Dingus Milktoast wrote:No offense but if you need a formula to determine most dangerous mountain, you're asking the wrong questions.
In another thread about rating climbs similar points were made. People, including many of here on SP will attempt to compare, catagorize, rank, and rate things. Some people make lists of goals, consider statistics and plan trips. Others think these behaviors are foolish and they just "go do it" so to speak. Maybe its a right-brain vs. left brain behavior. To each his/her own.
I'm the list-maker, goal-setter, planner-type so maybe thats why I'm finding this topic so thought provoking.
Right. You're a digital man and you like things ordered and sorted. I totally get that. Because this is the internet the climbers most likely to be this way are also most likely to be computer geeks like us. So we tend to be very comparative, us geeky climbers.
I have my digital urges, no question. I have some ordered lists and my own versions of OCD. (and it certainly approaches OCD for many list-takers).
But many years ago I went back to analog. I'm an electronics man and larnt the basics on old analog equipment, radar and what have you. So the analog to digital comparison speaks to me.
In analog systems, close is often good enough. In analog stereo systems for example, close is so good enough many audiophiles perfer it over perfect reproduction of digital.
Anyway, for me? Going analog is to push away from digital urges, to let feelings and impromptu decisions have their day in the sun just as I do the grandiose digital plans.
So my job here is to remind yall... the most dangerous mountain in the whole wide world is the one you are standing on. Never forget that.
And make some snap decisions... how about for this weekend. Forget your plans, scrap them! Go do something WILD!