etc.?
October 13, 1917, we were attached to the French Army Division No. 4; May and June 1918, under General Mangin’s 5th Division at Haudramont, Bras, and nearby towns. September to October 1918, Soissons and the Chemin des Dames, with the 29th Division. We all did all or more than what was expected of us and got along very well. Our French companions made themselves understood, as for the most part, our French was very limited.
What was your opinion of the troops of our allies?
The Australian soldiers were tall and good looking—about 6'2" or more. The British and Canadians were great soldiers. After the armistice, we worked with civilians in the Amiens, St. Quentin areas and [witnessed] results of the fighting there. They deserve nothing but praise. Our French 29th Division soldiers were great soldiers too at Verdun, Argonne, Soissons LaFaux and the Chemin des Dames.
Did their arms and equipment differ from that of our soldiers?
I can’t answer about guns and equipment. On two or three occasions, our French division used colonial battalions to attack the Germans. These soldiers were wild-eyed and dressed in their own fighting gear when going into battle. They were big men and their appearance would scare anybody. They were given lots of whiskey before they charged and gave a wild yell when in combat. They were terrible fighters; they mostly used knives, and if they did not draw blood of the Germans, they would cut a gash on their own faces, legs or arms. When wounded, it took three or four ambulance drivers to get them on a stretcher and into the ambulance for the trip to the hospital. They were absolutely no good at all in cold weather.
Did you and your comrades consider your enemy to be good fighters?
The Germans were well trained and good fighters. They were disciplined and well-armed. Toward the last however, some ranks were filled with very young men.
How were American prisoners treated by the enemy?
No personal observations but some stories I have heard or read suggest many American prisoners of war were treated badly
[On the other hand,] I saw many groups of prisoners being marched to the rear and put into stockades. I can imagine it was hard on them too to be prisoners of the French.
Part 2 – Occupation and Demobilization
How were local civilians treated by the allied military administration?
In December, January, and February of 1919, our ambulance group worked with French civilians going into the country locating the sick and taking them to hospitals at St. Quentin, Lille, Arras, etc. After four years of war and being transported to the South of France, they rushed home by repaired railroad or trucks to see if their old homes were still standing. Many had poor clothing and little food and got sick with pneumonia or bad colds. Many came home in rags and covered with sores.
When and where were you discharged and under what conditions did you return home?
I was discharged June 20, 1919, at Battle Creek, Michigan. Afterward, I had a fine home—with my father [Frank] and mother [Amelia (Bartak)] and older sister [Minnie Frances]. As soon as I was able, I began to help my father in his wholesale and retail leather goods business [Votruba's, in Traverse City, MI]. My military experience wasn’t particularly transferable. Nearly everyone wanted me to talk about my war experiences.
If the Army sent you to school, please recount your experiences there
No school—just $60 in railroad fare to get home.
What were your expectations of civilian life upon leaving service (postwar America, GI benefits, educational and career opportunities)?
After seeing what other veterans of war received, I thought WWI vets should get some benefits too, but I guess the $60 we got is all that we can expect. Apparently, they do not think WWI was a hard war, and WWI vets are not worthy of help anymore. If they delay long enough, WWI vets will die off and so they won’t have to do anything. It won’t take too long for this. Out of 40 to 45 in our section, there are about four left. Personally, I do not need anything like a pension. I am 90 years old [Grandpa was rounding up here] and have enough to last me. There are, though, lots of vets who do need help and it would be good if they could get help.
Was your service during World War I of any specific benefit (or detriment) when you returned home?
It took me quite a while to get adjusted. Because of the illness of my father and his need for my help at home, I was unable to go back to the University and get my degree [he had wanted to study medicine].
Do you have any historical material to add to the Military History Institute?
Yes: diaries, memoirs, letters, photos, insignia, etc.  I also have German maps of French territory which I feel are priceless. I also have about 45 French National war loan posters. These were a present to me after I got home. There were purchased at Brenton’s, Paris. I am holding my diary and many items for a son who is a capable writer and wants to put my experiences in story form. He plans to get the diary copy protected.
 Anecdotally, Bill took over a billet previously served by a member of the Libby vegetable family. Numerous Harvard undergrads precede the USAAC. The “Harvard Boys” are frequently mentioned in WEV's diary and those of his companions.
 Here it is thought the questionnaire was soliciting the name of a base or other location, but my father assumes they want the names of the “postes de secours” where he traveled to collect wounded for transport to medical centers.
 All this has been offered to various official archives but declined as uninteresting. Much of it been well received at exhibits by local libraries, etc., but remains the property of WEV’s descendants. Some of it will be on display starting May 27 at the Benzie Area Historical Museum.
Bacon on It
1991 Buick Riviera, $1,500. Car wash and wax, $5. Pallets, free.
After doing this tonight, it strikes me as a good exercise for schoolkids, to get them to read the thing: Rewrite the DoI for a different audience. I hadn't ever read it all the way through. I suppose someone must have done this before, but I didn't google it, I just did it anyway. It was very uplifting.—Emily Votruba
When in the Course of events it becomes necessary to dissolve political bands and assume among the powers of the earth, the separate and equal station to which the Laws of Nature and of the Universe entitle them, a decent respect to the opinions of all requires that they should declare the causes which impel them to the separation.
