Wow, this has devolved purely into personal attacks. Awesome! Can we delete all these posts and ban both TR and L7 so that we can get on with talking about Bonfire, current, past and future?

Read it, there's some content in there. I talk about it now and then, but the very next post is TR going at it again. I tried to answer some questions and have some discussion, but it was to no avail...no surprise really.

It seems that usually, mostly depending on the individual, my dissenting views on bonfire, even though I support it, are met either one of two ways. One it's plainly not discussed because to say anything would be to agree, or two, to attack rather than discuss. Merely an observation about why discussion isn't really fostered here - it goes both ways. Simply reread the posts on this thread to discover that, if you'd like Kip, I'd be happy to cut out all the bs for you and copy only what is pertinent to this matter. Then if you'd like, I'll talk about that and only that ignoring everything else (see Rebel)...then watch the attacks come flying.

bonfire was one of the largest traditions we had at A&M, thousands participated every year in building it and tens of thousands went to burn. Almost every student for 90 years was involved in one way or another with bonfire... hundreds of thousands of former students, a very large portion of the BCS community, and a large number of the current A&M Faculty. You tell me why they wouldn't have any interest in talking about it.

No doubt there will be a discussion, but the feeling I get from some around here is that they believe Bonfire's possible return is way up on the list of things to talk about. There's black, there's white, and there's a hell of a lot of gray here. Do I think it will be discussed? Sure. To what degree...I dunno, do you have any idea? See, I just can't imagine the discussion happening anytime soon (say...before the class of 2011 graduates) where there is some serious chatter by "important" people asking questions not like "Maybe it will return one day...?" but rather questions like "Ok folks, I want to see this thing return, there's a sizable committee/faction of faculty, administration, and students who are behind me, what can we do right now to lay out a plan to make it happen?"

Unfortunately, I just don't see that happening. Like I posted earlier in this thread, there's just so much baggage associate with Bonfire and everything it brings to us. As we get further and further away from it, it can be easier to romanticize an event or an era in time because we filter out the bad and are left with the nostalgic warm fuzzy feelings that remind us why we love it. But along with those, tragically, is 1999 and everything it did to this university and to Bonfire and its legacy. It'd be nice to say that both of those entities can recover, but that's all...it'd be nice. It's not forgone.

Thank you for asking a genuine question, and I hope my response comes across as genuine as well.

Sorry I left out what you said about 90 years, I sort of touched on it, but I'll add this. 90 years of happy memories and great times can sadly be erased in fell swoop. As 1999 may turn out to have done. I think that moment and the countless painful moments that followed reminded hundreds of thousands of Aggies and non-Aggies alike that there was a VERY real and present danger associated with one of A&M's greatest traditions.

That's why I can't put much into the "it affected millions over 90 years" argument - because 1 life is too much to pay.

[BEWARE, SERIOUS POST WARNING!]

Does anyone know what were the repercussions, or if there were any, to the three previous fatalities (1955, 1981, 1996) in respect to Bonfire? Anything legal? Also, what was the public reaction, both at A&M and broader, like at that time?

I kind of chalk up getting a first-hand account response to the '55 incident, but I am sure some good Ol' Ag on here went to school during the other two.

I know the 1996 death occurred on the way back to campus when a truck rolled resulting in a ban to riding in truck beds, but was the public sentiment any different from other fatal automotive accidents? Furthermore, I am even more curious about reaction to the 1981 incident where someone got caught under a tractor.

Sno, I for one don't know. But what is your own reaction to those fatalities?

[sarcasm]Well... You know me, I like to depend on others for what my thoughts and emotions should be.[/sarcasm]

Honestly, I don't know the whole story to any of these incidents and really would like more information about them. I feel, as for now, any reaction to 1981 and 1955 on my behalf would be uninformed and unfounded.

I can say this, I know what it is like to lose a life-long friend and college buddy in automotive accident and wouldn't wish that on another person, but he was going to see friends and family so he had to be on the road like he did. The driver and two others in the car were shaken up with medium injuries to only minor scrapes, he lost his life. It was very tragic.

