Grumpy Old Schoolers

Everyone should read the Four Agreements before participating in ANY forum:

Author is Miguel Ruiz.

Be impeccable with your word.
Don't take anything personally.
Don't make assumptions.
Always try your best.

Check out this link for a summary: http://www.humanpotentialunlimited.com/Summary-content.html

pffffffffffft! that's all nonsense, only a lunatic would post that dribble.

;)

I asked if NSMBA would support having a new director/group to deal with maintaining old technical trails.

If such a position would be supported, and was defined appropriately, I would volunteer to run although I'd encourage others to do so as well. But there is no point in volunteering for an undefined position that currently has no support.

I think you've got this volunteerism thing backwards. If you wait for someone to define it and support it for you, you'll be waiting forever. Don't wait for the change - be the change. You think there's a contingency for this? Put it together. Work with the trails guys in a way that is additive. The beauty of leading a volunteer effort is that there are actually very few people who will say "no" if you're willing to put in the effort. That's not to say there won't be constraints, but people saying "no we don't want your help" probably won't be one of them.

Don't get hung up on being a director of the NSMBA. Lots can be done as a volunteer without needing to take on fiduciary duties of a director.

The word "positive" seems to be difficult for the two of you to grasp. Reading skills are a little low too.

I asked if NSMBA would support having a new director/group to deal with maintaining old technical trails.

If such a position would be supported, and was defined appropriately, I would volunteer to run although I'd encourage others to do so as well. But there is no point in volunteering for an undefined position that currently has no support.

To Grumpy Builder and Tom - feel free to create your own thread to whine about old schoolers in, this thread is for positive feedback on the original posting for this thread.

Why does there need to be a defined position? Perhaps you think volunteer trail organizations are more serious than they are. And why the hell would you expect me to be positive? You did ask for grumpy old schoolers after all.

I think you've got this volunteerism thing backwards. If you wait for someone to define it and support it for you, you'll be waiting forever. Don't wait for the change - be the change. You think there's a contingency for this? Put it together. Work with the trails guys in a way that is additive. The beauty of leading a volunteer effort is that there are actually very few people who will say "no" if you're willing to put in the effort. That's not to say there won't be constraints, but people saying "no we don't want your help" probably won't be one of them.

Don't get hung up on being a director of the NSMBA. Lots can be done as a volunteer without needing to take on fiduciary duties of a director.

I think you fail to understand politics - I've been part of the NSMBA, I was a trail leader before, I left because of the politics, I won't return without a clear picture of what I will be getting involved in. However I AM trying to do something positive here - I am trying to work with the current directors to define such a role if it makes sense and move it forward. I've also asked for a clearer picture of the future of the trails (which has been asked before in another thread) i.e. which trails will be TAP'd and which will be left. I think everyone would benefit from such information.

I think you fail to understand politics - I've been part of the NSMBA, I was a trail leader before, I left because of the politics, I won't return without a clear picture of what I will be getting involved in. However I AM trying to do something positive here - I am trying to work with the current directors to define such a role if it makes sense and move it forward. I've also asked for a clearer picture of the future of the trails (which has been asked before in another thread) i.e. which trails will be TAP'd and which will be left. I think everyone would benefit from such information.

I've got a pretty good feel for the politics, thanks - I was a director of the NSMBA for 3 years. And I guess my view of it is that the "political" angle is vastly overstated, particularly on the NSMB.com boards. It's really more about resourcing. If you want it to happen and can put together the team, have at 'er. If you want to wait for a clear picture of everything, then keep waiting.

(As an aside, I don't disagree that there should be a trails master plan. That was on the radar back in my day but was a tough nut. I imagine it still is.)

I think you fail to understand politics - I've been part of the NSMBA, I was a trail leader before, I left because of the politics, I won't return without a clear picture of what I will be getting involved in.

You probably won't want the Czar of Gnar position then. There you'd be responsible for balancing the wishes of Land Managers (who are employed by politicians), grumpy riders who will all have different opinions on what trail features to keep and how to maintain them, and good trail building practices.

For the role your suggesting to be viable it needs someone who is willing to take time to analyze the black+ trails to come up with a clear picture. That's a huge job which is why the NSMBA has trail adopters for each trail to do exactly that for just 1 trail.

You probably won't want the Czar of Gnar position then. There you'd be responsible for balancing the wishes of Land Managers (who are employed by politicians), grumpy riders who will all have different opinions on what trail features to keep and how to maintain them, and good trail building practices.

For the role your suggesting to be viable it needs someone who is willing to take time to analyze the black+ trails to come up with a clear picture. That's a huge job which is why the NSMBA has trail adopters for each trail to do exactly that for just 1 trail.

You are correct - I'd not want the position, but I'd volunteer to do it just the same if no one else stepped up. This isn't my case but often the best person for the job is the one who wants to do it the least (in a political world). In this case the best director of "gnar" trails is someone who has been a builder for years and years and still passionate about the older style of riding. I know of such a person but I doubt he'd do it.

Fantastic conversation! Here are my thoughts"

If you wait for someone to define it and support it for you, you'll be waiting forever. Don't wait for the change - be the change.

This is sorta how I fell into doing the MTBCypress thing.

You think there's a contingency for this? Put it together. Lots can be done as a volunteer without needing to take on fiduciary duties of a director.

This is a very good point found in Directors Duties within the Not For Profit Business Corporations Act.

Why does there need to be a defined position?

I tend to agree. There is more latitude being a Gamma Delta Iota, god damn independent, outside of a formal organization. For me and MTBCypress advocacy's message, I regularly provide NSMBA with updates about the Upper Lands Working Group. So they are updated monthly. I do this out of cooperation for sharing, and getting feedback on views I am may be ignorant on requiring any historical facts.

