Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

The National Parks Were Reportedly Told to Stay Silent on Deaths

outsideonline.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–67 of 67 posts

Re: The National Parks Were Reportedly Told to Stay Silent on Deaths

#61

Post by vkou »

warumdarum wrote: post #54
vkou wrote: post #51

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Or maybe people didn't do a deep dive of the consequences of putting a crook and his cabal of idiots in charge of the country, and just... Voted with their gut against the incumbent, because they didn't like the economic consequences of 2020-2021 COVID inflation coming home to roost? (Weird how they all forgot who was in charge in 2020, who fired up the printing presses and who handed out money like it was on fire...…

People chose a tribalist warchieftain because realities at the downlow where already unsustainable after50 years of attrition warfare and the solution by the predecessors was to declare the problems non existant. Even worse they openly displayed the incompetence by declaring all problems as social ones.

Right, he never declares problems non-existent or acknowledges that he is an utter idiot who creates self-inflicted crises left and right.

The economy is, after all, doing great and inflation has been solved, and all the bad parts are Obama/Biden's fault, blame them if the price of gas and milk and healthcare went up this year, and the debt he is saddling us with is no big deal.

Re: The National Parks Were Reportedly Told to Stay Silent on Deaths

#62

Post by ndsipa_pomu »

jasonfarnon wrote: post #27
slg wrote: post #9

One thing that I can't get over about this administration is its cartoon villainy. There are all sorts of substantive and important issues in which people can have viable disagreements. Even when I disagree with people on those issues, I can usually at least understand their motivation. But this administration has so many policies like this which both seem completely unimportant to be worthy of focus and yet are also…

According to the article Interior is just centralizing the release of the information. That sounds reasonable to me rather than letting any NPS employee discuss it with the press, and is consistent with many other agencies and employers policies (family privacy etc). As far as I can tell the only "cartoon villainy" is based on speculation in the article that the administration has some other motive. The only evidence…

Is the information being released centrally though? It appears not. I feel that you've fallen for their "justification" to censor employees so that it becomes easier to dispose of the administration's enemies in National Parks.

Re: The National Parks Were Reportedly Told to Stay Silent on Deaths

#63

Post by xhkkffbf »

slg wrote: post #9

One thing that I can't get over about this administration is its cartoon villainy. There are all sorts of substantive and important issues in which people can have viable disagreements. Even when I disagree with people on those issues, I can usually at least understand their motivation. But this administration has so many policies like this which both seem completely unimportant to be worthy of focus and yet are also…

The cartoon villainy is not the administration but the people who want to portray it that way. Anyone who reads the article will find a lengthy statement from the NPS that spells out something very different from the headline. They're not told to stay silent, but to wait the right amount of time and coordinate to avoid miscommunication and error.

Re: The National Parks Were Reportedly Told to Stay Silent on Deaths

#65

Post by collingreen »

trick-or-treat wrote: post #58
HoldOnAMinute wrote: post #26

Earlier quoted context omitted.

These are the same people who said that if you stop testing for COVID, it won't be a problem any more

And yet... they're no longer testing and it doesn't seem to be a problem anymore, lol.

I'll never understand people who think endemic disease is a win or not a problem.

Re: The National Parks Were Reportedly Told to Stay Silent on Deaths

#66

Post by sagarm »

TurdF3rguson wrote: post #57
sagarm wrote: post #39

Earlier quoted context omitted.

How many people die climbing half dome? Do the deaths tend to happen I only inclement weather? Do you realize how divorced from reality you people sound?

Why are you directing this at me? I couldn't care less about people dying climbing half-dome. It seems like one of the better ways to go.

In your post above, you quite clearly are making the case that information and statistics about casualties at national parks isn't useful.

Actually, they are, because they help you make judgements on e.g. whether to climb Half Dome.

The fact that you couldn't even make the connection shows just how out of touch you are here.

Re: The National Parks Were Reportedly Told to Stay Silent on Deaths

#67

Post by TurdF3rguson »

sagarm wrote: post #66
TurdF3rguson wrote: post #57

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Why are you directing this at me? I couldn't care less about people dying climbing half-dome. It seems like one of the better ways to go.

In your post above, you quite clearly are making the case that information and statistics about casualties at national parks isn't useful. Actually, they are, because they help you make judgements on e.g. whether to climb Half Dome. The fact that you couldn't even make the connection shows just how out of touch you are here.

What did you mean by "you people" though? What group do you think I belong to based on that post? People who make a particular case about national parks?

It's genuinely bewildering why you would say "you people" there.

Post reply on HN