[at-l] Purism...to me.

[RoksnRoots@aol.com (RoksnRoots@aol.com)]

Felix wrote:

<< I also don't think I said that people
cheat because of popular sentiment. Partially because it's
an asinine thing to say.


    ~~~  No, not really. People who follow the Trail see trends. I have no 
doubt that popular Trail culture makes it easier to hike your own hike rather 
than commit yourself to finishing the AT as a goal. I'm sure the yellow-blaze 
network is easier to access now a days. There's no way to measure how many 
attempted through-hikers finished or fell short back in the early days vs how 
many fail today because they simply lost track of the goal due to presently 
existing alternatives. Just making a point, no need for offense. The topic 
was how the Trail has changed and why...



 And, I don't think about
things as deeply as you do...or, as you like to think you
do.

    ~~~  ???

>
>      ***   Yes, but there is a legitimate claim that
> conscientious blue-blazers are doing a better hike
> involving more Appalachian experience. There's obviously a
> need here for a review of the hike to see if it covered
> the requirements.

A 'better hike'? What the hell does that mean?



     ~~~   It means a hike that goes over more mountains, passes more natural 
features and oddities, passes a better variety of forest and habitats, spends 
more time in the wild, diversity, wildlife, streams rivers and lakes, 
Appalachian hollows and small towns, overlooks, waterfalls, campsites, 
historic places, geological formations, cliffs, etc etc etc...  



 Doesn't
'Hiking the Appalachian Trail' mean just that? It doesn't
mean 'Hiking NEAR the Appalachian Trail'. It doesn't mean
'Hiking a lot of the Appalachain Trail.' I'm not saying that
hiking every blue blaze along the way isn't more enjoyable,
or longer, or harder or whatever you want to say. I'm saying
IT ISN'T HIKING THE APPALACHIAN TRAIL.


    ~~~ Well, isn't the intention a tour of the Appalachian range and all it 
holds? A well designed blue-blaze could then actually be a better 
'Appalachian trail' than the official path.



After all that you've said, how can you say that hiking it
'clean' will help someone 'get the most out of the
through-hike challenge'. Isn't that what you're trying to
disprove?


    ~~~I was just trying to see all sides. I believe the central point was 
doing the whole deal in order to do justice to it. True, section hoppers 
could claim that they did justice to as much as they wanted to do justice to, 
but the line will always be the whole Trail. My point was that conscientious 
blue-blazers should be given credit if they walked a similar or harder 
equivalent. 
     The more you stick to the Trail the more it sticks to you. I honestly 
believe those who commit to a continuous traditional (ATC) hike will end up 
having a better experience and am trying to convince newcomers to keep 
going... 



Guess what...I didn't care what Wingfoot would let me get
away with. Guess what else...


     ~~~ You wouldn't be the first. Lighten up, it was a joke. Though I 
*would* have to question the sanity of a hiker who denied himself 
through-hike credit because he missed 100 feet...  ;)


--
Felix J. McGillicuddy
ME-->GA '98
"Your Move"
http://Felixhikes.tripod.com/ >>