Dingus Milktoast wrote:Them and their self righteous rule books. I encourage young climbers to listen to level heads like ksolem and guyzo, know their history, respect the elders, reject the loud mouth ethics police and always always always TAKE (not make... TAKE) their own opinions.

Always.

I make up my own mind. I am a climber. I decide. I took that decision the first time I ever went climbing and I continue to this day. I don't need anyone's permission.

DMT

This self-centered attitude is exactly why we have breed of folks out there that care absolutely less as to what the consequences of their actions are for the REST OF THE TRIBE!

But then who gives a rats ass about the next guy, right Dingus. They're climber's for God's sake.

As long as you get your shit done and feel good, fk the rest and how ACCESS will be affected for them.

Gotcha...


If we as a TRIBE DO NOT START SETTING A REALISTIC THRESHOLD as to what and where we do what we do and how we do it.... there will not be any REAL CLIMBING.

"THE MAN" WILL SHUT IT DOWN.

We will all then be climbing on man made structures in the FLATLENDER's Urban Jungle Gyms.

Jesus Chief, can we stay on topic just once?

I don't care how other people climb until they start spraying. When you realize that most sport climbs are rated based on the pump factor, if you hang at every bolt you obviously never got pumped and did NOT do the bloody route. If you want to climb that way just don't make claims that aren't true.

Personnally, sometimes I really want to climb a route and sometimes I don't care and will hang to my hearts content, but in the first case I will spray if I succeed, and in the second case I will be honest and admit to dogging my way up.

Personal integrity is just that, personal. If you don't have any personal integrity then lie thru your teeth, if you do have personal integrity then don't worry about how you did a route, just be willing to admit the reality.

Bob said we're done. And he's right.

I've cleaned up the mess.

I know this forum is "lightly moderated," but to have SP members flailing at each other is pretty distasteful, as some have expressed both in this thread and in PMs.

I ask from the members patience in allowing us time to get around to handling these situations. It may take a bit, but we'll get around to it. PMs are the best way to keep us apprised.

We each manage situations differently on the staff, and I suspect Bob was short on time. I had a bit of time before company arrived, so I cleaned the place up. Please strive to keep it cleaned up. Any assistance will be appreciated by alerting us with PMs.

Had this been a really huge mess, I would have deleted the thread. I'm not accustomed to riding the delete button, but with continued conditioning, I'll get there, and I'll be less likely to offer up explanations. Folks know the rules around here, even in this "lightly moderated" forum. I would prefer to keep it that way.

Thanks for your consideration. We now return to the topic at hand.

Aaron Johnson wrote:Bob said we're done. And he's right.

I've cleaned up the mess.

I know this forum is "lightly moderated," but to have SP members flailing at each other is pretty distasteful, as some have expressed both in this thread and in PMs.

I ask from the members patience in allowing us time to get around to handling these situations. It may take a bit, but we'll get around to it. PMs are the best way to keep us apprised.

We each manage situations differently on the staff, and I suspect Bob was short on time. I had a bit of time before company arrived, so I cleaned the place up. Please strive to keep it cleaned up. Any assistance will be appreciated by alerting us with PMs.

Had this been a really huge mess, I would have deleted the thread. I'm not accustomed to riding the delete button, but with continued conditioning, I'll get there, and I'll be less likely to offer up explanations. Folks know the rules around here, even in this "lightly moderated" forum. I would prefer to keep it that way.

Thanks for your consideration. We now return to the topic at hand.

Aaron..... so you had to delete post to this topic? That is a shame, falling is a part of climbing.
I don't see any point in making an off topic snide comment.

is there a way the post could be numbered? And would it be possible to show "deleted post"
with who had to have their mouth washed out with soap?

Hello Guyzo-

Bob had looked at the situation and had decided to leave the posts in place to show how awful the two participants were acting, knowing if the posts were deleted, lots of speculation would follow, and he was right. In the meantime, I had received several PMs from concerned members about the matter and disagreed about leaving the posts in place, so I came over here to check it out. Since this forum is "lightly moderated," I never venture into this area.

The thread had derailed into a slugfest between the two members and it had nothing to do with the topic. It was angry, hateful, vitriolic and just awful, much like a similar situation I had stumbled upon just months ago. It's very troubling for me, and obviously other members, to see this type of exchange going on between members in any forum on SP. So I removed the posts that contained the troubling dialog that had understandably bothered others.

Of course Bob was right with his prediction and speculation certainly followed. It was another tough call. I felt something had to be done. If nothing was done, we were hosed either way.

I did not want to delete the thread. Its a good topic, so I labored to remove the argument instead of the whole thing, which would have been easier. Rest assured the deleted posts had nothing to do with the topic.

As to your "deleted post" question, we could go in to each post, erase the content and type in "deletd post" which is even more labor intensive (it's four clicks for each deletion). But we don't do that because it would get people thinking we go in and alter their content. We don't, and we don't have the time.

