[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

RE: [AT-L] Re: [AT-L] Re: [AT-L] Re: Walking Sticks vs Ski Poles



Both have their place, but it goes back to the question from an old
tale....What walks on four legs in the morning, on two legs in the afternoon
and three legs at night. Those who took Latin in school years ago would know
the answer. So, I'm just saying it is a matter of choice. I use the poles
for serious hiking w/ loads, and the stick for little hikes (like with the
scouts). With the walking stick, I get to tell stories and use it for a
focal point for them.


Edward S. LaVine                                        GridNet
international
Sales Order Administration                         http://www.gridnet.com
Quality Customer Service
770.518.5351                                                   "If it is to
be, 
770.998.9096.fax                                                 it is up to
me"
elavine@gridnet.com

>----------
>From: 	tfort[SMTP:tfort@felix.TECLink.Net]
>Sent: 	Wednesday, September 11, 1996 1:14 PM
>To: 	Ed LaVine
>Subject: 	[AT-L] Re: [AT-L] Re: [AT-L] Re: Walking Sticks vs Ski Poles
>
>Felix wrote:
> 
>> I agree  t. , but does this men we're back on the "tech" controversy?
>
>No, I don't believe this to be a tech issue.   I'm actually on the pro
>side of technology.   I just believe a walking stick should be a found
>stick in its natural state.  
>
>t.
>
>-- 
>
>
>Tom Fort 
>tfort@teclink.net
>