If you're really interested there's a pretty knowledgeable guy on here, Ag_Fossil I believe, has been chiming in a lot on a great thread on AO, you might be able to find him on the History board of Aggieland...I dunno. I'm sure somebody on one of those two board would have some good information on the matter if you can't find it here.

The eery part was it actually occurred on 11/18/05 and the sleepy driver who ran into him was an A&M student who attended the Bonfire Memorial at 2:42AM and spent the rest of the night studying for a test and after his test a friend coming from Huntsville broke down and he drove to help him out and was on his way back. There is absolutely no way I can hold anything against that guy because I would have done the exact same thing for a friend in need. I only pray God can give him peace.

[Sorry, I really didn't want to make this all about myself or my experience, but I haven't thought about that recently and I really needed to share it.]

[This message has been edited by DoctorSnoball (edited 12/22/2007 1:44p).]

quote:

---

there was a VERY real and present danger associated with one of A&M's greatest traditions.

That's why I can't put much into the "it affected millions over 90 years" argument - because 1 life is too much to pay.

---

The invalid assumption you ([]1) are making is that Aggie Bonfire had a disproportionate amount of danger compared to any other similar activity one can do in his/her life.

Flight has claimed more than a single life, is necessary for present day travel, yet you don't talk negatively about it.

Cruise Ships have claimed more than a single life, are not necessary for any reason other than vacation/tourism, yet there are no negative comments flying about those.

Bonfire, while necessary to be a Texas Aggie, is not viewed as a necessity by the rest of the world so can be classified anywhere from one extreme to another. Yet, instead of even remotely considering that safety can be improved, and many students for years to come can continue to have the option of participating in something that builds character, leadership, responsibility, commaradery, and puts the very education that he/she came to Texas A&M for to practical use in a collegiate environment, you choose to just shout to all four corners of Texags that Bonfire was not worth it.

Here's a hypothetical...say a few cadets from the classes before '44 did not have Bonfire to bring them together, and missed out on the opportunity to develop/sharpen their leading abilities before heading "Over There". These Aggies don't step up when their brothers need them, and you don't have as many/any CMH resting in the MSC now.

Could it be possible that those men saved 13+ lives...which translates to ~102 lives (using the current average number of children per family in the US in 2004, which was 1.9...cubed since there were ~3 generations since, multiplied by 13 since we can assume the soldiers they saved were only 1 in a 2 part union)

In your mind, would Bonfire saving 13 lives and allowing 89 more to start even begin to outweigh 15 lives lost to unfortunate and tragic accidents?

[This message has been edited by TexasRebel (edited 12/22/2007 4:33p).]

You see all? It's posts like that why we don't have discussion that goes anywhere.

Bonfire was sanctioned by the university and occurred on on university property and 12 people died on the university's watch.

That's all I'm going to say on that, as that's all I feel needs to be said about that. There was a thread over a year ago discussing why similar comparisons were absurd, and if you'd like several answers to your question, you can look them up and find them there. However, I don't think this discussion or any future discussion needs to be had about why not have Bonfire if we fly, skydive, walk out of our house, breathe, etc.

What we were talking about was whether a serious discussion would be had or not, and why or why or why not this discussion would take place. I gladly agreed to have this conversation with anybody who would like to have it. However I will not allow you to bait me or anybody else on this thread by bringing up irrelevant comparisons that have been dismissed before.

So with that being said, who believes a conversation will be had or won't be had? What is the basis for your opinion either way? And how do you feel on the matter?

Thank you.

dp

[This message has been edited by SquareOne07 (edited 12/22/2007 5:08p).]

quote:

---

So we've debated the location. That's probably the easiest problem to solve. Texas A&M has lots of land. Bonfire will not fail to come back because there's no place to burn it.

So what do you think about the other obstacles I cited? I'd really like to broach the subject of the Bonfire Culture.

1. It seems that the most fervent advocates of the tradition, the "we only burn it to get it out of the way for next year" group, would never be happy with anything less than what's happening with Student Bonfire now. That is, they'd never want to surrender control to the university administration.

The 100-percent student built, student led, and student controlled Bonfire led to the 1999 tragedy--a structurally unsafe project built without engineering oversight, or practically any "adult leadership."

