1
General Discussion / Re: Tent
« Last post by GlennM on Today at 04:59:09 PM »We are presented with an image that these hikers are brave and noble Soviet youth. OK, but there are things that are also suspect. The expedition leader wants a challenging hike, but accepts a friend who in all liklihood could not complete the trip and another who couldn't for academic reasons. When warned of dangeous conditions by the forester, he ignores it.Another member was the group penniless entertainer, but also a prankster whom gets in trouble more than once. Is it he who hides because he can not pay train fare? There are two women on the trip, one is rigid in her ways, the other plays with men's hearts. Two of her involvements are on the expedition. We have a soldier who wants to improve his circumstances and adjust his attitude. We have people in the group who do not like to be told what and when to do things for group solidarity.We have someone as the group police who assigns detentions which are not honored. Several were smokers, easily winded at high altitudes. We have leadership setting a schedule of progress which is not honored by,some in the group. Finally, we see that the goal of the hike suddenly gets a lot harder once the free rides cease. They lasted what, two or three days on the actual trail and had to backtrack on one of them? The focus of most theories centers on external causation. But, this tent thread raises the issue of human error stemming from the group dynamic as an integral and unfixable element.