[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.

[Anne Elk]

You're strict, Tom, but right.

[Bernardo]

Well, this thread led me to the break-in thread that I might have missed so thanks for that. I'd have to agree that while that discussion was interesting, it was definitely political. Not really a close call in my view. I wonder if people at the social discussed human nature and how to optimize social interactions like we have here at NWHikers which quickly get rough?

[Tom]

Hard to say since those those with a proclivity to discuss the finer details don't seem to have the time to show up to the socials.

[Bernardo]

It's hard for us hiking bots to take physical form.

[Chief Joseph]

[Brushwork]

[MtnGoat]

Since when was there an expectation that discussion wouldn't be 'endless'? What are the *specifics* of the metrics used as to who is supposed to be satisfied by a discussion, or how long an argument is 'endless', or what 'value' is? To me, the 'me too choir' adds zero value. Especially when it's basis is people who complain that a topic doesn't go their way, and think that shutting down a conversation, even ones in which which no one is attacked.... is a good approach to 'community'. Steering topics is what editorialists do, not people interested in actual conversation or 'value'.

[neek]

[Brian R]

[Ski]

Thanks for locking the other thread, Tom. Maybe a few more thread locks might convey a much-needed message to a few players here who are hellbent on perpetuating arguments for arguments sake.

[Brian R]

Priceless coming from you, Ski. Tom, kind of an eye-opener here. It seems what you've created is a de-facto private club. A sort of bobble-head progressive dinner party. On one hand, I can appreciate efforts to limit non-outdoor political discussion. On the other, I have rarely encountered someone with sensibilities as delicate as yours. It truly does seem to me when a discussion, even a civil one, doesn't comport with your world view, you simply shut it down. Completely your privilege, yes--but not a club I want to participate in. Enjoy the limited little world you are creating. I'm out.

[Malachai Constant]

Don’t let the doorknob hit you in the ass on the way out. How about we talk about hiking, post pretty pictures, help out newbies, cook good food, give useful links, talk about threatened areas, help each other hike, find partners, and just get along. Toss this political shiz where it belongs.

[MtnGoat]

Seeing everything one disagrees with as political, is evidence the observer is the politics.

[Anne Elk]

[Ski]