[wiki summary]

UPDATED TERMS (9/3/2020) It is disheartening to see this site transform from what was once a positive, fun, spirit filled community to one more often than not dominated by contentious discussion and negativity. In light of this we are going to implement a stricter posting standard. Call it the family rule. Treat this community as you would your family. Give others the benefit of the doubt. Be constructive if raising a valid criticism. Check your negativity at the door. If you have an issue with something in a trip report send a private message intead of calling someone out publicly. Treat others as you would like to be treated. If you just come here to argue, please don't. The bar on the internet may be low, but it really isn't hard to be nice. If you bring negativity to the forum you will be asked to leave. This site won't be going away any time soon, but we can do better. Thanks to the all who have stuck around through the thick and thin and made this site the valued resource it is today, and for many years to come. I will be adding a pop up prompt such that posting will be restricted until these updated terms are read and agreed to.

[Matt]

Thank you for a good reminder, Tom. The light moderation of this site has allowed for a very beneficial variety of views and experiences. Let's all keep our contributions positive and helpful, like Tom said, so it can be a welcoming place for everyone.

[DIYSteve]

I'm in, will require a bit o' behavior modifcation

[Voxxjin]

ok

[Malachai Constant]

Ok I will try to,not rise to the bait

[NacMacFeegle]

[Bernardo]

Just got a dialog box asking that I consider the value-add of posts before submitting. Is this a new feature of NWHikers? Something just for offenders? Is the text of the pledge anywhere for review?

[Bernardo]

[seattlehikertoo]

ok

[johnmarken]

I appreciate the reminder and emphasis. I stopped posting for a while due to the tone of some discussions. I don't mind being disagreed with at all but adding a personal attack or rudeness wasn't something I cared to deal with. As noted above, some participate in forums to do battle and do like to rise to the occasion so I am happy to see the subject raised.

[Bob2005]

I don't know if it is related to the new terms, but I logged in to reply to a TR, entered my reply, and got: "General Error Could not set forums read DEBUG MODE SQL Error : 1064 You have an error in your SQL syntax; check the manual that corresponds to your MySQL server version for the right syntax to use near '' at line 1 UPDATE phpbb_users SET user_forums_read = 1066943 WHERE user_id = Line : 656 File : /usr/www/users/caver/www.nwhikers.net/phpbb/viewtopic.php"

[Tom]

Thanks. No, not related. Should be fixed now. It was a bug with the new post tracking (bookmarking) feature that only manifested one time under rare conditions such as the one you described.

[Bernardo]

Things have quieted down here the last fews days, after some fairly acrimonious discussion. Without getting into the issues, we can say there are always going to be differences of opinion. Not just little differences of opinion, but big "you are immoral if you hold that view" differences of opinion. I would suggest we not expect to resolve these issues here. Not because they aren't important, but because this place isn't conducive to debating effectively major moral issues. The strict no politics rule was the best idea ever for this forum. Not expecting to resolve moral issues, doesn't mean not pointing out areas of disagreement. I believe it means not being angry when your view isn't shared, not attacking the dignity of the other person, and not expecting anyone to change even if you make a logical and moral argument. This is a forum about hiking and it turns out hikers have all the views found in our society. We shouldn't expect to all think alike and we should accept that so that we can enjoy talking about hiking. There are other places to hash out differences, the voting booth for one. Instead, maybe we should see NWHikers as a chance to interact safely with people who like hiking but don't necessarily share our views and where, over time, they and we can gain new perspectives by not hating on the people we know are wrong. At the same time bullying should not be tolerated. I think many of us can slip up and type up zinger now and then, but I think we can agree on what bullying is and police it when we see it. It's a tough balance, but NWHikers does a pretty good job being lightly moderated IMV. When the moderators step in, I'm willing to give them the benefit of the doubt based on the work they've done over the years and because invariably they steer the conversation back toward hiking. I should add, I am open to hearing other views on this matter.

[Anne Elk]

Good post, Bernardo. I wanted to say something about the recently closed thread that was devolving into awfulness, but feared it had gotten too hot to address. There are extremists on both sides. I'd hoped cooler heads would prevail and that we could really advance the discussion and gain some understanding. I'd wanted Tom/Damian to open that thread again, but have since changed my mind, for all the reasons you mentioned. I agree - for whatever a new member's POV is worth - that the moderation I've observed so far is pretty good. A tough job. Going out on a limb here, I think most reasonable people would agree: "Testosterone has a lot to answer for." (I think that's a Lily Tomlinism). On the other hand, it doesn't further the cause of gender relations for women to see/hear "micro-aggressions" everywhere and constantly react at one volume (loud), especially when someone might be unconsciously 'ignorant', but not intentionally mean. See confirmation bias. I've observed this in contemporary race relations, too. As one male member of this forum wrote to me in a PM:

[Anne Elk]

Moderators - you already locked the thread on the Mt Dickerman break-in - really?? It didn't strike me that posters had gotten out of hand - but I suppose someone decided that it was a discussion that "might" get political, or at least not evolve into anything but spinning our wheels. To BK who started the thread - thanks for putting up the post. We really need to know about these incidents, and their frequency. FWIW, the last time I was up on Dickerman (overnight), it was before the parking area was constructed. I stopped at the Verlot station (I forget why) and happened to mention where I'd been. The ranger expressed surprise that my truck hadn't been broken into. Apparently there'd been a rash of break-ins, especially at Barlow Pass; the rangers somehow had a bead on who was doing it (a crew out of Darrington); they'd staked the place out a few times but couldn't catch these guys in the act. The ranger then proceeded to tell me a few horror stories. Break ins are one thing, it's the malicious additional destruction that's rough. One particularly awful story the ranger related was of one guy who had his truck broken into. Finding nothing to steal except a few quarts of motor oil, they proceeded to pour at least one quart all around the inside of the cab. Don't know what the solution to this is; the rangers obviously can't be everywhere. But it would be good to have access to stats re break-ins. I do think the Mt Loop, from Darrington to at least Dickerman & Big 4, are particularly susceptible.

[Tom]

The thread drift debating the societal cause/effect was pseudo political and not hiking related and thus off limits in trail talk regardless of how civil. The thread served its purpose to alert users to theft/vandalism at the Dickerman trailhead.