We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all are created equal, that they are endowed by their Creator with certain unalienable Rights, that among these are Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness. — That to secure these rights, Governments are instituted, deriving their just powers from the consent of the governed, — That whenever any Form of Government becomes destructive of these ends, it is the Right of those governed to alter or to abolish it, and to institute new Government, laying its foundation on such principles and organizing its powers in such form, as to them shall seem most likely to effect their Safety and Happiness. Prudence, indeed, will dictate that Governments long established should not be changed for light and transient causes; and accordingly all experience hath shewn that creatures are more disposed to suffer, while evils are sufferable, than to right themselves by abolishing the forms to which they are accustomed. But when a long train of abuses and usurpations, pursuing invariably the same Object evinces a design to reduce them under absolute Despotism, it is their right, it is their duty, to throw off such Government, and to provide new Guards for their future security. — Such has been the patient sufferance of these beings; and such is now the necessity which constrains them to alter their former Systems of Government. The history of the present rulers is a history of repeated injuries and usurpations, all having in direct object the establishment of an absolute Tyranny. To prove this, let Facts be submitted to a candid world.
They have refused their Assent to Laws, the most wholesome and necessary for the public good.
They have forbidden their Governors to pass Laws of immediate and pressing importance, unless suspended in their operation till their Assent should be obtained; and when so suspended, they have utterly neglected to attend to them.
They have refused to pass other Laws for the accommodation of large districts, unless those residents would relinquish the right of Representation in the Legislature, a right inestimable to them and formidable to tyrants only.
They have called together legislative bodies at places unusual, uncomfortable, and distant from the depository of Public Records, for the sole purpose of fatiguing them into compliance with their measures.
They have dissolved Representative Houses repeatedly, for opposing with firmness their invasions on rights.
They have refused for a long time, after such dissolutions, to cause others to be elected, whereby the Legislative Powers, incapable of Annihilation, have returned to creation at large for their exercise; the earth remaining in the mean time exposed to all the dangers of invasion from without, and convulsions within.
They have endeavoured to prevent the population of the earth; for that purpose obstructing the Laws for Naturalization of Foreigners; refusing to pass others to encourage their migrations hither, and raising the conditions of new Appropriations of Lands.
They have obstructed the Administration of Justice by refusing Assent to Laws for establishing Judiciary Powers.
They have made Judges dependent on their Will alone for the judges’ tenure and salaries.
They have erected a multitude of New Offices, and sent hither swarms of Officers to harass and take more than their share.
They have kept among us, in times of peace, Standing Armies without our Consent.
They have affected to render the Military independent of and superior to the Civil Power.
They have combined with others to subject the earth to a jurisdiction foreign to its constitution, and unacknowledged by its laws; giving their Assent to Acts of pretended Legislation:
For quartering large bodies of armed troops:
For protecting them, by a mock Trial from punishment for any Murders which they should commit on the Inhabitants:
For cutting off Trade with all parts of the world:
For imposing Taxes without Consent:
For depriving creatures in many cases, of the benefit of Trial by Jury:
For transporting creatures beyond Seas to be tried for pretended offences:
For abolishing the free System of Laws, establishing therein an Arbitrary government, and enlarging its Boundaries so as to render it at once an example and fit instrument for introducing the same absolute rule:
For taking away Charters, abolishing the most valuable Laws and altering fundamentally the Forms of Governments:
For suspending Legislatures, and declaring themselves invested with power to legislate for others in all cases whatsoever.
They have abdicated Government, by declaring some out of their Protection and waging War against them.
They have plundered the seas, ravaged the coasts, burnt towns, and destroyed lives.
They are at this time transporting large Armies of foreign Mercenaries to compleat the works of death, desolation, and tyranny, already begun with circumstances of Cruelty & Perfidy scarcely paralleled in the most barbarous ages, and totally unworthy.
They have constrained those taken Captive on the high Seas to bear Arms, to become the executioners of their friends, or to fall themselves by their Hands.
They have excited domestic insurrections, endeavoured to bring upon the inhabitants of the frontiers the merciless ones whose known rule of warfare is an undistinguished destruction of all ages, sexes, and conditions.
In every stage of these Oppressions We have Petitioned for Redress in the most humble terms: Our repeated Petitions have been answered only by repeated injury. Rulers whose character is thus marked by every act which may define Tyranny, are unfit to rule.
Nor have We been wanting in attentions to our fellow creatures. We have warned them from time to time of attempts by their legislature to extend an unwarrantable jurisdiction over us. We have reminded them of the circumstances of our emigration and settlement. We have appealed to their native justice and magnanimity, and we have conjured them by the ties of our common kindred to disavow these usurpations, which would inevitably interrupt our connections and correspondence. They too have been deaf to the voice of justice and of consanguinity. We must, therefore, acquiesce in the necessity, which denounces our Separation, and hold them Enemies in War, in Peace Friends.