2. The university, wary of its mistakes in the past but unable to admit them because of ongoing litigation, would never agree to allow Bonfire back without strong controls in place and ultimate veto power over the project.

3. The large group in the middle, the vast majority of students and former students for whom Bonfire was a spectator sport, used to support the students in conflicts with the administration.

If an administrator got crosswise with the Bonfire leadership, he could count on some angry phone calls from influential alumni, some of whom gave lots of money. If a professor criticized Bonfire because of its environmental damage, his office windows got egged. Indeed, Rusty Thompson's rather infamous quote in the Linebeck Commission report, to the effect that his job as Bonfire Advisor was to clear administration hurdles for the students, stands out as an example of how the administration kowtowed to the Bonfire Culture of the time.

(The accident report also wondered how Dr. Bowen, an engineer by trade, could have driven past the Bonfire stack every day for eight years and not taken a more proactive approach to engineering safety.)

These days, those people in the middle seem either indifferent of skeptical about the resumption of the tradition.

My question to those Bonfire devotees who read this forum is this: How much would you be willing to compromise in order to get the tradition back on campus? How much of the old "build it" experience would you allow to be modified or diluted in order to have the football team, the band, the yell leaders, the coaches, and the vast majority of Aggies who used to show up attend?

How much of what you consider sacred about Bonfire would you let change in order to assure the continuation of the tradition under unviersity sponsorship?

I'm conderned that, with increased opposition from Brazos County, as evidenced by the fiasco with Judge Sims for the past two years, the off-camplus tradition is on its way to a long, drawn-out, gradual death. Fewer people will probably attend this year because of location. How much longer, as the years pass, can we count on the spirit of the bulders to keep it going?

---

DualAg 11/06/06

That considered...why would you even want the discussion to be had if Bonfire's return to campus meant the most perverted idea of Bonfire you could imagine? Why would you all give up what you're doing to have it back on campus and lose SO much of what you're fighting to keep?

there was no comparison...

flying = extreme to the necessary side
vacation crusing = extreme to the unnecessary side

Both contain inherent risk, and both fatal at least once in the past.

Since Bonfire falls somewhere between the extremes inclusive for every single person on the planet, the issue cannot simply be dismissed because of an accident.

Because of the necesity of Bonfire to Texas Aggies, Bonfire will be discussed, most likely when the litigation is finished, with a pretty high priority.

Why do you think Bonfire is necessary to being a Texas Aggie? I think there's a very narrow minded, almost elitist approach to it.

Here's another's perspective on the relative risk argument:

quote:

---

As for the "relative risk" argument: There is a BIG difference between driving home for Christmas to be with your family, driving to class to work to earn a degree, and standing in the woods while 18-24 year olds who are minimally trained to swing axes are doing so to participate in a tradition. Likewise, if any Aggie is standing and yelling in the stands of Kyle Field, and they feel they are at risk of serious injury or death, no sane person would support their staying out in the heat.

---

Basically, driving or flying to make a living, earn a degree, spend time with your family is VERY different than participating in a tradition. That's where the difference is. People drive, fly, skydive, and breathe on their own time, but Bonfire and the tragedy that occurred took place on Texas A&M's time, and has some serious long lasting implications. Bonfire was great and gave a lot of people a lot of great memories, but presently and where we are now, no matter how you look at it, it's just a tradition, a tradition that took the lives of 12 young Aggies at that.

quote:

---

The Bonfire Commission proved that the design and culture of Bonfire, both of which the University tolerated, were responsible for 12 deaths.

---

Why won't Bonfire return to campus? In my opinion, there you have it, right there.

*Both quotes from ChBass

Rebel, you fail to explain why you believe Bonfire will be such a high priority discussion.

http://texags.com/main/forum.reply.asp?topic_id=691570&page=4&forum_id=14

A good read for those interested in a discussion of Bonfire's return.