However I AM trying to do something positive here - I am trying to work with the current directors to define such a role if it makes sense and move it forward.

You are doing something positive here. No one is denying that. Constructive comments is what is happening such as what exactly is the bulls eye?; Which direction will you be throwing?; What are the darts?; Where is the bulls eye?; ect.

It's really more about resourcing. If you want it to happen and can put together the team, have at 'er.

I agree, it is about Time, Money as I alluded to in another thread somewhere recently.

You probably won't want the Czar of Gnar position then. There you'd be responsible for balancing the wishes of Land Managers (who are employed by politicians), grumpy riders who will all have different opinions on what trail features to keep and how to maintain them, and good trail building practices.

Here is my reality with MTBCypress:

There is an Old School group that does not want any change citing BPP is ruining a "way of life" (maybe a way of life for 8-10 people), understanding that they are largely the initial crew that was on that mountain a decade ago. So, for them, understandingly, they have much attachment to those slopes

Then there is a more progressive group that wants to cater in providing aggressive advanced New School trail experiences. They realize change is happening. They, I think, see it coming and are open to it. Chomping at the bit and a bit frustrated with me and the process I describe below-

Then you have the Land Owners, DWV and BPP, and which are in this planning process called the Upper Lands Working Group which is trying to determine the high level visioning for the remaining development, and what is not developed. And the definition of development ect. And the outcome of this ultimately will dictate how many trails, city taxes received, and private profits.

If you think of the three circles in the MTB video, what you start off wanting you will get a lot less due to Guiness's insight.

You are correct - I'd not want the position, but I'd volunteer to do it just the same if no one else stepped up. This isn't my case but often the best person for the job is the one who wants to do it the least (in a political world). In this case the best director of "gnar" trails is someone who has been a builder for years and years and still passionate about the older style of riding. I know of such a person but I doubt he'd do it.

You need to talk to the President of the NSMBA about this. You need to hear their feedback on the concept.

That is my positive feedback.

Here are my personal views after all the business and education and life experience I have in my 47 years:

For any old school tech trail to "save" on Fromme and Seymour will require a new TAP sponsor AND Land Manager being provided a plan, budget, ect (what ever NSMBA does for that) AND a crew and volunteers- oh and the Land Manager must agree.

For any old school tech trail to "save" on Cypress will require __.
The ___ is still being determined by the planning process.

Until we all know the outcomes of the Upper Lands Working Group recommendations to Council in early 2015 the __ is a blank chalk board.

You want old school tech? Help save Cypress. Oh wait we hold no cards- the Private Landowner does, and the DWV does. So how do we save tech- we need to show them and help them understand what is special up there.

Hence the MTB Cypress survey that was kicked of Apr 2 2014 and as of today has 192 responses. Thanks!

Hence the MTB Cypress video at the NSMBA Open House in May.

Hence patience. The __ is blank. We can help fill it in.

Fromme and Seymour are Fromme and Seymour. A lot more defined by their historical past.

Fantastic conversation! Here are my thoughts"

You need to talk to the President of the NSMBA about this. You need to hear their feedback on the concept.

That is my positive feedback.

I've been in talks with him for the past week. I've been told they are working on some projects that relate and to wait.

I think this thread has run it's useful course. Thanx.

Actually found an article that pretty much sums up how I feel about this whole thing and thought others might like to read it and from it my favourite quote

"The raw, primitive, unrefined trails that see little to no maintenance are the kinds of trails that really build skill. What kind of skills do you learn riding a trail that was made by a machine, groomed to perfection and void of any rocks, roots or other obstacles that could send you careening over the handlebars?"

http://reviews.mtbr.com/the-angry-singlespeeder-we-need-primitive-trails

Actually found an article that pretty much sums up how I feel about this whole thing and thought others might like to read it and from it my favourite quote

"The raw, primitive, unrefined trails that see little to no maintenance are the kinds of trails that really build skill. What kind of skills do you learn riding a trail that was made by a machine, groomed to perfection and void of any rocks, roots or other obstacles that could send you careening over the handlebars?"

http://reviews.mtbr.com/the-angry-singlespeeder-we-need-primitive-trails

Good stuff. We're lucky on the shore that we have quite a good balance between unrefined trails that have seen little to no maintenance, and other trails that have had a lot of maintenance. Good variety.

Good stuff. We're lucky on the shore that we have quite a good balance between unrefined trails that have seen little to no maintenance, and other trails that have had a lot of maintenance. Good variety.

I echo this remark.

That said, I put this out into the conversation:

First Point-

It is unrealistic to assume that in the future what we have now, is what we will have then, in terms of unrefined trails close to the city like we have now.

You only need to look at other trail systems, whether hiking or biking, closer to city centres as more people enjoy the woods, the unrefined becomes torn up and an issue and trail maintenance ensues. I saw this throughout the National Parks growing up, albeit hiking. The difference now and then of those trails, or even Grouse Grind, and the New Expresso and the Old Expresso it is a matter of use that results in the trend.

It is apparent with the eyes I view my reality with that for unrefined trails (which are not erosion issues / high use wear and tear issues) for those trails like the hikers for that experience you will need to go further and farther out of the city.

Only those people not able to (due to transit limitations, time limitations, expense limitations) will stay on the closer trails, hence more traffic, hence more need to maintain, hence loss of that "unrefined" aspect.

Second point-

You CAN have advanced trails, though, not necessarily "unrefined" advanced trails, closer into the city center, which can withstand the traffic of wear and tear.

I think the above remarks are good in that it necessarily requires us to make a distinction.

Unrefined we will need to travel for or look for it…

Another thing that makes us grumpy.

[http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded[HTML_REMOVED]v=bJm1y0o7MHc](http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=bJm1y0o7MHc\)