[at-l] A Clear Choice for RnR

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

In a message dated 8/7/2005 12:27:49 AM Eastern Standard Time, 
rafeb@speakeasy.net writes:
*
*
*
No, I simply want to pose you as someone
with a need to feel morally superior to every
other hiker who ever set foot on the AT.  Not
that this isn't abundantly obvious already.
        
           ***     I'm surprised an intelligent person like yourself would 
try to get away with posing this as a question of "moral superiority"? Like most 
cell phone die-hards, instead of recognizing the terms here you are subtly 
trying to question the Trail's purpose as "moral superiority". Well, that's 
entirely inappropriate. The AT wilderness ethic is a last stand to protect 
undeveloped nature. It's more of a neglected last stand than anything overbearing or 
oppressive. 

         Cell phones, however, their value is the slow creep of indifference. 
Their moral value is progressive and indifferent harm to wildness typical of 
what the AT tries to counter. You are blaming the victim here Rafe. You are 
also ignoring/denying how they affect the Trail.





These aren't baited questions, RnR.  You set
yourself up for them.  They follow from your
own logic, or lack thereof.

          ***   They are. You totally avoid any mention of just about 
everything I wrote of the Trail's purpose, it's writings, and background. Rafe, we 
aren't talking about debate tactics and who sets themselves up for what. We are 
talking about honest understanding of the Trail and its purpose and the Trail 
Community's responsibility to such. 



Rather than accept that a cell phone solves
a problem that's affected hikers from day one...
your attitude is that we should forego any
such solution and tough it out.  Those left
at home mustn't worry, mustn't make demands.

           ***    What you are trying to do is change the argument to a 
baited question over hiker needs. That has absolutely nothing to do with what I'm 
saying. Solar Bear called you on it. You ignored him and came right back with 
it even stronger. First off, hikers have managed to stay in contact before cell 
phones. You yourself said the Trail doesn't have that many uninterrupted 
stretches. You ignored my answer to this and go right back to your own bogus 
rendering. That is all you are doing is arguing YOUR view of the Trail. It doesn't 
necessarily involve any commonly accepted Trail foundation or any reflection 
of where we are on the main talking points. 

           Once again, your argument avoids how your view affects the Trail 
and its purpose. You cannot engage this discussion unless you involve the whole 
argument. I don't want to waste my time describing that whole scope only to 
have you ignore it in your replies. It's the entire gist of this debate.




You offer no solutions, just preaching and
moralizing.  You want a trail walked only by
the purest of souls.  I'm confident (and
relieved) that your dream will never come true.

           ***   Anybody who reads serious Trail concerns backed by valid 
Trail references and calls them "moralizing" and "preaching" is just in plain 
contempt of the Trail. I do offer a solution. Trail members should stop dealing 
with this on such a superficial level and get with it. They should honor and 
respect the Trail's purpose.

             You yourself are a perfect example of cell phones' effect on the 
AT. Like I said before, some people don't like the AT when it is properly 
described to them - they just don't realize it...






*