uphill right of way??

Only you know the truth to that Keith! I don't ski at most ski areas anymore because of the dipsh*t factor. Hence the bitterness.

Oh brother...

What? Soggy bottom? Guilty as charged? I'm glad I have some stimulating interaction on the internet right now. Pretty damn boring browsing as of late. Yeah, sucks to be me Keith, only rode lifts in Europe last year. Not a one over here. Damn, I'm so uppity I can't even stand myself. One word for this year though...ETEC. Care to join?

I like to be the one who steps off and lets others pass when being overtaken or meeting on the trail. My theory is I will choose a less impactful wide spot, rock, or patch of gravel to roost on than they might.  Maybe uphill right of way should be reconsidered at a place as crowded as Paradise.  I don't mean to defend RMI, who I've also seen behave arrogantly, but from a resource protection 'standpoint', doesn't it make more sense for smaller parties to yield to larger ones on trails?

Gary!!!
I see your point but it's too complicated for me as taken to the logical conclusion then.

1. Large groups whether travelling up or down have the right of way to minimize the environmental impact of those forced to step off trail.

2. If both groups are of equal size, a decision should be made as to which group will do the least damage to the flora, that group should then move.

3. I f there is only one person in each group, they should perform rock/paper/scissors?

4. Rule 2 will require that all groups are accompanied by a NPS biologist to make the environmental impact determination. The NPS biologist will only be available through filling in form 203(c) at the Longmire Gate ( or as we like to call it , The Vogt Gate)

Thanks for the compliment (I think), Scotty, but the in-crowd calls it 'Waitgate'.  Technically, I guess that would be the out-crowd...

Perhaps glisse enthusiasts could work out a protocol for equal-size group encounters amoung ourselves.  I propose the most important factor is profile, and I don't mean just the traditional strong forcing aside the weak. 

How about those with wide clumsy rigs like my X-loaded 205s yield to sleeker setups like vertically mounted snowboards & skis.  Horizontal skis & boards would be the lowest caste.  Tiebreakers could be boots, with the least agile randos given trail priority & sneakers yield?   

If we're into rules, what about winter time in sometimes crowded backcountry.  Seems like downhill should not have to yield to uphill on a forest ski trail, maybe 'the rule' is because of patrollers on sleds at ski areas?   Is is OK to descend potential avy slopes above people who are poaching your hard-broken uptrack?       Snowshoers - threat or menace?       etc., etc.

I was a compliment and I'm glad you have retained your renowned sense of humor.

My brain works in strange ways sometimes.  When I read Scotsman's post I couldn't help thinking of this film clip showing two parties meeting on a narrow trail (30 seconds in). The downhill party claims the right of way, as you can see.   

Forth Eorlingas!