[EdwardDiego]

I hunt and tramp (hike) and there's inherent risk, and risk that can be removed or minimised, and the risks he took that killed him were unnecessary ones.

[tasuki]

Yes, he took "unnecessary" risks. I understand his goal was not to "minimize unnecessary risks". If that's your goal, fine. It's mine, too. It wasn't his goal.

[EdwardDiego]

Yes, but he didn't exist in a vacuum - someone had to find his decomposing body, someone had to remove it, someone had to clean the public shelter he died in.

His chosen risks inflicted downsides on others.

[tasuki]

> someone had to find his decomposing body

Well, yes - is this an argument against dying in general? Fully agreed - it sucks!

> someone had to remove it

Yes, that's what people do with dead bodies!

> someone had to clean the public shelter he died in

The abandoned bus? Well no one had to clean it, but I suppose someone cleaned it? Yes, cleaning up after dead people is a nuisance.

So preferably he shouldn't have died, ever? To spare the people finding his body, removing it, and cleaning up?

[EdwardDiego]

The abandoned bus that had been converted into _shelter_ for other back-country users. Shelter is vital, so not sure why you're minimising it.

> Yes, that's what people do with dead bodies!

Entire point is, his death was easily avoidable. He chose not to avoid it, thus impacting other people needlessly.