92
edits
Changes
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
→Crew-finding websites
:Thanks for the reply, and for the correction on the price (I originally wrote it based on a rough estimate from memory). Your approach is a bit aggressive and presumptuous for a new user who appears to be against the very principles of hitchhiking, in a resource written by and for hitchhikers. You may also be interested to know that I am not an actual treefrog. ;-) Anyway, I've made some compromise edits to address the issues you're concerned about. Please feel free to continue the discussion here, but please do not continue to make contentious edits without reaching a consensus here first. [[User:Treefrog|Treefrog]] ([[User talk:Treefrog|talk]]) 21:31, 16 June 2020 (UTC)
:Hi Treefrog, are you the chief editor here? Why would you say being factual is 'aggressive and presumptuous' or 'contentious', and what makes you think I'm 'against the very principles of hitchhiking'? You seem to me of presuming a position of supremacy rather than trying to understand the subject. You're updates are not a compromise, they are wrong, and if you actually used either crew sites properly you would know that. What you're writing are clearly assumptions! Why don't you make your suggestions here first, instead of asking me to get your personal approval first? Who are you? You now write: "...but difficult to find a boat without paying for a membership", how do you know that? If that was true, there wouldn't be anyone using that site! There are more Premium boat members on Find a Crew then on any other crew site, so why should it be more difficult? You obviously seem to have your own agenda here, and only like to see written what's roughly in your memory rather than being factual and actually provide useful, relevant information for the hitchhiking community. I think your censoring is not providing any value or substance but rather a clear misinformation. I'm not sure who is reaching a consensus here first, from what I see your word is the consensus as you keep clearly omitting the relevant points without anyone else’s input and ignoring mine. It’s difficult not be cynical when one thinks a consensus is his or her bullish single handed editing of an honest, factual, and relevant contribution and sticking to false statements to reflect your narrow personal experience. Unless you can state what edits were 'contentious' and why, I think you're clearly out of your tree.
