Bad behavior

[Jack Tarlin]

The subject of hikers mis-behaving has been coming up here lately. Today, for example, there was a post about some hikers acting obnoxiously at a shelter in Virginia. A few days ago there was a thread about a hiker who repeatedly made obscene entries in Trail registers.

Here's my questions to Whiteblaze visitors:

*Do you approve of public discussion of this sort of thing?
*Is Whiteblaze a good place to discuss such things?
*Do you approve of people being publicly named/shamed?
*Or do you think that when this happens, we only get one version of
events and there's a possibility that folks might have their names and
reputations tarnished unfairly or even wrongly?

Personally, I think there's nothing remotely wrong about publicly naming these folks; I think it serves at least three good purposes:

*It might make folks straighten up a bit when they realize that lots of people
think they're acting like idiots.
*It might discourage other folks from acting similarly.
*It'll tell hikers, trail angels, hostel-keepers, motel owners, etc. about folks
they may well want nothing to do with.

Opinions, please. Oh, and if any moderators have thoughts/opinions on this, I think that would be interesting to read, too.

[berkshirebirder]

I didn't catch the thread you refer to, Jack.

Normally, I believe "evildoers" should suffer consequences for their actions. BUT...and this is a big but...

Just as we feel it's unfair for someone to badmouth a business without substantial evidence of wrongdoing, I think there's a good chance that those who leave an obscene message in shelter registers would use a fake name or sign someone else's name (yours might be a name a lot of hikers would know).

Chances are such a person would cause other, more reportable problems on the Trail.

Reporting that this is happening in a certain area might be useful, but I'd avoid attaching a name.

[BobTheBuilder]

I agree. It seems that an increase in anonymity leads to a decrease in civilty, and vice-versa. It doesn't bother me that I would have to watch my manners on the trail, even if I was having a bad day, or risk my rudeness might be broadcast far and wide.

[Wheeler]

I know that when I was on the trail, somebody got me confused with somebody else on the trail, and it created a few awkward moments. I heard some interesting stories about things I had done; they weren't that bad, just not me. Luckily I was with other hikers who were like " that couldn't have been him , he was with us hundreds of miles from there". This got cleared up; the real "culprit" was identified, and like I said wasn't a big deal anyway. I've also seen this happen to others. I don't think people should be encouraged to talk about/name others in an online forum. There is just too much room for error, abuse, and inaccuracy. People can get names confused, exaggerate, or just not like someone. The world has always had misbehavers, and probably always will. People should just hike and hike their own hike. There's no need to make this a "gossip column". With all the opinions on here, I'm glad I hadn't heard of Whiteblaze before my AT hike; it might have made me think twice. When someone does something particularly creepy, it often gets on here anyway. I think if somebody is a genuine threat, then it's a good idea. However that person should not be named unless positively identified, but the authoritys can handle that.

[Gray Blazer]

When good people stand around and do nothing the bad behavior will continue and possibly become worse, thereby wrecking things for everybody.

[Alligator]

It's often a whole lot of unsubstantiated, one-sided gossip. The alleged offenders are not able to present their side of the story skewing the actual events tremendously.

You might be getting trolled as well.

[berkshirebirder]

When good people stand around and do nothing the bad behavior will continue and possibly become worse --Gray Blazer

True, Gray Blazer. But it might be better if those personally affected by the behavior complain to local authorities rather than Whiteblaze, where page after page of secondhand commentary will accomplish...WHAT? if anything.

Jerks are notoriously blind to criticism--in fact, it often makes them worse.

[Ender]

There's also the possibility that they name the wrong person. I was a victim of that on the PCT, when one hiker heard a story about a bad motel guest, and thought it was our room (it wasn't, it was two rooms over). But that didn't stop her from spreading the incorrect rumor that we had done bad by the motel, even after she had been told otherwise.

[NorthCountryWoods]

IF, the reporting of bad behavior could be confined to details and facts, then it would most certainly have positive results.
However, most anonymous reporting involves an increased level of hyperbole and would ultimately have negative results.

By "shaming publically" do you mean post their real name or trail name?

[Spokes]

To me, it's just another way for the sub-culture to self-regulates itself. I say let the banter continue!

[Spokes]

Of course if you believe in entropy then you subscribe to the notion that all systems "move from a state of order to a state of disorder". The trick is determining where on the continuum the system is....

