Our Kenneth
What I love the most about Ricochet is the community. Even those of us who are, um, former members of the community, for one reason or another.
(I'll pause here for a moment to say, once again, that if you haven't joined as a member, please do. Right now. We'll wait.)
Okay, with that said, many of you will remember a former member, Kenneth, who stirred things up with his acerbic wit and -- let's be honest -- sharper-than-necessary language. What's he been up to lately?
There's lots of funny stuff over there -- he calls his blog "The Full Kenneth," which means pretty much what you expect that it means. But I especially enjoyed his recent screed against the huge amount of land the government owns:
The federal government owns more than 30% of the land in the United States. Here in California, that share is more than 45%.
Now, no one would object that national treasures like Yosemite and Yellowstone should be preserved, in perpetuity, for the enjoyment of future generations.
But the problem these days is that federal bureaucrats and their environmental enablers increasingly militate for a regime in which the public who owns those lands are barred from enjoying them.
Take Sequoia and Kings Canyon National Park, for instance. Established in 1968, this 316-square-mile preserve spans a magnificent part of the high Sierra Mountains. But it’s tough trekking, so, for many years before and since the establishment of the park, dozens of small, family-owned companies have provided horseback tours that allow flatlanders to enjoy the area’s beauty.
No more. An outfit calling itself High Sierra Hikers – essentially two fanatic environmentalists who live in Lake Tahoe, hundreds of miles away from the park – recently sued the federal Department of the Interior, claiming that by allowing a few hundred tourists each summer to visit the park on horseback, the Department was violating the 1964 Wilderness Act...
...those two guys in Lake Tahoe found a big-time San Francisco law firm to file the suit. And, by coincidence, the federal judge who heard the case was a former lawyer for said big-time law firm. And when the two guys won the case, the judge awarded the big-time law firm millions of dollars in legal fees, while the small companies that had offered horseback tours for generations were put out of business. And hundreds of citizens who might have enjoyed the back country each summer were out of luck.
I know I'm stirring things up myself when I say this, but if you've got a moment and are so inclined, head over to Kenneth's blog and say hello.
- Comment (133)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (12)
Comments:
Dec '10
Re: Our Kenneth
What an interesting post.
Yeah, it may belong on the member side, but it was fun to read people's responses up front. I have always considered myself to be the worst member, as I throw grenades, occasionaly (but never personal attacks).
My Mom is a lurker and, let me tell you, I have heard from her about me making "personal" comments about public figures. Even if I provide her with documentation, it does not matter; to her, I should never make such public statements.
To me, the greatest sin a Ricoteer can commit is to post a Thread, or a Comment, without tending it like a garden. On the internet, it seems like a strafing-run, if you are not their to defend yourself, or lighten the mood after what may have been a quip. In my real life, I just can't get back to a topic in a timely manner.
In my mind, I am one of the worst offenders, but my only alternative is to neither Post, nor Comment, at all.
I wonder how much irritation with "Kenneth" amounts to some of the same thing?
Oct '10
Re: Our Kenneth
Indeed.
Oct '10
Re: Our Kenneth
I'm laughing so hard, I'm crying! That's certainly succinct! [:-)
Oct '10
Re: Our Kenneth
Yeah!?! Another important going-on that I missed. Katie is simply magnificent. I'll join the posse sent to round her up and return her here!
Aug '10
Re: Our Kenneth
HVTs
Yeah!?! Another important going-on that I missed. Katie is simply magnificent. I'll join the posse sent to round her up and return her here! · 1 minute ago
Basically Katievs left because Ricochet was causing her to neglect her off-line life. She did say she may be back at some point but as you can imagine there was much wailing and gnashing of teeth when she made her announcement. I have been less frequent here in the past couple of months because I was neglecting my business so I can certainly understand where she was coming from.
Kenneth was one of the early members of Ricochet and I enjoyed many of his posts. I missed most of his flame wars but they were getting pretty childish from what I understand. Too bad the guy couldn't control his on-line behaviour...
Oct '10
Re: Our Kenneth
Lance: Kenneth was a raw talent. It's just a shame he didn't always use it for the greater good. It is a bit quieter around here, and the shame is it didn't have to be that way.