We, therefore, the Representatives of earth, in General Congress, Assembled, appealing to the Supreme Judge of the world for the rectitude of our intentions, do, in the Name, and by Authority of the good residents of Earth, solemnly publish and declare, That these united creations are, and of Right ought to be Free and Independent, that they are Absolved from all Allegiance, and that all political connection between them and the Rulers, is and ought to be totally dissolved; and that as Free and Independent beings, they have full Power to levy War, conclude Peace, contract Alliances, establish Commerce, and to do all other Acts and Things which Independent beings may of right do. — And for the support of this Declaration, with a firm reliance on the protection of the Universe, we mutually pledge to each other our Lives, our Fortunes, and our sacred Honor.
First snow of 2016/17. Lights went up last night.
The four volumes of my life on Facebook since January 1, 2008, arrived November 28.
My friend Anthony and I explored this concept in the first decade of the 21st century. Donald Trump is really good at these.
They broke the mold when they made you.
I can't tell you what it means to me.
I can't say enough good things about...
No one does it like you.
He's one in a million.
They boned up on their Hamiltonian history, told their friends and family, got dressed up. They each paid the sum of ten dollars—a Hamilton—since their benefactors called for this rudimentary investment [“skin in the game”—EV]. When they arrived at the theater, they stood in line and received their tickets. Then the scalpers descended, offering the students hundreds of dollars apiece. ¶ “I could see them looking at the scalpers and looking at me,” the teacher recalls. “What was I supposed to say? I just said that if you're going to sell your ticket, then you're not going to be able to discuss the show.” None of the students sold their tickets. Touched by their idealism and disturbed by this curbside reminder of the relationship between speculation and economic inequality, the teacher led the group into the theater. “The play's about how anybody can make it,” he says. “But it's not true.” —Robert Sullivan, “The Hamilton Cult”
“The typical 1970s woman is a woman who’s wondering what she’s actually going to be able to do with the freedom that everyone keeps telling her about; a woman who wonders what new lie she’ll have to make up now, how she’s going to pretend to be cool, so that all these men will finally leave her the hell alone.”—Nathalie Léger, Suite for Barbara Loden, quoted in Christine Smallwood’s New Books column
De Quincey never renounced his incorrigibility. (WIth less than a year to live, he can still be found writing to his editor, “Did you say, or is it a dream, that I could have till the 22nd.”) Both his style and his lifestyle became glorious refusals to come to the point. In an essay on rhetoric, from 1828, he reserves his highest praise for "half meditative, half capricious” writing that doesn't quite know what it's up to. Elsewhere he says to the reader: If you insist on my telling you what is the moral of the Iliad, I insist upon your telling me what is the moral of a rattlesnake, or the moral of a Niagara. I suppose th emoral is—that you must get out of their way, if you mean to moralise much longer. —Matthew Bevis, “Supping on Horrors,” Reviews
Percentage change since 1996 [I graduated in ’95] in the price of U.S. higher education: +197 —Harper’s Index
What leads to peace is not violence but peaceableness, which is not passivity, but an alert, informed, practiced and active state of being. —Wendell Berry, Dissent from the Homeland: Essays after September 11
You would like to modify your statement with the word often. For example: “Short skirts are often accompanied by an increased risk of catcalls.” Forget every other problem with this sentence, and instead ask yourself, what does often mean here? At what number of short-skirt incidents swiftly accompanied by catcalls did this correlation between short skirts and receipt of catcalls cross the line into often? On the one hand, it’s a judgment call (often) made by an unspecified judge. On the other hand, is often necessary here? I mean, either short skirts are accompanied by an increased risk of catcalls or they aren’t. The risk is always there, or it never is. Furthermore, how will you know you are at risk if no one ever actually does it to you? But “Short skirts ARE accompanied by an increased risk of catcalls” may seem too definitive to you; perhaps you didn’t read all the literature, or the study hasn’t been peer reviewed, or the difference between wearing a short skirt and wearing nothing at all isn’t statistically significant. You are standing on a precipice with your tippy toes catching the chill wind of the truth as it roars past—the chill wind of the truth that soars above the abyss of error and deception. So you use “often” for plausible deniability, one hand holding on to a spindly hedge, because you really want to post something. (I think this metaphor needs work.)
People in short skirts often get catcalled. This bothers me less, for a lot of reasons. I’d again like to know who decided how many times was often, but at least there’s a discrete number of indiscreet incidents potentially to be counted, and once that number is ascertained, if it ever is, so can the statement’s truthiness. I like People in short skirts get catcalled often even better, especially if they get catcalled more than once per short-skirt-wearing episode.
By the way, “catcall,” according to the dictionary, does not include “Hello, beautiful!” Street harassment may be a better term.
Here's another, clearer, less fraught example of what I'm talking about. Unless you're really into dairy...
Milk will often go sour if left out on the counter. >> Milk may/will probably/is likely to go sour if left out on the counter.
I like to eliminate often when the dynamic in question (in this case, an increased risk) cannot occur more than once. No matter what, when I see often, I wonder about it.