[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

[at-l] Re: WF and all that

Rick -
First allow me to note that I'm not angry about this, nor am I likely to get 
that way.  I'm much too tired for that.  We spent Saturday scouting, 
flagging and clearing trail and Sunday doing pulaski and rock work to make 
it passable. Tends to keep the flame levels down.

>Hi Jim, While I e-mailed you quite a time ago to say that I thought your 
>"Thru-hiker Papers" were brilliant (still do, BTW), and then again a few 
>months back to say I thought you were missing something since WF looks not 
>to have applied for 2,000 miler status in the year you hiked, I haven't sat 
>around this campfire in the past.  On slow days I have looked thru the 
>archives, however.

Hmmm - did I "meet" you on the OUTDOOR list maybe?  I've been on more than 
one list in the past and I remember you from someplace - but then the memory 
is the first thing to go, right?

>Perhaps I am the exception.  But former southbounders should be, right?

We're all exceptions in one way or another - but southbounders REALLY 
qualify  :-)

>>I'm not gonna touch that one right now - aahhhh hell, yes I am.  Some time 
>>ago I warned at-l that if WF's list went down, there'd be >an exodus 
>>(albeit temporary) of atml people onto at-l.  My words, as >I recall, were 
>>-"pray for WF's health".  We just may get back to this >later - but not 
>Sorry to hear you feel that way.

Sorry - the words were "pray for WF's good health".  Reason was that having 
all of atml transplant over here would have been a real donnybrook.

One thing you might want to keep
>in mind is that the vast majority of people on Trailplace are new to the 
>Trail, and just looking for some support before taking the leap.  Sometimes 
>these conversations take the form of "WHat is the best pot", but there is, 
>I think, something much more important behind those kinds of questions.  It 
>is that group of people that makes Trailplace matter most, IMO.

We're getting close to "long term damage" again, but I won't bite right now 
-- another day.

>>I'm not sure where you want to take this - or what your point is, so I'll 
>>make mine and you can respond or not as you see fit. On this particular 
>Sure.  WF was called out for lying to become listed as a 2,000 miler the 
>year you hiked the Trail.  I wasn't there.  I can't speak to the fact that 
>he hiked the Trail in all or in part.  All I can say with some degree of 
>certainty is that he wasn't listed in the ALDHA book as having been 
>recorded as a 2,000 miler.  That can mean only one of two things.  The 
>ALDHA left his name off in error or he didn't apply those years.  Hell, I 
>don't know which is the case.  My point is that the truth on that is cloudy 
>from where I am sitting.

I know about the certificates from people (several of them) who have been in 
his house.  I stood beside him while he whined to the bartender at Traildays 
in Damascus - and then had people repeat the story to me later.

Maybe ALDHA left his name out deliberately?  I doubt it but I haven't asked 
about that.  And there's no conceivable reason for that anyway.  He was once 
a member of ALDHA - until he huffed off in a snit because someone disagreed 
with him.  But I've never met anyone who cared.

I can't
>say if he has 7 certificates on his wall, and for what years.  I have not 
>been in his house.  If I was, I would probably be sitting with my back to 
>the wall.  Thats a joke, BTW.  I can say that I believe I accurately read 
>with my own eyes that he was only listed for 5 years in that ALDHA 
>yearbook.  Again, my point is simply that things are cloudy from where I am 

Yep - I counted the same thing.  Does it really matter?  It's kinda like 
cell phones - whether they matter or not depends on how you use them  :-)

>>5. But he DID claim the '92 hike through ATC.  Check with ATC if you have 
>>any questions about this.
>Can you do that? You didn't call did you?  You can really call the ATC and 
>check up on these things?

Why not?  If you phrase the question properly they'd have no real reason not 
to answer.  They did for me.  In other words - yes, yes and yes.

>>DON'T get this wrong - he did 3 supposedly "pure" thruhikes - and for that 
>>he gets points.
>How many points do you get?

How many would you like?   :-))

But he doesn't get to choose.  He'd take them all.

>>he hasn't.  But it gets right irritating when those who don't know what's 
>>real and what's not show up on at-l and call us liars out of >their own 
>>well of ignorance.
>Jim, I am not calling you a liar.  If anything, if you want to cast it as 
>such, I am just saying that you haven't prooven your case to me.  I hope 
>thats OK to say.  What's more you don't have to. You guys have been going 
>over this for years, its probably getting a bit old by now.

Yeah, it's real old.  And if you're not convinced, then do your own 
research.  I don't expect everyone to believe everything I say - I DO make 
mistakes - about 1 per year, I think   :-)

At least.

>To that end, I HOPE to not get dragged too deeply into this.  What I think 
>I will do is limit myself to just one WF related post for 5 of something 
>more to the spirit on this list.  I am going to try, anyhow.

I'm outta here - there were at least 30 posts that I could have put out 
after this weekend - but at the moment I don't care.  Maybe I will tomorrow. 
  I hope not.

>>Next time, I'll buy
>Then forget the beer, I rather prefer cognac.

Cool - I'll take the beer then.

>>Your beliefs, your actions - are your choice.
>Better to discuss that one after a half bottle

Hmmm - Maybe I should tell you up front that I'm a cheap date - I'll be 
asleep before that   :-))

Have a good day,
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com