[RJ]

in reply to: "After the Flags" Album? #48781

I’m truly enjoying the photo gallery, the more the better. I often wondered as I took a name from the e-mail and put in on the list of a given mountain what the people looked liked. It’s nice to finally put a name to a face.

[RJ]

in reply to: Afterthoughts #48777

Thank you for your kind words Greg. This event was most definitely a cooperative effort and everyone involved should be proud of his or her accomplishment.

[RJ]

in reply to: Afterthoughts #48775

I would like to extend my personal thanks to all the hikers who participated in this event and a special thank you to Greg and Frodo for making this event possible. Well done!

[RJ]

in reply to: Peaks List Update (2002) #48718

Yep, at good old QU.

[RJ]

in reply to: Peaks List Update (2002) #48716

Greg, have a safe trip. Thanks again for all your help. One of these days we will have to get together for a hike, either in NH or CT.

[RJ]

in reply to: Mission statement tense problems? & stuff. #48698

Amadeus:

I’m sorry if I seem to be overly harsh with respect to your suggestions, it is just that I’m a little tired of the crap over at the AMC website concerning this event. You made a valid point and I’m sorry if I overreacted.

[RJ]

in reply to: Mission statement tense problems? & stuff. #48696

Thank you. This newest version allows the core sentiment of the mission statement to remain intact.

[RJ]

in reply to: Mission statement tense problems? & stuff. #48694

If you want to change the tense to reflect the actual time of the event, so be it. However, I would put the reference to the LNT at the end of the statement and not placed in the middle as it is now. Placing it just above the somber unity sentence make me feel a little uncomfortable. The LNT is a housekeeping element and shouldn’t be placed just above our core reason for hiking.

[RJ]

in reply to: Mission statement tense problems? & stuff. #48692

Greg, I’ve kept my mouth shut while others on the AMC board have attacked our intentions for organizing this event since I believe everyone has a right to voice an opinion regardless if I agree with it or not. However, I don’t believe we should alter, rewrite, or revise our mission statement just because one person has a problem with the wording.

Where do we draw the line? Does everyone who reads this page get to rewrite the mission statement? I realize that you were trying to be helpful by addressing a concern, but I personally don’t have a problem with the wording.

If we try to rewrite the mission statement NOW, we might as well just scrap it all together. I agree that LNT should be observed, but it doesn’t belong in the mission statement any more than asking people to leash their dogs.

We are too close to the event to worry about the opinion of ONE individual. Our main concern now is to get through this weekend with the least amount of issues. Rewriting the mission statement as this late date does nothing but disrupt the continuity that we have worked so hard to establish.

[RJ]

in reply to: A few Thank You’s #48689

Thank you Greg and Frodo for your kind comments. I too believe that without the 100+ hikers our dream of placing a flag on all 48 would have remained just a dream. I would also like to echo both Greg and Frodo’s acknowledgment that without the committee, this event would have never come to pass. Well done to all of you.

[RJ]

in reply to: celebrating after flags on the 48 ? #48677

Thanks Greg, I really appreciate that. Every time I post a name to a mountain my heart would sink a little knowing that I could not participate.

I’ve tried to point out to my friend the advantages of eloping, but his bridge for some strange reason wants a “real” wedding. Win some, lose some.

[RJ]

in reply to: celebrating after flags on the 48 ? #48675

To be honest pedxing, if I were to be in NH that weekend I would be more than happy to host everyone. As the fates would have it, I am attending a wedding that Saturday in CT so I cannot participate in the event. I’ve tried everything short of extortion to get out of going, but my wife and my friend who is getting married would be extremely hurt if I didn’t show up.

I have participated in a small way by working with Greg to receive the e-mails of participants and to add them to an Excel file, which I then e-mail to Greg for posting on his page. By doing this, I feel that I am least part of the event, even though I cannot climb one of the mountains on that day.

Needless to say, I am not a happy camper about the way things have turned out.

p.s. The offer to stay on my land still holds.

[RJ]

in reply to: Allow multiple sign-ups? (2002) #48639

Under the Q&A section dealing with multiple peaks we can simply say that although there isn’t any restriction on how many people can sign up for a given peak, we encourage all participates to choose a mountain that hasn’t been represented so that ALL 48 peaks will be flying a flag on the 14th.

I have noticed as I assign a name to a mountain, when the last person to sign up for that particular mountain sees that there are other participants, they usually e-mail me back to change their choice of mountains.

[RJ]

in reply to: Allow multiple sign-ups? (2002) #48635

Given we need as many people as possible to make this event a success, we might not want to restrict which mountain one can climb. If we still have a number of mountains unassigned one week before the schedule event, we can always ask people to change their choice of mountain.

Keep in mind, not everyone who will ultimately participate will go through the assignment process. As word gets out, people might just hike up a particular mountain just out of curiosity.

[RJ]

in reply to: Web page #48629

The page looks great, Greg. Well done.

[Author]

Posts