Though not a promoter of Clay, I was happy not to see Reagan gain acceptance. With it's bald summit, Eisenhower somehow seems appropriate. The question is why would anyone, even New Hampshire-ites, want to honor Franklin Pierce?
Petition to change the name of Mt Washington
- Thread starter peakbagger
- Start date
Help Support vftt.org:
- Status
JoshandBaron
Well-known member
This is not entirely accurate. Estimates from the 1800s put the the global population of slaves at around 36 million using a narrow definition. Current estimates are about 40 million using a much broader set of criteria. If using the narrower criteria more closely aligned with the traditional definition of slavery from the 1800s, the current count would be closer to 9 million. If using the broader defintion, the 36 million estimate from the 1800s is most certainly higher. As a percentage of global population it isn't even close no matter which parameters you want to use.
TCD
Well-known member
- Joined
- Aug 18, 2004
- Messages
- 2,069
- Reaction score
- 138
(I recommend ignoring the thread drift.)
Responding to an earlier post: I'm not sure why it's "lame" to have several things named after a great leader and our first President. I would imagine most countries name lots of things after their historical figures.
Responding to an earlier post: I'm not sure why it's "lame" to have several things named after a great leader and our first President. I would imagine most countries name lots of things after their historical figures.
What the hell? Why do that?
Mike P.
Well-known member
We live in a country where you can petition anything and in Denali's case... I agree this has little chance of happening and seems to be a waste of money too.
How many other moderators do we have here that have been unannounced?
I believe that peakbagger may have been the only one to answer the call for moderating assistance a couple of months ago. If it were not for peakbagger’s continuous stream of informative and sometimes provocative posts over the past many years, I think that this site would have died a long time ago.
I agree. He's just not listed as a Moderator but a staff member. As is at least one other member is while the existing Moderators are listed just that in their Avatars. Yes lots of changes here but I think it is not asking a lot for some clarification on the new site. I have ask these questions here before directed at the Old Moderators but so far have been ignored. IMO it is only fair to those that have been financially supportive of this site to have some better info on what they are actually supporting. In this case the Moderator at large has posted a provocative post that probably knowingly that there was potential for just what he is trying to moderate. Maybe some topics should just be left alone, or they should be allowed to be discussed.
Maybe peakbagger is listed as a “staff member” during some probationary period? I have no idea. But, I think that this group is as good as any to chime in on the mountain re-re-naming petition. If not us, then whom?
The “Mount” part of the boat name makes no sense to me.
Why? There are (have been) some USN ships with the word Mount in them, such as USS Mount Whitney, USS Mount McKinley...and I think there are many other non USN ships named in this manner.
Last edited:
FYI, there was an open call to assist with the site, I offered and one day extra capabilities appeared when I logged in. Hillwalker also volunteered and he also was deemed a moderator. As for the transfer of the site to the new and anonymous to me owner that happened under prior management. I was told several options were tried when Tim no longer was interested in doing the heavy lifting (whatever it was) and none worked out so that the current arrangement was the last attempt. I personally did not hear of this effort until after the fact at a Pat and Audrey event from Dave M. Had I known, I would not have been capable of taking it on myself but know of at least one member who had the skills and interest but that apparently is now "water under the proverbial bridge"
Keep in mind this site has been around "forever' in internet time, somewhere in the 30 plus years range. To have survived this long with only three "site hosts" means it must have some value. The closed membership aspect was a response to an issue literally decades ago when forum software did not have anti spam protection. We do get some rare ones if some spammer decides to join the forum but when I see it I nuke it. Therefore, membership is now open but membership requests from known to the forum software to be problematical blocks of IP addresses are quarantined for a moderator to look at.
Note, I think all the mods are volunteers with no financial interest in the site. It appears the new owner is just a commercial entity that does the technical side of keeping this and many other forums running and depending on volunteers to moderate and the owner gets whatever revenue is associated with doing so. There is no moderator school or owner's manual for this forum software, it appears to have far more power than I have figured out. As far as I know the forum is not a democracy, although any member had to right to vote with their "feet" and depart never to be seen again. I think I can erase someone and all their content from existence since day one but I personally would not use that option barring some unforeseen probably criminal action. If I am using my moderator superpowers they may not be visible to regular forum members but I will try to note that it was moderator action like I did when recently combining threads.
