Re: [at-l] Registers on the Web

[Trailmixup@aol.com]

<< But my point was this - even if people (in general) want their notes to be
 read by others, and even if the register entries are attributed by others
 (be it Season on the Trail, or a www site with a scanned register) they are
 both redistributing the material of hikers without (most likely) their
 consent.>>
 

Expanding on this idea (. . . It's been stated in so many words by others, as 
well.)

 -- The authors of register entries are writing their thoughts in a book that 
they can expect will be read by those who visit the site where the book has 
been placed, as well as the club (or other "owner" of the book), after it's 
full.  Do those who make register entries anticipate that the book (or parts 
of the book) will be distributed/used in other than the above manner?  (okay, 
okay --except for law enforcement, rescue, etc. -- should these uncommon 
needs arise.)

I know that my assumption has always been that the register entries have a 
somewhat "limited" audience.  My understanding was that some of the primary 
purposes of the registers are to capture thoughts of trail users, allow for 
self-expression and sharing of ideas, link members of the Trail community, 
and assist clubs in documenting trail use and maintaining or otherwise 
improving the trail sections for which they are responsible, through comments 
shared by the users.

Maybe the owners of registers who plan to distribute any of the comments in 
the registers in other (read "unanticipated") public arenas should make a 
notation in the front of the books stating that this is the case?  Just a 
thought.  (I seem to recall reading in some registers, notations from the 
maintaining club or owner making clear that the entries would be used for 
"this or that" purpose.)

Another thought.  (Hey, "I'm talking and I can't shut up!")
Isn't there a whole lore about the registers, including some "unwritten" 
rules about their use?  (For examples, the use of Trailnames vs. real names 
and the admonition (especially to those leaving the Trail) to not share 
information about the whereabouts of hikers still on the Trail so as not to 
make them vulnerable to "unscrupulous" characters.)

I know that we have relaxed much in regards to the latter.  We readily share 
with one another on this list, "Was out hiking this weekend and ran into 
XX,YY, and ZZ at Blah-Blah Shelter.  They were having a ball and planning to 
do a town stop at ABC and hoping to reach DEF by the ++st. "  Just a few 
years ago, that kind of info-sharing was strongly discouraged.  What 
information *was* shared was long after the fact or vague sufficiently to 
obscure details that could increase a hiker's vulnerability.  For a time, 
such info was shared only after securing permission from the hiker.  We've 
arrived at a point in time where I suspect that permission to share is rarely 
a thought in the minds of those sharing the info.  

I'm wondering if this practice is a good one or if, perhaps, it deserves some 
re-evaluation?  Or am I just being paranoid?

Are too.
Am not.
Are too.
Am not.

Trailmixup
* From the Appalachian Trail Mailing List |  http://www.backcountry.net  *

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