[Lone Wolf]

lots of bad behavior at The Place this year. almost daily i have to remind someone of the rules. almost always 20something year old thru hikers

[general]

thing is, hiking is the ultimate freedom. there are no rules in the woods except the rules that one wants to live by. there is no law, so even if there were rules then there would be no-one to enforce those rules. if a person wants to express what someone else views as bad behavior well, then they have the right to do that. if someone else doesn't like it well, then they have the right to find another piece of the woods to call their own for the moment. everyone has similarities and differences with other people which causes some to become friends and others to become enemies. on the trail, clicks develop quickly, and some of those groups of folks take it upon themselves to impose their particular brand of life on others. don't like it? move on. it is as simple as that. as far as business owners affected by bad behavior, they cater to a specific group of people. some of them just don't act like others. hikers in general are a different breed of people. business owners along the trail should know this and take it into account, and the the revenue generated by hikers helps to sustain those business owners lives. it is a risk that they take, and they receive a monatary gain in return.

[Jack Tarlin]

"There is no law" in the woods?

What planet are you from?

Try burning down a bridge or defacing a shelter or intentionally starting a forest fire.

There are all sorts of rules and laws that apply in the woods and any hiker who thinks otherwise may be in for a big surprise.

There are also codes of socially acceptable behavior that nearly everyone recognizes and acknowledges and it is expected that these codes and "rules" will be obeyed as well, especially when it comes to respecting other people.

[Tilly]

I don't buy the 'hikers are just a different breed of people.'

I also don't know why everyone else has to bear the responsibility of packing up and leaving when obnoxious a** show up.

[b.c.]

There are many degrees of trail misbehavior. For example, one could start with snoring and go all the way to murder.

The more severe the misbehavior, the more information that could be posted would be important including naming names, in my opinion.

Let's take theft. If someone is allegedly stealing packs I would want to know the who, when, and where of it all, even if the accounting contained mistakes and/or prejudice. It would be important for me and I would be grateful for the information.

For minor misbehavior I feel that it is okay to gossip but I would want to bear in mind that there are two sides to every story. Therefore I would not name names if I were the one posting. I recognize that it is fun to chat but being responsible on the Internet is important too. I sure hope that I never slander anyone in any situation.

[general]

"There is no law" in the woods?

What planet are you from?

Try burning down a bridge or defacing a shelter or intentionally starting a forest fire.

There are all sorts of rules and laws that apply in the woods and any hiker who thinks otherwise may be in for a big surprise.

There are also codes of socially acceptable behavior that nearly everyone recognizes and acknowledges and it is expected that these codes and "rules" will be obeyed as well, especially when it comes to respecting other people.

well, unfortunately Jack, some people don't really care what other people think is acceptable behavior. i don't think that dropping cigarette ashes all over other peoples food on the grill, or taking bites out of pork chops and throwing them back on for other folks to eat later is acceptabe behavior either, but it has never stopped you has it? there are laws in society, but they cannot be enforced on the trail. there is no regular patrol of law enforcement officers except on defined wildlife management areas, so, if you see someone breaking the law, who are you gonna tell? then who is that law man gonna write a ticket to or arrest, the long haired bearded guy with the fake name? and as far as my planet goes, that would be the one in northeast georgia that is full of rednecks, guns, and overly large four wheel drive trucks.

[general]

I don't buy the 'hikers are just a different breed of people.'

I also don't know why everyone else has to bear the responsibility of packing up and leaving when obnoxious a** show up.

what else are you gonna do, box with all of them to put them in their place?

[Tilly]

what else are you gonna do, box with all of them to put them in their place?

That wasn't exactily my point.

[Jack Tarlin]

Ah, General, what a charming fellow you are.

And your last post is instructive, especially when we think about the possibility of people telling stories about other hikers that are just plain exaggerated or false.

For example, the delightful story about pork chops and cigarette ashes in the food is untrue from beginning to end; just for starters the story allegedly took place last April in Franklin, and I haven't smoked a cigarette in almost three years.

But thanks for making a good point: People should be leery of repeating stories they don't have all the facts on, and if they insist on telling tall tales about other folks, they should realize how childish and petty they look when they don't get their story right.

Have a nice day.

Lastly, General, laws get enforced on the Trail all the time. A few weeks ago a whole lot of hikers got cited and almost arrested for drinking in the Fontana Hilton, despite at least three signs telling them not to do so. So if you actually think that there aren't quite a few areas of the Trail that aren't regularly patrolled, well this is merely something else you're wrong about.