[at-l] Dissing the ATC....

Tom McGinnis sloetoe at yahoo.com
Sun Feb 14 13:30:07 CST 2010

--- On Sun, 2/14/10, Rosalind Suit <rosalind.suit at verizon.net> wrote:

> Why do you assume that the ATC is agin' 
> extending the AT.....or that they only support ideas
> engendered within?  

### I still remember my membership number: 4790. Had it from 1978 through 2002(?), when I just got too pissed off at the distance generated between the ATC and the trail and the hikers and the volunteers and the history and (God help me, but now I'm channeling Arrrgh&Arrrgh) the *ethos* of the trail.

Does the ATC do some things right? Yes. Sure Absolutely.
Are there some pretty terrif' people working at the ATC, or volunteering gobs of hours over years and years at the ATC? Huge "Yup!" again.

But the ATC is about the ATC, not about the Trail (nor, for that matter, about the volunteers). In things little-and-stupid, and material-and-big, the ATC has shown that when things benefit it or threaten it, it will respond appropriately, with regards to the trail, the ATC will steer towards complexity, central control, burgeoning organizational responsibility, and eschew simplicity, local control, and mission-standing. "Make-work" projects -- missions like "a uniform, graded trail from terminus to terminus" -- bridging every stinking little stream or wetness from Georgia to Maine -- no "when full, pls send this to Joe_Hiker, Main St. OH.".... blah blah blahblah blah. That's the sort of thing -- and just one dimension.

And it's not "dissing" if it's true.


More information about the at-l mailing list