sobo

Ah! Thanks.

Well then, will Zlib compression become available?

...as stupid does. This guy is a certifiable idiot!

"Captured Saddam" action figure

Is it "Goof Off" or "Goo Gone"? I have Goo Gone. It's a toluene-based chemical. Same stuff?

Noticed the same thing lately. What's up?

Just off the wires... The article is about Jose Padilla, the dirty bomb suspect arrested in Chicago last year. A three-judge panel has determined that Padilla should be released from military custody (presumably into civilian custody) because he is a US citizen arrested in the US on terrorism charges. Note that this is different than being a US citizen arrested in a foreign country as an enemy combatant (remember John Walker, the "American Taliban"). Question: Does the President have the right to hold a US citizen, arrested in the US, as an enemy combatant? Discuss. Even being politically middle right-of-center, I personally think the answer is "no". He should be turned over to the civilian justice system for prosecution. This is the sort of thing the Founding Fathers rebelled against. It amounts to "trial by the Crown".

I understand that, Dru. But read my second paragraph again more carefully. While the "re:" works for the immediate quoted post, there is no "trail" for any other quotes contained within a quoted post. You can only find out who's quoting who (in multiple-quote-containing posts) if you go back and research the whole thread. The old system carried all usernames from all quoted passages from post to post. This new way does not. I find that to be a "lost value". Score = ZERO for reading comprehension. Here's an example: Look up a few posts to scott_harpell's reply to MWS. We know he quoted MWS because her name shows up in the thread title box with the "Re:" in front of it. Simple enough. But MWS quoted another post in her post. You don't know who that quote came from, until you scroll back up about four or five posts to find out that it was from Bug. Inconvenient, IMO. Now expand that scenario to one where people start quoting posts from several pages back in a thread. You can see that it very quickly becomes quite cumbersome to determine who is saying what. As I said before, I find that we have lost value with the way this new "post quoting" function operates.

I noticed that only the "quick reply" contains the spell-check feature, but not the regular "reply" selection. What's the diff between "reply" and "quick reply" anyway? Also, quoted replies no longer carry the quoted author's username. I thought that was a useful feature that is now "almost" lost. You can see the last person quoted in the thread title box, but if a post contains more than one quote, you don't know who was quoted earlier without going back up thru the thread to read and find out.

Hey, seriously, if you can give 'em away to someone else before you have to pack 'em in your rig, so much the better. If someone else wants 'em, I'm cool with that. But if not, I'll take them. Are they the big "gear storage" style of bins?

minx, I didn't take your post personally at all. I was responding to TTT's post about stopping rescues with cell phones before they get started. I'm down with that. I take my cell phone with me on climbs and hikes and such. It keeps me on good terms with the wife!

I've never known any mountain rescue people to do that. That's the job of the SAR folks.

I never meaned to imply that I was against carrying a cell phone. It's great to halt a rescue in progress (or before it starts) with a cell phone. What I am opposed to is people calling in rescues on cell phones just becasue they don't want to try to get down/out on their own. We had a call just like that earlier this week!

Got any room in your rig on your pass thru Yakivegas for the storage bins/lids...? If you're too cramped, that's

In my mind, and our unit's experience, not reliably ahead of time. Most of the time, the info you get from the reporting party is sketchy at best. To base a "go/no go" decision on that info alone would, in my mind, be considered negligent. After the fact, you could possibly assess the situation and determine that the rescue was frivolous, but then the situation turns into a "he said/she said" feeding frenzy for the lawyers. And the end result is that other folks are less likely to call in help when it's really needed in the future.

hmmmmmm... The article was a nice read. I have called for rescues of lost friends in the past, and didn't feel bad about doing it. I do, however, feel quite apprehensive about the increasing (and distrubing) trend of people getting in over their heads and just ringing up 911 on their cell phone 'cuz they're tired and want to get a free ride out on a chopper. But I personally, as a mountain rescue volunteer, oppose the formation of a charge for rescues, for many of teh reasons cited in the article. I'd rather screw up my weekend plans than read about a body recovery because somebody feared financial repercussions about a rescue call. My $0.02

Don't know the exact conditions under which SMR was ripped off, but if they were on a mission, or the truck/equipment stash was stored on Sheriff/County property, then they *should* be covered for full replacement under County insurance. At least that's how it works for us here in CWMR in Yakivegas. Still, an inventory of the loss and publishing of the act to gear re-sellers should be done so as to have a hope of collaring the shitheads who pulled this shit.

jon/timmy: Noticed on the Home page, under the "latest threads" section, that multiple duplicate thread titles appear with (what appears to be) every new post to a thread. It's not a big thing to me personally, but I *do* use the home page to monitor new threads and post replies. Another "thought you'd like to know" comment from sobo, FWIW.

Copper Canyon was discussed about 6 weeks ago in this thread. Cheers! Read pindude's posts (and Dane's) for best info on Copper Falls in the above referenced thread.

Or check this out!

Soooooo, would that be asp'teryx...? Congrats, scott. Welcome to fatherhood. Nothing will ever be the same.

Because by the time I'm at the point of placing a leaver, my hands are frozen, I don't wanna futz around lining up holes and tie knots, and I have fully entered the bail-out mode. Oh, and I'm probably pretty gripped by then, and all I really want is

Are you sure you don't mean the west face? If memory serves, the east face (well mebbe NE really) overlooks Ice Lake. It's just a bowl. But the west face looks like there's lots of loose friable granite. I had heard of some dood back in the 70's doing an FA up the west face. He had said that the rock was shit.

I just can't see you getting past the TSA screenpoint with those. Waaaaay too much like a weapon. When we went to Vietnam last year, they made me take my beard scissors (tiny little fold-up thingie) out of my carry-on and leave them at the screenpoint. Aside: The "silverware" on our flight to Taipei (Taiwan) was plastic, but once we boarded the plane for Ho Chi Minh City, we were served dinner with real stainless steel utensils, knives included! My wife and I found that soberingly funny. Guess they don't have to worry too much about terrorists there.