Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
in reply to: Vote for the post-event party locale #49781
It’s decided. Locking the topic.
-Stephen
in reply to: List updated #49986@Jaytrek57 wrote:
Oh..Oh.
Owls Head is open again. :blink:
Never fear… I’m back “on-call” and if it means Owl’s Head… so be it. :flag:
-Stephen
in reply to: List updated #49983This e-mail was sent to approximately a dozen people who have contacted me recently. Not all of the contacts were negative, but most had a sense of frustration about the process. I wanted to share my response with everyone…
@Stephen wrote:
All,
You are recieving this message because you have sent me a question over the last month or so in regards to participating in the Flags on the 48 event.
I apologize for the blanket e-mail, and for the long response time. I have been very overwhelmed with real life for the past month and a half, and some things just had to drop lower in the priority list.
As you may know, the list filled up very quickly, and this has caused some ire and frustration for those who did not get on the list. I’d like to explain why the signup process exists in its current format.
As the organization for the flags event came about this year through discussions on the FOT48 forum, it was clear that we should continue with a first-come, first-served signup basis this year. It is impossible to find a way to make the process 100% fair, as what is fair can be somewhat subjective.
The process for this year came out of discussions with the group, and the programming was written by me. The main concern on everyone’s mind was to achieve 100% coverage of the 48 peaks. We have yet, since this memorial started, achieved this goal.
As a result, two ideas came to rule the signup process:
1) A primary representative will exist for each peak. This is the person who initially signs up for a peak. They would become the primary contact for that peak. The peak would then be “claimed” and further signups would be prevented, so as to encourage other peaks to be covered.
2) We would “reserve” the accessible peaks (Cannon, Washington, Wildcat D) so that non-hikers could have a way to participate.We had no idea that so many people would be itching to be primaries. As a result, some groups have been left out. Some have hurt feelings as they feel they have a right to certain peaks, and others are just not pleased with the process in general.
In response to this criticism, I’d like to point you back to the original reason for this event. We are hiking and planting flags to commemorate those who had their lives taken (not “lost”, nor willingly “given”) from them on September 11, 2001. That is the main point.
With that in mind, I’d like to suggest a few alternatives:
1) Hike the mountain of your choice. I hope that not having your name on a web list doesn’t prevent you from participating by hiking to the top of the peak and being present at the flag.
2) Bring some goodies for other hikers, talk about the event, or just be there.
3) Bring your own flag, even. There is nothing to prevent 2, 3 or 20 flags on the peak. (Just remember LNT).
4) Celebrate the memorial on a non-4k peak. There are plenty of other oft-visited peaks (Little Haystack comes to mind) that you can put a memorial up on.
5) Support the event. Tying back in to #1, just being present at the top, saying thank you to those who are there, is a HUGE help. Maybe even offer to carry some of the gear back down. Make some friends.
In my mind, this event goes farther than just signups and forums. Those are all talk. Someone once told me that you know you truely believe in something when it goes from your head, to your heart, to your hands.
With that, I hope to see you all in 18 days.
-Stephen (formerly The8re)
flags04@flagsonthe48.orgin reply to: Mooseland Grill Tally 2004 #49890Stephen
ON-CALL
2in reply to: Stupid "Reserved" question #49860Sorry, guys, Real life has me slammed,
I’ll try to do some updates tonight on the many questions folks have had over the past coule weeks.
-Stephen
in reply to: Summit Journal #49708All-
In case you hadn’t noticed, I added a Journals forum for people to make thier comments.
Like a guestbook, anyone can post there, and can do so anonymously. However, in order to reply to a post, you have to be registered.
Since I anticipate that this forum could see extra amounts of spam and innapropriate content, I’ve asked MichaelJ and SilentCal to assist in moderating, and they have accepted.
Thank you for helping, guys!
-Stephen
in reply to: Forum Updates #49758@MichaelJ wrote:
I like the journals forum! Will that also be where we replicate entries from the books out on the peaks?
Yes, that was my thought.
-Stephen
in reply to: Summit Journal #49706Rather than putting it on the logbook, how about adding something to the summit sign, kinda like this:
“If a logbook is available, feel free to add your comments, which may be reproduced on our website. You can
also visit our website and leave your comments there.”in reply to: Potential Ski Area Locations #49614@Greg wrote:
Is it safe to assume that we are going to consider other options besides the offerings from Attitash, Bretton Woods, and Loon? I’d like to follow-up with these folks as a courtesy.
Looks like we leaning towards something more open, so, yes, I think we can take these options off the table.
-Stephen
in reply to: Almost halfway! #49665@rbhayes wrote:
I also see a couple of people have siged up for two peaks (Hancocks and Osceolas) Are we sure they are planning on being at both peaks versus having mistakenly signed up for one and then signing up for the one they really wanted. Is there a way to un-sign up for a peak?
Yes, I have confirmed that in both cases, they will cover both peaks.
-Stephen
in reply to: Backup teams #49686So, what’s our decision? This Sunday marks two months until the event, and we have 2 peaks open and 3 reserved.
I’m willing to program whatever is needed, but I want it nailed down before I start, so that we fulfill everyone’s expectations without a lot more patching in the code…
-Stephen
-Stephenin reply to: Backup teams #49681I thought about the idea of making a forum section with a thread for each peak.
unfortunately, it’d be a mess, as it is sorted by latest post, not by topic name…
-Stephen
in reply to: Posting the Event Announcement to Other Forums #49642Well, there’s always the fact that coberg’s site got more than both AZ and VFTT combined! 😛
-Stephen
in reply to: Posting the Event Announcement to Other Forums #49640Don’t worry Greg. You beat out VFTT soundly…
: —-
312: http://www.viewsfromthetop.com/
(312 total)311: http://forums.alpinezone.com/
197: http://flags.alpinezone.com/
130: http://alpinezone.com/
41: http://www.alpinezone.com/
33: http://community.alpinezone.com/
(712 total)1033: http://www.hike-nh.com/
209: http://hike-nh.com/
62: http://webmail.hike-nh.com/
61: http://forum.hike-nh.com/
(1365 total)in reply to: Backup teams #49679@^MtnMike^ wrote:
In addition to back-ups on specific peaks, it would be nice to have a small group of back-up hikers who are alright with not being assigned to any specific peak ahead of time — hikers who will be willing to hit any peak that gets dropped.
Just a thought. :flag:
^MtnMike^We put out a call for on-call hikers, but only one signed up. Perhaps we should request again.
You interested? 😉
-Stephen
-
AuthorPosts
