Long, as usual <g> Re: [at-l] Re:Hiking for causes/Wingy

[DaRedhead@xxxxxxx (DaRedhead@xxxxxxx)]

--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
In a message dated 4/26/2003 1:54:14 AM Eastern Daylight Time, RoksnRoots
writes:

> I believe I did explain this before. You have to understand with Trailplace
> that it is a site designed to promote active participation in the AT.

How can you promote "active" participation in the AT when you allow no
mention on your site of any other AT websites, including the ATC, ALDHA, ect.
and no links to any other site involved in the AT? I'm just curious - ya know
- because all the information *I* recieved on various environmental and trail
issues I recieved from those "banned" places, plus this *list*, and off list
by other hikers I know, and thru mailings from organizations that actually
support the Trail with time and money.  And after I recieve it from them, I
research it.  Then I write, or call, as needed.  I *don't* blindly listen to
one mans opinion on one website who allows no other opinions to be voiced.
That doesn't mean I think his purpose or belief in what the AT should be is
not valid. That doesn't mean he doesn't post occassionally some real issues.
It just means that I'd rather have a bit more information than what he allows
on his website - which is his opinion. That's all he allows.  If you
personally have such faith in him as to believe every word he says, and never
feel the need to actually research the situation or issue at hand, by all
means - send his automatic emails. But don't try to pretend he promotes
"active" anything except to agree with him - because he doesn't.

I also "actively participate" in the AT by hiking it, paying dues to real
organizations that show real results regarding the AT, supporting it either
monetarily or with trail maintenance if possible, and with my web or other
computer skills when I can't even afford membership fees, and in any way I
can, period.

With TP, there were no other links, no other sources of information other
than what that particular webmaster decided to impart.  There was no
interaction, no real debate allowed, and no ideas other than do what "WF"
told you to do. (i.e. fill in this form, send it, or get kicked off my list.)
 Tell me again - how is that designed to promote active participation in the
AT? I'm just wonderin' . . . because I think your idea of "active
participation" in the AT and mine differ just a tad bit.  The sad part is - I
really believe you care about the Trail.  Which is why I can't believe you'd
actually say something so patently untrue and easily proved false as the
above.

Red