[at-l] Cell phones VS Nature - An attempt to clarify - LONG (Saunterer)

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

In a message dated 8/3/2005 8:18:22 PM Eastern Standard Time, 
jbullar1@twcny.rr.com writes:
*
*
*
development of the recreational camp. It is something neither urban nor 
rural. 
"There are in the Appalachian belt probably 25 million acres of grazing and 
agricultural land awaiting development. Here is room for a whole new rural 
population. Here is an opportunity - if only the way can be found - for that 
counter migration from city to country that has so long been prayed for." He then 
goes on to propose the trail (and a *whole bunch* of other development) in the 
Appalachian Trail corridor. _Every single argument_ that MacKaye makes in 
favor of the project points out its benefit to *people*.

                ***     Some people don't and will never "get it". In the 
several years we've discussed this, I've commented that MacKaye was no dummy, his 
main objective was preserving the Appalachians with a binding Project that 
would lock-in the region under an environmental/social relief plan. In 1921 
Benton MacKaye was not about to get a huge Appalachian conservation project backed 
or funded for the sake of preservation. It had to have a functional plan. Now 
read this and read it slowly - Did it ever dawn on any of you that MacKaye's 
experience with the Long Trail culture already in place in New England was a 
direct inspiration for the Project? That the early 1900's version of the (Long) 
Trail Community and HYOH was something MacKaye saw as worth expanding? I find 
it incredibly frustrating to make these keen observations of what is most 
important about MacKaye only to see in return "prove why MacKaye hated people". 
It is just infernally wrong as far as the Trail goes.

           What Saunterer leaves out is the entire other side of the history 
where MacKaye describes the actual Trail corridor itself as being a primitive 
and wild place necessary for exposing visitors to primeval America for the 
sake of Trail shock (wilderness immersion). That is pretty much true today, and 
why people go to the Trail. The original purpose of this topic was to show that 
there was real background for Trail advocacy. People who comb the 'Regional 
Planning' article for the camp development parts are not looking at the 
wilderness mechanism part clearly elaborated by MacKaye. Again, the responses show 
the argument isn't be followed that well. In reaction to this I've seen some 
alleged Trail voices respond "there was no hidden agenda". Strangely, these 
people don't discuss what I wrote above.
           

Your arguments aren't arguments at all.
******************************************************************************
****
For the benefit of any newbees to AT-L who may be wondering what is 
happening. Several years ago RnR came to AT-L from another list (ATML, now defunct) 
where the moderator and a cadre of dedicated followers enjoyed "discussing" the 
deeper meaning of the trail. The list became defunct when the moderator got 
miffed over some people disputing his narrow view of the AT and he abruptly shut 
down his entire website along with the mail list. The website is now 
functioning again but in a way that nothing can be posted which disagrees with him.

Upon arrival in AT-L, RnR (and one or two others of lesser passion or at less 
less vocal about it) attempted to convert AT-L into the type of list they had 
been deprived of by the closure of ATML. Since then whenever there is mention 
of anything that touches one of his 'hot buttons', and cell phones are one 
such subject, he draws us into one of these convoluted arguments. You may have 
noticed they follow a pattern. 
Someone posts something and RnR latches onto one part of the post as an 
entree to expounding his view of the AT. It includes one or more comments implying 
the original author said something he/she did not and/or insults the original 
author. 
The author and/or others respond saying that RnR has misinterpreted and 
presenting a refutation of the position RnR posed. 
RnR re-responds by restating what he has already said and escalating the 
misrepresentation/insults instead of responding directly to anyone else's 
arguments. In the entire time he has been here I yet to see him respond directly to 
any argument presented. 
Eventually this cycle devolves to an exchange where RnR accuses his 
opponent(s) of what he has done from the outset and the whole thing fizzles out in 
exhaustion. 
This cycle is as predictable as the sun rising tomorrow morning. I know 
because (eternal optimist that I am) I have been caught up in it many times in the 
apparently false belief that he can actually be reasoned with. To my knowledge 
however RnR has not, in the entire time he has been a member of AT-L 
converted a single person to his point of view. He has alienated quite a few list 
members with his repeated accusations that we all hate the trail and are out to 
destroy it (all evidence being to the contrary). Still he must derive some 
satisfaction from his outbursts since he persists from time to time.

If you are disturbed by these periodic exchanges be assured that AT-L, 
although we do get off track frequently, is a valuable resource for hikers and the 
folks here are pretty nice people. We're just a bit quirky but if you hang 
around a while you'll get used to it. Oh, and I've yet to meet anyone here who 
"hates the trail and what it stands for" but I KNOW I will be accused of such for 
posting this and yes, the sun will come up tomorrow too.

            ***     This a low blow and off-topic ad hominem. I hiked the 
entire Appalachian Trail end to end and many long sections of several weeks in 
the ensuing years. I also maintained and oversaw the Trail with 20 maintainers 
under me in New York. I did many hundreds of hours of trailwork, including 
heavy stonework, a shelter, and relocations suggested, planned, and built by 
myself. Saunterer, the man who poses as my Trail judge, as I understand it, has 
never hiked the AT. I leave it to the persons Saunterer addressed to decide, but, 
myself, I think the bald slander above is typical of exactly what I'm trying 
to confront and symptomatic of what AT lists induce. It's reason is clear to 
more serious Trail members. I feel I'm owed an apology. 







*