Feb. 12, 2015, 10:57 a.m. -  NatBrown

#!markdown I've already gone over my problems with Jordan's article in the comments to it, and suffice it to say that I found it counterproductive. I don't find this Loam Ranger article as off topic as that one, but it contributes to what I consider to be the promotion of controversy between hikers and bikers on Fromme. I think, on balance, the space used to promote the controversy has significantly outweighed that given to balanced works. That is my feeling off the top of my head though, if someone wants to counts the words given each way and I'm wrong, I'm happy to be called on it here. And I do concede that Cam has promoted a balanced response in his little editorial bits at the beginning/end of the articles, but I don't think it's enough to effectively communicate that point to the audience here. Anyway, I am left with the distinct impression that the works in NSMB have been responsible for the appearance of the controversy in the mainstream media. Is it enough that this is now in the hands of the justice system? I think so, based primarily on my faith that the people involved in that system have the educational foundation and experience to make good decisions that will effectively serve justice. NSMB calling for victim impact statements seems fair enough to me, but stirring the pot for an audience, almost all of whom are mountain bikers and know very little about the details of what the alleged criminal acts were, seems like an obvious move to court controversy. I think there have been a significant proportion comments that illustrate precisely why the victims of crime should not be the ones to decide guilt, culpability or apropriate punitive measures. We have a significant conflict of interest here.