[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[at-l] On Wingfoot
- Subject: [at-l] On Wingfoot
- From: kahley7@ptd.net (kahley7)
- Date: Mon, 26 Mar 2001 09:25:47 -0500
OK..so I was wrong....we need to respond to Jack on list.
I started this questioning of dan's record in public and was challenged to defend
my allegations in public. That's fair. Sorry to those who get upset. Of course you read the
subject line and could have deleted then. If it upsets you so much ..stop now! There will
be other threads today for you to enjoy, I'm sure.
I have first hand accounts of dan's yellowblazing but I will not post them and I will not name the writers
because the writers haven't given me permission to do so. To be truthful, I don't blame them because
the way some people react to any truth telling about dan is awful. Jack references people who write
here. without there full names. Sheesh....few of us use a formal signature on our posts. But we know
each other, sometimes even in the real world. We know who's believable and who isn't. I know most of
these people to be honorable. I also know that some are positons that make a direct confrontation with
dan very difficult. Or perhaps they just don't want to get the kind of hate mail I get from the wingnuts.
BTW....you know who you are, but I bet you didn't know that aol isn't quite the fortress of security you
think it is. Especially when you create three new personalities on the same day in order to send me
three batches of insults. And then log onto aol using your ISP!!! Duh.....One of these days, I'm
gonna spend the 29,99 to "Find out everything about anyone" like the spammers say <g>
For me, the bottom line is that Dan now seeks to establish a new criteria for thru hiking....as pure as
humanly possible Yet he lied about doing same to the ATC. Maybe I'm out of step or
naive to believe that is a load of crap. When he just used those fraudulent certificates to make a few
bucks by selling his books, that was one thing. It was still fraudulent but nothing like the hypocrisy
of this current effort. I repeat, Jack, why should it not be dan's responsibility to support his claim
of seven thrus? Does he get to say whatever he wants and everyone who knows different is just
supposed to shut up? What about his own words? Don't they count either? Jeesh....a man
admits he lied, but we are still supposed to believe and support the lie?
Now about the Averys.....anyone remember his post about recruiting Avery Monitors? Is that
the kind of atmosphere you want on the trail? People making notes as to who goes where and when?
What will the procedure be? Thumbprints? Log books? Just what does he have in mind for OUR
trail? This is no longer some guy inflating his resumee to make a few bucks. This is someone
who wants to change the Trail to suit his own desires. I still have plans to hike and as sure as hell,
I don't want to have to give even a single thought as to which of the hikers I meet may be a monitor
who's job it is to evaluate my purity or monitor my hike in any way shape or form....PURE BULLSHIT.
One last thing....for those of you who have written to me over the years and said you think dan is full of BS, and
you only hung out at TP so your journal could be there....I think you are worse than dan.
Use a man's facilities and then dis him behind his back.......totally tacky. I'm afraid it's a sign
of the times when people give lipservice loyalty to a person, not based on what he is, but on what he can
do for you.
Below is a copy of the email i sent to Jack in response.
I have removed the portions of his email to which I reference, to save us all from countless more  's.
First, are you aware that this is the way your posts look when they hit the list? See below for full effect.
Second, maybe you were on the trail when it happened, but Dan did announce to ATML that two of
his thrus were not in fact thrus. I dumped all ATML stuff last year and I haven't a clue as to the date or the subject
header so there may be no way for me to prove it to you. That's why I said "I believe" in my e. I
knew someone was gonna ask me to prove it. But just because I can't quote his words, that doesn't mean
I didn't "hear" him say it.
There is a lot more I have been told. I haven't alluded to it in public because the people who told me
have not given me permission. Naturally, that puts their stories in doubt. However, since Dan has already
admitted that he mischaracterised two of his hikes as thruhikes when they were not, I am more likely to
question his reliability that others who have not yet been proven liars.
Jack, I can't believe you are serious in this. Seems to me, before Dan started TP, his exploits on
the Trail were fairly well known. Only when he started TP did the subject become verboten.
Beyond all the above...can't you see the hypocrisy of his Avery Award? He lied about the last two
of his hikes, according to him. I have heard from people who were out in 89 or 90 who say
he yellow blazed hundreds of miles then as well. So that puts at least four in doubt.