[This message has been edited by SquareOne07 (edited 12/22/2007 5:32p).]

quote:

---

It seems that usually, mostly depending on the individual, my dissenting views on bonfire, even though I support it, are met either one of two ways. One it's plainly not discussed because to say anything would be to agree, or two, to attack rather than discuss. Merely an observation about why discussion isn't really fostered here - it goes both ways. Simply reread the posts on this thread to discover that, if you'd like Kip, I'd be happy to cut out all the bs for you and copy only what is pertinent to this matter. Then if you'd like, I'll talk about that and only that ignoring everything else (see Rebel)...then watch the attacks come flying.

---

Thanks for the offer, L7, but I think that the degree in English and the 4.0 in the MBA prove that my reading and reading comprehension skills are sufficient for me to understand the posts in this thread without your help. My complaint is that this devolved into a bunch of personal attacks between you and TR. My banning recommendation has nothing to do with your opposing viewpoints. Notice, I didn't only recommend that you be banned. TR was included there as well.

And, yes, I would like it if you (and TR . . . and everyone else, for that matter) would keep to the discussion and leave the personal attacks for some other place. If you can't do that you (general "you" not specific "you" ) should be banned.

And, by the way, since you are in Cypress right now I would love the opportunity to have a beer with you and discuss your viewpoints on Bonfire in person. I'm sure it would be enlightening for both of us to discuss this in person rather than on the MB where time and lack of tone-of-voice make a true discussion difficult.

*edit, changed " to " ). Stupid smileys.

[This message has been edited by kip (edited 12/23/2007 11:10a).]

I saw all that post and I was hoping some of it would be about the bonfire discussion we were having...but no. That's ok though...in your response to this post, please respond to me, but also the discussion, I think there's been some interesting material in there as far as any discussion on a return goes.

As far as a beer? Sure, when and where is good for you, I don't know how to get you my number (sure as hell not posting it here ) maybe you could get it through Jayci or something. I won't be available until after the new year, and then i'll be here in town for a little over a week. So just get in touch with me and let me know when and where...this isn't an ambush is it?

Terry

OK, Terry, I'll comment.

I think that it is great that she mentioned Bonfire so soon after starting her new job. I think that this may be an indicator about how much interest there is in Bonfire outside of our small group. I do not believe that she talked about Bonfire because a few people on TexAgs think it is important.

That being said, I do not think that Bonfire is anywhere near the top of her priority list. There are a lot of things that rightly should be ahead of Bonfire. It is an institution of higher learning, after all. A&M does not exist solely as a place for people to gather to build Bonfire. I'm just glad it is on the list, no matter how far down.

As for people here thinking that it is important (and perhaps more important than it really is), well, that's human nature. We all think that the things we find important should be important to everyone. That's just the way people are. No one likes to think that the things they hold dear might not be important to others.

And no, Terry, this is not an ambush. I don't know anyone on here personally and will not let anyone else know when or where we might get that beer. Feel free to get in touch with me when you are around. My address is a gmail address, starting with kip1995. I am available pretty much anytime that first week.

Sorry you feel that way Kip. I invite you, and anyone else that feels the same, to review this thread, the one titled "Square...", and the other one about the new president.

[]1's postings have just become old and tiresome. I fought for months to cover his word twisting, anti-Bonfire posting (he claims to be pro, but has never shown any evidence to back that) duing the fall of 2006, my brownpot year. Now I just respond when provoked (see the "slim gets man of the year award" post on the first page) and keep a not-so-serious banter going to remind viewers that since this is a public forum, nothing that is simply posted here is "official" or even true. If the news is here, it is already somewhere else.

Oh yeah, If you make it in for any Baseball games come visit section 203...I'm sure we'll find something to talk about between innings.

TR,I agree that it has become old and tiresome, but so have the barbs that you trade with him. Let it go.

I will gladly come by section 203 to discuss both Aggie Baseball and whatever else if I can get up there.

Gees TR, Let. It. Go. I'm not even going to respond to your further than urging you to let it go for your own sake.

Kip, refreshing point of view. I wish it were reality that the things we found important were important to evcerybody else as well, unfortunately they aren't. Regardless of what Rebel thinks, I do like seeing ASB succeed and do well and make decisions that advance the project, not hinder it. It is because of my sentiments towards ASB that I hope and urge people to stay realistic about what's going on.

I'll send an email a little later this evening...time to eat.

Kip - email sent.