Chief and Dingus were the offenders and both understand why. Most folks know who was involved, so I try not to make it any more obvious than needed.

Folks may not agree with choices we make with each situation, and in a situation like this with bitterly feuding members that results in other members PMing the staff with their concerns, we do what we think is best, and in this case, it's to get the thread back on topic and get the arguing members to calm down. The members don't want to see it or they wouldn't PM the staff. Folks that disgree can certainly carry on their battle in private through PMs or email, but in a forum on an established topic, the best solution is to remove posts not pertinent to the topic.

Washing their mouths out with soap implies punnishing little kids. I rather like "negotiate a truce" or "take a step back and think about it and then talk it over elsewhere," because these aren't kids. They're guys that are passionate about their climbing, ethics and opinions.

I gather my "snide" comment you refer to about the lightly moderated forum was not intended that way. The forum is lightly moderated, which for me means leaving it alone until I'm alerted to a problem. This is my first visit here. To my knowledge, this forum has never had any problems. As to the delete button remark, until recently, I have purposely avoided the delete button. I understand I might have to use it more in the future. As to keeping this forum lightly moderated, I whole heartdly want to keep it that way, hence my bold letters on that point.

Hope that answers your concerns, and I hope I didn't derail this thread! I'll gladly remove my off topic post upon request-I just wanted to answer your concerns.

Aaron Johnson wrote:Hello Guyzo-

Bob had looked at the situation and had decided to leave the posts in place to show how awful the two participants were acting, knowing if the posts were deleted, lots of speculation would follow, and he was right. In the meantime, I had received several PMs from concerned members about the matter and disagreed about leaving the posts in place, so I came over here to check it out. Since this forum is "lightly moderated," I never venture into this area.

The thread had derailed into a slugfest between the two members and it had nothing to do with the topic. It was angry, hateful, vitriolic and just awful, much like a similar situation I had stumbled upon just months ago. It's very troubling for me, and obviously other members, to see this type of exchange going on between members in any forum on SP. So I removed the posts that contained the troubling dialog that had understandably bothered others.

Of course Bob was right with his prediction and speculation certainly followed. It was another tough call. I felt something had to be done. If nothing was done, we were hosed either way.

I did not want to delete the thread. Its a good topic, so I labored to remove the argument instead of the whole thing, which would have been easier. Rest assured the deleted posts had nothing to do with the topic.

As to your "deleted post" question, we could go in to each post, erase the content and type in "deletd post" which is even more labor intensive (it's four clicks for each deletion). But we don't do that because it would get people thinking we go in and alter their content. We don't, and we don't have the time.

Chief and Dingus were the offenders and both understand why. Most folks know who was involved, so I try not to make it any more obvious than needed.

Folks may not agree with choices we make with each situation, and in a situation like this with bitterly feuding members that results in other members PMing the staff with their concerns, we do what we think is best, and in this case, it's to get the thread back on topic and get the arguing members to calm down. The members don't want to see it or they wouldn't PM the staff. Folks that disgree can certainly carry on their battle in private through PMs or email, but in a forum on an established topic, the best solution is to remove posts not pertinent to the topic.

Washing their mouths out with soap implies punnishing little kids. I rather like "negotiate a truce" or "take a step back and think about it and then talk it over elsewhere," because these aren't kids. They're guys that are passionate about their climbing, ethics and opinions.

I gather my "snide" comment you refer to about the lightly moderated forum was not intended that way. The forum is lightly moderated, which for me means leaving it alone until I'm alerted to a problem. This is my first visit here. To my knowledge, this forum has never had any problems. As to the delete button remark, until recently, I have purposely avoided the delete button. I understand I might have to use it more in the future. As to keeping this forum lightly moderated, I whole heartdly want to keep it that way, hence my bold letters on that point.

Hope that answers your concerns, and I hope I didn't derail this thread! I'll gladly remove my off topic post upon request-I just wanted to answer your concerns.

Aaron..... I don't think you made a snide comment, it's posters who jump into a discussion and derail it with "Snide comments".

When SP added ESS is was in response to some who asked "why do we need to have this as a topic" or some other BS.

I was hoping to have a place where we could discuss climbing stuff and not get in the way of the General discussions.

or the PnP stuff.

thank you
gk

Hey Guyzo-

Yeah, I understand. Hopefully the participants will understand and keep this forum about climbing, specifically. So far, I believe that is the case. I'm not a regular visitor here, but I haven't HEARD anything to the contrary. There will always be the occasional side conversation and of course, a derailment, but I think overall the intent of this particular forum is clear.

Of course, if it gets crazy, just look me up and I'll be glad to come in and wreak some more havoc!

I'm going to stop before this thread is derailed by moi.

Thanks Guyzo.