Recent comments in /f/vermont

headgasketidiot t1_jbai3fo wrote

>I’d like to agree with you completely (since I found the piece hard to follow as well) but Hartman’s Law means your launch should have been scrubbed. [reason]

Are you saying that I wrote "sledge hammer" instead of "sledgehammer," and therefore, invoking Hartman's Law, I shouldn't have pointed out that there were grammatical errors in the piece? I think you misunderstand the point of the law, and not without some irony.

I made a substantive critique, which is basically the exact opposite of the nit-picking the law pokes fun at. The few grammatical problems I point out are explicitly labeled as minor points (e.g. "Whatever, I make typos all the time"), but they still contribute to the larger point, in which I argue that this is a bad piece. I talked about typos and grammar, sure, but I actually made it pretty clear that was the least of my concerns.

Hartman's Law doesn't mean that grammar doesn't matter. It's a fun way to poke fun at nit-picking. In making the greater point that one of our elected representatives wrote gobbledygook, it is perfectly valid to point out failures of grammar, among other things.

>Also for someone who seems like they should appreciate nuance the responsibility VTDigger has to their pieces labeled OPINION elude you. Put simply they converted their “Letters to the Editor” feature/tradition to rotating/chosen Opinion pieces some years ago. While the legislative connection is front and center and his employer is unstated, it is certainly public knowledge. Unless he is a paid spokesperson it’s not really relevant tho. Or rather I’m comfortable leaving the relevance as an exercise to the reader. There’s not really any “AHA!” moment here. But I’m pretty sure VTDigger employees would be happy to spell it out more, as the times I have reached them for editing errors they have responded to me quickly.

Sure, I'll remove that critique of VTDigger. I'm sure they're underresourced and overworked and doing their best. I didn't mean it was an AHA moment as in I got VTDigger, but it was an AHA moment for me in that suddenly the piece makes sense -- he feels very strongly about it because it's a threat to his livelihood. He didn't fail to make a coherent argument because he failed to communicate it; he probably just doesn't have one. He is using his position to defend his job, not to make some greater point about policy.

3

Unique-Public-8594 t1_jbaf0mu wrote

A baby would be welcome but you don’t see any because the hike in is often steep and slippery making it unsafe to bring a baby. Head to a beach this year. Save the swimming holes for when they are older.

3

PassionsBite t1_jbadr3s wrote

I really love Wans. It's 1 person in 1 room so it's completely private. She does a great job and her prices are reasonable enough that i can be there for 2 hours, leave a nice tip, and not break the bank. I get the thai massage, which has her working you through stretching exercises, and it helps me so much. You can book online too, which I love.

4

Internal-Fudge8578 t1_jbad6mz wrote

Part of the reason VT has gone back to being over 60% Forested is because of active management of our forestland. Our forests are far healthier than the forest preserve right across the lake in the Adirondacks because our public lands are managed (mostly through timber harvests). We’re more resilient to Forest pests, invasives, potential for fire, and it even gives us an economic argument for keeping it forested. If you look at the Adirondack and Catskills Forest preserves (where cutting hasn’t been allowed in any form on the state lands ever since they realized they needed trees to have water for the Erie Canal), it’s pretty obvious how detrimental a complete lack of forest management is.

5

Sea-Election-9168 t1_jbad38i wrote

We have taken our babies to swimming holes here for ….. well the oldest is now 31 years old! People are almost always thrilled to see the little ones splash about.

Be cautious in choosing a swimming hole with regard to water flow and temperature. The bottom of Bolton Potholes is usually pretty safe, same as at the end of Bartlett Falls (Bristol). Warren Falls is beautiful, but ohhhh so cold! The slower flowing rivers and creeks are warmer, but bring a box of salt for the leeches.

0

Internal-Fudge8578 t1_jbac41t wrote

It’s federal land so of course it’s a federal project, but it’s not like the wood just goes down to DC it’ll end up at mills in VT or at the paper plants in Ticonderoga so unless you live in a house made without a single piece of wood in it and wipe your butt with a cloth instead of TP you should probably be pretty grateful that we have the space to be able to pull off long term management plans of our forests that include sustainable harvesting.

1

0thell0perrell0 t1_jbabvso wrote

I would, there are a lot of sweet spots and I am sure you can find just what you are looking for. I wouldn't go to the crowded spots - just trawl up or down the road and find some less busy spots. I have a memory of such a place when I was 2 or 3 - I couldn't swim but I remember the beauty.

1