Maybe he should have been held to the standard he now seeks. Maybe you should be asking him
o prove his claim rather than ask others to disprove it. I believe that's the way claims are usually
handled.
yours...k
BTW.....happy hiking!!!!
1. I've been following the present Wingfoot thread with more than casual interest, tho I must say I'm DELIGHTED that I've so far resisted the temptation to contribute to it. Needless to say, I'm sure that there are plenty of folks on the list who are equally delighted I stayed out of it.
2.{nbsp; However, sorry folks, but I feel compelled to include this:{nbsp} While I'm NOT going to set foot in the fire that results whenever Dan is discussed here, I do feel compelled to comment on several recent posts that questioned the integrity and completeness of Dan's thru-hikes.{nbsp} However one may feel about Dan, I feel that it's improper to make such statements, assertions, or even implications without (so far) one iota{nbsp} of real evidence attached.{nbsp} One poster said "is there anyone out there who actually witnessed Dan's hikes?" or words to that effect.{nbsp} To this I must say, is there anyone out there who has corroborative evidence to the contrary?{nbsp} If so, they should come forward, and I want to hear FACTS, not gossip, innuendo, rumor, hearsay.{nbsp}{nbsp} I want someone, anyone, to come forward and flatly provide the evidence/proof that Dan's hikes are in any way fraudulent, as his been recently stated or inferred on this list.{nbsp} If this evide!
nce/proof is not immediately forthcoming, I respectfully suggest that at least THIS particular criticism of Dan should cease.{nbsp} Gossiping and telling tall tales about another hiker, with the sole intent of damaging their name or reputation is simply wrong, REGARDLESS of whatever other beef you may have with the hiker in question.{nbsp}{nbsp} Criticize him, by all means.{nbsp} There are many folks on this list with real and genuine grievances towards Dan} I understand this a lot better now than I did a few years ago, which is one of the reasons I probably stayed outta this discussion this time around, which probably surprised some folks, as I've been habitually described by some over the years of one of Dan's blanket supporters and apologists.
{nbsp;{nbsp}{nbsp}{nbsp}{nbsp} On the other hand, while I understand the anger his name generates in some quarters, I feel that some of the criticism aimed his way is unseemly.{nbsp} And unseemly or no, maligning, impugning, or denying someones accomplishments as a hiker, without providing incontrovertible, verifiable evidence{nbsp} to support one's accusations is just plain wrong.{nbsp} It's essentially slander, and it doesn't matter who it's directed at.{nbsp} It is also particularly improper to make these accusations under the cowardly cloak of anonymity found on a public Internet Forum.{nbsp}{nbsp} So, please:{nbsp} To those of you who have gone on public record (tho not always with your real name adding credence, integrity, and dignity to your allegations):{nbsp} Either provide solid evidence to back up your recent accusations, or stop sending them to the list} in their present state, un-corroborated, unproven, and unsigned, they dishonor their senders, and do no credit!
to this list.
3.{nbsp;{nbsp} That being said, thanks Belcher, for the words to your song} watching you sing that live on Katahdin after finishing your trip (yeah, folks, I can verify that she made it, in case anyone wants to suggest that SHE'S a fraud, too!) was perhaps the single funniest thing I've ever seen on the A.T.
4.{nbsp;{nbsp} I look forward to responses to the above post} should make for very interesting reading before I leave for Georgia. And please, before I receive a chorus of angry voices, please address yourself to the SPECIFIC issue I'm addressing here: I am NOT questioning anyone's right to criticize or comment on Dan Bruce's words, published works, public actions, or management of his website. Instead, I'm asking for SPECIFIC information from some of his more strident critics, regarding SPECIFICALLY the suggestions and implications that his hiking record is exaggerated or embellished, and I'm very curious as to what these critics can immediately present to us to buttress their recent comments, and prove to us that their allegations have merit. Ball's in your court, folks------run with it, or drop it!
(Baltimore) Jack Tarlin
AT 95-96;97;98;99;2000
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at
http://explorer.msn.com
------------------------------------------
--- StripMime Report -- processed MIME parts ---
text/html (html body -- converted)
---
_______________________________________________
AT-L mailing list
AT-L@mailman.backcountry.net
http://mailman.backcountry