Hacker News Reader

Comment by dumpsterlid | Hacker News Reader

If you agree to hike in a group, become the pace setter in front, and don't let the slower people in the group take a good rest after you rest to let them catch up you look like and ARE functionally an asshole. All it takes is a little self-awareness to treat group hiking as a group activity instead of an activity where you get to as fast as you possibly can go.

This article is a dumpsterfire

View on HN

It's affectionately known as a Fuck You stop, and the easiest solution is to put the slowest people up front, instead of writing lengthy blog posts about why it's a noble thing.

https://slowerhiking.com/skills-techniques/the-fu-stop-or-ho...

That article is a very reasonable take on it; it specifically defines FU stops as not-agreed-upon-in-advance slinky stops. It also doesn't mandate any specific style of hiking together (other than to say stay together in dangerous conditions). Applying the lessons from that article to just about any group activity is a great lesson in "how to not be an asshole."

Something that gives the "pro FU stop" side ammunition is less nuanced takes on them, such as "If you ever do a slinky stop, you're an asshole" or "Always have the slowest hiker lead." It then becomes easy for non-assholes to end up sympathizing or siding with the assholes just because the absolutist claims have gone too far.

Assholes also weaponize this to garner sympathy. A statement of "I'm called an asshole just because I do slinky stops" when the actual truth is they have refused to calmly discuss other options for hiking.

I mean, one of the first rules of hiking that I learned was to have the slowest person lead the group... this shouldn't be rocket science.

I agree :-p. If you want to exercise, and are going in a group, you can simple hike forward and backward in the trail, to make sure everyone is doing ok. When hiking in groups, for example with families, we do that, either some adult or a kid with a lot of energy is asked to go forward and then backwards to tell us how we are doing, and they enjoy the explorer role, while at the same time the little kids, or the grandparents in the group are also kept the loop and accompanied the whole way.

Good idea, but needs to be someone with a little bit of self awareness or experience doing this. A preadolescent has no sense of rationing their own energy and will burn themselves out long before the end and make themselves and their caretakers miserable. Speaking from experience with my nephews :)

> If you want to exercise, and are going in a group, you can simple hike forward and backward in the trail

Yeah, my wife and I kept hiking up through month 8 of her pregnancy. As she started slowing down, I'd take the dog ahead and hike back to her, always keeping her in eyesight. Eventually we got to the point where we were literally running circles around her as she plodded along.

Worked great for everyone.

> and don't let the slower people in the group take a good rest after you rest to let them catch up you look like and ARE functionally an asshole.

This is every hike I've ever taken with my family on vacations. I'd always lag behind and finally catch up—out of breath—and the second I'd arrive the family would continue.

This conditioned me to hate hiking and physical activity. Then I started hiking with good friends who didn't even make it a problem to just casually hike with me, even if they could go faster. They're good folks.

A bit of devil's advocate here, but the slower people in the group are willing and able to rest at any point that the fast hiker is ahead and the fast hiker would never even know.

Depends on the hike. There can be a safety issue with getting too far apart. There can also be the opportunity for further friction: on a dayhike if the fast person gets to the end or the turnaround point and then is or feels compelled to wait. As said elsewhere, setting expectations would be the key.

The article is about how the advice is bad and myopic because it pretends like the optimal solution is averaging everyone and ignores that there is actually some subtlety to choosing the right thing to do, not about how it's not-ever-rude to do that.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com