As you all know, a forum with no content is not long for the world, RE the dearly departed Rocks on Top, died a withering death when no one would take over it and content disapeared. When I see topics that could generate interesting discourse, I will start a thread. I try to self censure my posts and many do not see the light of day or are edited on occasion. On occasion some folks will not self censor, and in my opinion in most cases when member goes over the line we all recognize it and that member is effectively wearing a badge of shame. If the thread goes totally off track I may lock it but if it self moderates like this one appears to have done, I would like to keep a light touch. Long ago VFTT came to prominence as an alternative to the heavily moderated AMC forum and this I like to honor that flexibility. Do note that edits to posts are flagged and I do seem to have the option to "unedi them" if someone appears to being playing games.
One thing to keep in mind is despite being a moderator I have my own opinions and on occasion I may not agree with yours.
Keep in mind this site has been around "forever' in internet time, somewhere in the 30 plus years range. To have survived this long with only three "site hosts" means it must have some value. The closed membership aspect was a response to an issue literally decades ago when forum software did not have anti spam protection. We do get some rare ones if some spammer decides to join the forum but when I see it I nuke it. Therefore, membership is now open but membership requests from known to the forum software to be problematical blocks of IP addresses are quarantined for a moderator to look at.
Note, I think all the mods are volunteers with no financial interest in the site. It appears the new owner is just a commercial entity that does the technical side of keeping this and many other forums running and depending on volunteers to moderate and the owner gets whatever revenue is associated with doing so. There is no moderator school or owner's manual for this forum software, it appears to have far more power than I have figured out. As far as I know the forum is not a democracy, although any member had to right to vote with their "feet" and depart never to be seen again. I think I can erase someone and all their content from existence since day one but I personally would not use that option barring some unforeseen probably criminal action. If I am using my moderator superpowers they may not be visible to regular forum members but I will try to note that it was moderator action like I did when recently combining threads.
As you all know, a forum with no content is not long for the world, RE the dearly departed Rocks on Top, died a withering death when no one would take over it and content disapeared. When I see topics that could generate interesting discourse, I will start a thread. I try to self censure my posts and many do not see the light of day or are edited on occasion. On occasion some folks will not self censor, and in my opinion in most cases when member goes over the line we all recognize it and that member is effectively wearing a badge of shame. If the thread goes totally off track I may lock it but if it self moderates like this one appears to have done, I would like to keep a light touch. Long ago VFTT came to prominence as an alternative to the heavily moderated AMC forum and this I like to honor that flexibility. Do note that edits to posts are flagged and I do seem to have the option to "unedi them" if someone appears to being playing games.
One thing to keep in mind is despite being a moderator I have my own opinions and on occasion I may not agree with yours.
Last edited:
richard
Member
It will always be referred to as Mt. Washington by me.
DayTrip
Well-known member
- Joined
- May 13, 2013
- Messages
- 3,722
- Reaction score
- 128
Exactly. As if somehow changing the name of something magically erases the past and what happened and makes everything just dandy. With all the other far more pressing things going on in the world here we are wasting time and money on a vote getting campaign that accomplishes nothing. Anyway, rant over.
sierra
Well-known member
It's a tradition to name mountains and other popular attractions after famous presidents. Washington was kind of a big deal, so his name gets used fairly often. It's also easy to pronounce, kind of rolls off your tongue.
Mike P.
Well-known member
Having been a Moderator when the site AlpineZone was started way back when bulletin boards were the only thing, it's a thankless job.
Thank you for clarifying. Well said.
TEO
Well-known member
It's just the opposite, the naming of mountains, buildings, highways, sculptures, et cetera, has long been a tool to erase the past. Frick, Sackler, Rockefeller, Vanderbilt, Carnegie, Koch, Wilson, Lee, Davis, Jefferson, Washington, et cetera—some have acted worse than others, but all have used or been the beneficiary of edifices that have and in some cases continue to have a sanitizing effect on their legacy.
The goal of renaming such monuments is primarily twofold: 1) End the whitewashing, 2) recognize the unsavory aspects of these historical figures and reëvalute their legacy.
Now, do I think that Mt. Washington should be renamed? No. Was Washington a slave-owner? Yes. Is that problematic? Yes. Has his legacy been sanitized. Yes. Do some renaming efforts go too far? Probably. Is the act of renaming monuments attempting to "magically erase the past"? No. Waste of time and irrelevant to hiking? Well, when on a recent hiking trip to rural Maine you see Confederate flags in the windows of homes and other White supremacist symbolism, then I would argue, no.
Last edited:
You are making my point. If the USN wishes to recognize a former president or a famous state geologist, then use their full names, such as USS William McKinley or USS Josiah Whitney, rather than the names of mountains, which seems dumb to me.
Given your vast superpowers, I would like to clarify that my reply to you about hiking ski trails was just a joke and I was only pulling your leg, so to speak. Please do not nuke me and obliterate my VFTT existence. Good explanation here. Thanks for that.
- Status
Similar threads
