|
I have no clue why people are interpretting this thread of planning as a fight. In discussing options, we - BY NATURE - have to be offering different opinions and then we proceed to discuss their benefits and pitfalls.
It's not an argument ... it's called planning. As you can see, if you read the thread, it's mostly fun talk about bears and hammocks and big black dicks.
Sheesh, we do have to talk about campsites and meals and teams and stuff. It's not a big deal, and I don't know why people are getting their pre-moistened panties in a knot.
Granted, Lisa and I were indeed fighting yesterday. I still to this minute have no idea why she is against me getting to the campsites by 10am. When Teresa suggested the very same thing earlier in the thread, she got no grief about it.
But be that as it may ... yes I happen to be more concerned with actual planning than with fun talk. That's just me. I like to plan a trip in the early stages ... and then completely forget about it until a week before. (Camping needs at least a week of physical prep time for me).
It now occurs to me that a) M&S most likely wanted to join Team D.C. to snag a campsite, and that would do them no good ... though I remain happy to try and procure them a site; and b) if I join up with them for the perfectly fitted Big & Girthy Weenie Roast, that leaves THREE non-team meals, not two. Again, I DON'T CARE. The Team thing worked out swell last time in terms of easy living, but I still maintain that maintaining multiple camp kitchens is a little impractical. It's not a biggie either.
But Team Meals are not the be-all and end-all of Swank Camping, and we'll all do fine if three meals are more pot-luck, or even feed-yourself.
But these ARE things that have to be worked out. I'm trying my best to work them out without ruffling feathers. That's really not my intention. My intention is just to work things out.
And I'm happy to talk about bears and hammocks and black dicks, too.
|