[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.

[Malachai Constant]

it is a hiking website not a argument website.

[MtnGoat]

Yeah, that's why you *choose* to stop in to arguments and respond. It's interesting to see the gaping chasm between pie hole noises... and actions. Takes two, and yet only one of us takes responsibility for our presence in an argument.

[Tom]

The point of this thread 5 years ago waa to ask folks to think about their contribution to this site before posting. I suppose it comes down to what is value added for the forum to what degree. My personal perspective is that locking certain threads is a net positive value added. For example when people start debating whether the middle fork road closure is white male privilege.

[Anne Elk]

[Bernardo]

I don't like nonproductive arguing, and stupid, poorly written, and illogical posts. That said, debates on issues and values shaped by a love of hiking is very interesting for me. I often just read and would strongly pefer respectful debate without rancor or personal attacks. Our Wilderness (my preference to capitalize) is a completely human construct dependant upon our laws and values. How much should we protect it, fund it, restrict it are all important questions and I think the views discussed here are important. My preference would be to allow debate related to all the things that have recently been blocked. It's ironic that some of the most active debaters, support locking threads.

[Ski]

[Bernardo]

Man, I just wrote a great post in the just locked thread that was going to resolve the whole argument, but now y'all ain't gonna get to see it!

[Bernardo]

I actually did type up a post that was rejected due to the locking, but I was just kidding as to its importance. I'm in the middle. Hiking content should be the priority. Civil conversations on vaguely related topics are also entertaining and provide an outlet for lonely cabinbound hikers.

[Tom]

Thanks. I didn't see that thread had been locked. But good points. Easiest solution is for folks to just de-escalate so the mods don't have to make that call.

[Chief Joseph]

[Ski]

Thanks Damian! Okay so how long before somebody initiates a thread complaining about Girl Scout Cookie Sale? I am waiting!

[Tom]

Updated terms 9/3/2020. See wiki post at top.

[zimmertr]

Thank you Tom, I have also noticed an uptick in animosity lately. The pandemic is getting to people I think.