Looks as though the WSHS is doing a little campaigning for the building of their controversial donor wall through a FAQ and timeline on their site. As I'm sure historians would agree taking an opinionated stance on events can taint their accuracy in portraying those events. Short of their own blog, I suppose this is a good way for them to get their opinions about the donor wall out and about. Seems their mostly concerned, according to the FAQ, about making the area more secure by limiting access and won't consider an archway to avoid accidental motor traffic on the Bridge of Glass. Who ever said anything about another archway?
Most of the FAQ is very confrontative asking skewed questions like "Have you violated your easement agreement with the City of Tacoma?", "Why is the History Museum denying direct access to the Bridge of Glass?", "Why do you have an anti-pedestrian attitude?" (my favorite), and other gems. Oh, and I'm pretty sure Mount Rainier can't be seen at all from the Museum's main arch, as is noted in one FAQ answer.
All in all, a good read. Seems like a bit of grasping at straws but, in the interest of opinion-based information, it's good to have out there.
I fancy we could come up with our equally opinionated FAQ. Shoot your questions and answers into the comments below.