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

[at-l] Flame Response : Cliff



In a message dated 6/22/01 9:17:23 AM Eastern Daylight Time, 
thornel@attglobal.net writes:

<<  You 
 respond and inflame those who maintain the belief that you are either 
 insecure or ill-informed. Those who attempt to engage you regarding the 
 process and history of events are ignored. Sir, you are a bully.

    *** I almost take that as a complement. But I temper it with the fact 
that certain other AT*L residents are allowed to freely go off with very 
little comment from others. If I'm guilty of undercutting my points by 
descending to a lower level of debate, I apologize. I see, however, very 
little mention of the free for all of hacks permitted in response. This 
digresses badly though, you're right.
    I find it somewhat amusing that I am accused of ignoring the challenge. 
It appears to me similar to the protestations of proof that went unanswered 
by the demander regarding WF's input. Pleas to let it go accompanied by 
requests for elaboration. What about that method? Yes, I am aware of the 
responsibility I hold to now flesh out what I stuck myself out for in this 
topic. I was waiting for things to calm down so people could just read what I 
sincerely believe to be important vs all involvement's with the Trail. This 
is not in heated response to the opponents, but just plain AT talk take it or 
leave it.  
 
 <You understand exactly that the issue has nothing to do with whether WF 
 advocates effectively for the AT or not. You understand that the issue 
 involves mercurial, bizarre and autocratic behavior that has saddened many 
 who have called WF "friend." It does WF no service to defend or attack his 
 grandiosity, as he is not able to hear such comments however they are 
 voiced. It also serves the AT community poorly to have such divisiveness 
 inflamed and maintained by this continuing drama. I think that WF serves a 
 useful purpose but falls short of his potential, alienating those who could 
 use his drive for leadership. I marvel at the thought of what could be 
 accomplished if WF and others could share the stage.

    *** Ah, not accurate to the record again. If you read back you will see 
that many made some pretty clear challenges to WF's effectiveness. So much so 
that they questioned whether he had any effect at all. Not honest on either 
count. 
   WF draconianism is infamous, but, to be honest with you, the more I attend 
AT*L the more I understand it. I try and look past that for the Trail's sake 
and ask where there exists another site that responds in such a way? AT*L 
seems willing to let that (and gains like a 3 million dollar tract) go in 
order to satisfy personal objections.
    As you understand exactly well that in this scenario maybe it is a good 
thing for the Trail to have someone who cuts through all this paralyzing muck 
of conflicting opinions in order to get things done. I honestly would prefer 
a "dictator" who makes the attempt to save vast acreage's for the Trail than 
a friendly group tolerating contrasting opinions. Not the best of all worlds, 
but productive and clearly aimed.
    I guess we'll never know what would have come from such a coalition. 
Perhaps Wingfoot's response to this withdrawal of support is to make his 
traditional site more of a one*way educational forum instead of compromising 
to community pressure. I agree about the drama being counterproductive. I 
also submit that trying to divest a site that has made gains for the Trail is 
also counterproductive in the same light. What Trailplace does has a place in 
the AT universe simply by default.
 
 >

    *** Some of that "blather" is the same substance from which the Trail was 
born. It's a shame so few see a need to live up to it now a days. Many have 
asked what my problem was that I keep this thread going? I guess what I have 
written would be the answer. I think it is important to understand why WF 
does what he does even if many don't really care to know anyway. I suppose he 
censors because he asks you either to get with his program or leave. He 
doesn't allow the chance for his opinions to gain the contempt mine have 
through this "process" you speak of. Some would call this fascism, I would 
probably (forgive me) tell them to go look at AT*L if you want to see the 
cause.

   Thank You for your response "OB"