[at-l] AT2004 Yahoo Group

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

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
In a message dated 12/12/2002 1:43:42 PM Eastern Standard Time, ryan@hack.net
writes:


> >          A good solution to the current AT-L problems is an AT-L site with
> >an auto-scrolling message board. That way 2 days worth of messages would
> >automatically appear and scroll down.
> >
> We had that.  Only about 7 people used it.  Much more people use the
> Usenet interface.



        ***   I suspect if the site had opened exclusively with this format
people would have used it and praised it. The problem probably arises from
users still having the e-mail option and not wanting to be caught being left
out. The core users shouldn't take it personally just because a
volume-capable format is used. Functionally, a message board allows readers
to view entire days without deleting. This form allows more information
assembling by being able to compare and review posts that would have been
deleted. Scrolling could enable a certain gear topic to be juxtaposed with
other responses. By being 'opened' already on the board members who complain
about volume or content could see at a glance whether the post interested
them or not. This would speed up the open - read - delete process which they
dislike.


>
> IMHO, A FAQ is nice, but there's a few problems:
>
> - Things change, people learn, new equipment, etc.



        ***   Members can always change the FAQ information when it
changes...




> - New people, with diverse experience, don't get to add to the
> collective knowledge  in an interactive manner.



       *** What would they being doing on the board the whole time?



> - New subscribers are less likely to get help, since they'll be scolded
> by FAQ-nazis.



        ***   The plus being newcomers having been briefed on their own
before launching the questions. A site which only worries about newcomer's
sensitivities is one that probably forfeits further benefits in order to
achieve that. Seems like the net is an experience of either being scolded by
dedicates or reprimanded by HYOHer's. At very least they should know all of
what is out there. In any case, the type of FAQ's we are talking about would
be weights, transportation, gear, food, LNT, and other neutral sundries...



> - A single, personal, experienced viewpoint carries more weight with
> many people than an institution claiming to be the authority on something.



          ***  Aghchhh...  Problematic and unpopular. Answered by moving past
this volatile subject and saying the Trail always needs more people backing
it on a fundamental basis involving all its elements. It would be nice if
this side trail to the, let's say, "comprehensive" AT view were left open
since there is a legitimate involved minority that does sincerely care about
the Trail - even if it is taken as aggression...

         Something to consider is how much an inspirational leader can work
for a cause. Benton MacKaye was such a person and the AT fell together
because of his involvement. How do we "aim" the AT? It's a good question. I'm
frustrated because the process of refining involvement tends to chase away
those needed for participation. Another tragedy is having a talented Trail
organizer undermine his own cause by hyper-micro-managing and quitting his
best successes just when they were proving themselves. High ambitions are
what it takes, but as with MacKaye himself, quitting off them has proven to
dis-empower the remaining gains that can still be won in the Trail's present
state. Right now the AT is a 2000 car train with one locomotive. It's is
underserved in both concept and oversight. I think Wingfoot had a certain
brilliance in recognizing that, even if he did run his choo choo like Casey
Jones. All said and done, the need still exists as does the cause. Looking up
and understanding ATC's AT definition can't hurt anyway. In my mind that also
helps improve the Trail's community and the Trail itself...



         -   R&R