Re[2]: [at-l] Re: ATML Official ATC 2,000-miler Rules

[tmcginnis@ucclan.state.in.us (Thomas McGinnis)]

     This whole purity thread is one of the reasons I quit even lurking on 
     the atml. I find it all "an exercise in stupidity, futility, and 
     frustration."
     
     That said, I must compliment Solar Bear on his statements below, 
     particularly "It is disingenuous to find the patch desirable, but then 
     rail against the rules that gave it its desirability in the first 
     place."
     
     And a note on tone: this medium -- being electronic email type stuff 
     -- doesn't allow us to *hear* how words are delivered, and the closest 
     we can come is to deliver the email smiley face {:^) or confused face 
     %^) or surprised face :^0 or whatever. But without the sounds of vocal 
     inflection, we often read others' words as more extreme than intended, 
     and this leads to *genuine* avarice infecting the communication 
     between otherwise agreeable folk. Please (and I know I may be a bit 
     sensitive.....), let's not have that kind of infection on the at-l.


______________________________ Reply Separator _________________________________
Subject: Re: [at-l] Re: ATML Official ATC 2,000-miler Rules
Author:  TOKTAADN@aol.com at ima
Date:    2/11/99 7:17 AM


In a message dated 2/10/99 10:44:55 PM Eastern Standard Time, jrowen@ibm.net 
writes:
     
> arguing about blue or white blazes is an exercise in stupidity, futility 
>  and frustration.  And that's not why I hike. Hiking is about freedom. 
>  The only one who has to be happy with the hike is  --- YOU.  Hike your 
>  own hike.
     
My only point here, and I make it with respect to Jim and the others who will 
disagree, is that ATC's rules are there NOT to constrain anyone's hiking style 
or choices, but simply to be a guideline to make the awarding of a small, 
cheap, otherwise insignificant patch meaningful.  It is disingenuous to find 
the patch desirable, but then rail against the rules that gave it its 
desirability in the first place.
     
Many have expressed their disdain for the patch and the "purity" rules that go 
with it.  That's perfectly reasonable and your hike can be more fun and 
meaningful than the purist's hike that qualifies for the patch.  What isn't 
reasonable is hiking by your own rules and feeling an "entitlement" to a patch 
you don't qualify for.  It seems we just had a thread where 100% of the 
respondents were against lying, so this shouldn't be too controversial a 
position, is it?
     
Happy trails,
     
Solar Bear
* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List |  http://www.backcountry.net  *
* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List |  http://www.backcountry.net  *

==============================================================================