I wish him well in the endeavor. · 4 hours ago
Well said, Lance, and extremely gracious and statesmanlike. I too enjoyed "The Kenneth" except when he got way too personal. I pictured him as a literary Troll, whose cave entrance was cluttered with partially devoured egos scattered about. I would welcome him back if he was repentant (especially toward you, Lance), more self-governed, and respectful of the C of C.
May '10
Re: Our Kenneth
Dec '10
Re: Our Kenneth
Wait, what happened to KatieV?
We didn't seem to see eye to eye much, but she was a sweetie.
What could she have possibly done that got her canned?
Oct '10
Re: Our Kenneth
EJHill · 9 minutes ago
I am not a number, I am a free man!
Nov '11
Re: Our Kenneth
As I recall, Kenneth posted re: the demise of a beloved pet in a warm, wry illustrated piece. I wish there'd been more of *that* from him...Although I know he'd dislike this intensely: "Godspeed, Kenneth!"
Oct '10
Re: Our Kenneth
CoolHand
Wait, what happened to KatieV?
We didn't seem to see eye to eye much, but she was a sweetie.
What could she have possibly done that got her canned?
Don't start that rumor! [:-)
Not canned ... back up to Frozen Chosen's explanation at #45.
May '10
Re: Our Kenneth
CoolHand, Katie did not get canned. She gave us all a couple of week's warning explaining that she was taking a break and would likely be back.
Feb '11
Re: Our Kenneth
EThompson: I tried to move the conversation toward the interesting political topic that was raised by Kenneth via Rob's post, but, in the words of the infamous Emily Litella ... "never mind."
Let the witch hunt continue. · 3 hours ago
Edited 42 minutes ago
Why do you keep doing this? Acting as though no one has said anything good about Kenneth? I didn't ban him -- he got himself banned four times for being a schmuck, as Michael Labeit said. I engaged with him, mocked him when he was ridiculous, and agreed with him when he was right. There's no witch hunt. I just don't think the Ricochet community should be celebrating him. Mourning him, perhaps.
Oh, sorry. I guess that because I have religious convictions, when I have legitimate criticism of someone it must be a "witch hunt." Nice.
Mar '11
Re: Our Kenneth
This.
May '11
Re: Our Kenneth
I typed in my previous comment a few hours ago as I was headed out the door. I read blogsites all day long when I am supposed to be working and there are very few sites where I bother to read the comments because the conversations are generally nauseating. Ricochet is a rare treat because of the civility and quality of commentary. You can be a total ass on this site if you want to but if you get aggressive and domineering in your comments you will look foolish. I have been reading the Fullkenneth blogsite for a few months since another member linked to it and I would say that it is far better than my blogsite, because I don't have a blogsite. If anything, his new site lacks the outrageous, overthetop, opinion that made Kenneth fully Kenneth. I would welcome him back if he could engage in conversation without making every conversation a personal battle. There are no winners in those sorts of conversations and I quit reading a thread when it devolves into that.
Feb '12
Re: Our Kenneth
I joined in Feb. I missed all the fun. He must have been something special, to leave an Odor That Still Lingers.
Sep '10
Re: Our Kenneth
So Kenneth was banned? I didn't know. Must have been busy somewhere else when that happened.
But that would explain why this site suddenly became a place for civil, center-right conversation on the web.
Jan '11
Re: Our Kenneth
Well, I know the story about Kenneth and the story about katievs - at least the details that have been previously publicized.
What I want to know is why Ricochet has banned Pat Sajak and Claire Berlinski? I really enjoyed their posts.
Hehehehehe -- since we're stirring up trouble anyway ...
Jul '10
Re: Our Kenneth
You called it. I can think of 20 members I would take the time to do a tribute to if the occasion called for it. I scraped this sad sack troll off my shoe long before Ricochet finally pulled out the ban hammer. At the first DC soirée we even wasted five minutes on CoC-verboten conspiracy theories explaining why he was still tolerated and what it would take for him to finally draw the hammer. I don't remember who it was, but the member who figured he was Rob's brother-in-law has just taken the lead.
If there's anything I miss on the site from that period it is Claire's grand week long debates.
Jul '11
Re: Our Kenneth
Still at it? Those who yearn for the man's return are similar to the dual black eyed battered house wives on COPS telling the arresting officer,"but I love him". Or perhaps a Cubs fan.