Please people, be honest...

If anybody agree with that statement of Sper As (which btw I think is a big time idiot), please speak up with complete honesty, I'll delete the article in a heartbeat if people here think I am trying to get attention or points, fuck no, (well I must be a true stupid searching for points, attention, and deleting every day dozens of images ah???). Sorry about the dirty words but this one got me on my nerves...
All I am doing is try to keep myself busy going through the hard times I'm having with all that cancer shit. Bone marrow biopsy, transplant search...bla bla bla...And the way I see it, the best way to do that is to continue to contribute to SP. By the way, I have over 200 contribution pages now and this idiot has only a few.

If my contribution is not welcome, fine by me, I'll take my words and photos elsewhere...

I d like to see some opinions here so I can decide whether I delete it or not.

Paulo, I don't know you, but I'll tell you what your problem is. You let the opinion of one person "make all my work seem useless."

He's also quite wrong in his interpretation of statistics, since he's comparing chronic risks to acute ones. Look at smoking, for example: if you smoke for 40 years your expectation is to die about 10 years early; four days smoking (no, biology doesn't quite work like this, I'm just comparing numbers) will cost you one day of life. If you spend four days climbing Mont Blanc at age 20, an 0.15% death rate means you should expect that it will cost you 27 days of life. So climbing Mont Blanc is nearly 30 times deadlier than smoking.

Honestly, I don't think AS actually read your article. I think he's anxious to denounce sensationalism, but describing and avoiding sensationalism is exactly what much of your article is about.

I do have to question one line from your fifth paragraph: "The increase in the number of deaths is exponential." Nothing in the article supports that assertion, and I frankly doubt it's true. ("Exponential" is a technical term in mathematics.)

Hang in there, don't let one critic disarm your contributions. I got a zinger one time, still can't figure it out. I stay out of the fighting. Ignore it.

nartreb wrote:Paulo, I don't know you, but I'll tell you what your problem is. You let the opinion of one person "make all my work seem useless."

He's also quite wrong in his interpretation of statistics, since he's comparing chronic risks to acute ones. Look at smoking, for example: if you smoke for 40 years your expectation is to die about 10 years early; four days smoking (no, biology doesn't quite work like this, I'm just comparing numbers) will cost you one day of life. If you spend four days climbing Mont Blanc at age 20, an 0.15% death rate means you should expect that it will cost you 27 days of life. So climbing Mont Blanc is nearly 30 times deadlier than smoking.

Honestly, I don't think AS actually read your article. I think he's anxious to denounce sensationalism, but describing and avoiding sensationalism is exactly what much of your article is about.

I do have to question one line from your fifth paragraph: "The increase in the number of deaths is exponential." Nothing in the article supports that assertion, and I frankly doubt it's true. ("Exponential" is a technical term in mathematics.)

Nartreb,

Thank you for your honesty. Look, I always welcome constructive criticism, but this guy wanted just to piss me off. Trust me, I don't let one person's opinion make the whole thing useless, I wrote the text and I know how good it is. I also accepted your criticism and changed the section where you said it was wrong and thank you for that. Sometimes english and portuguese get mixed up. There is words I know in english and I can't translate to portuguese and vice-versa. That happens.

If I really think one person's opinion defines my work then I d be a complete idiot, not at all. This is the reason I left this thread here, because I know maybe some friends agree with him but they don't say anything because we're friends (and they just don't wanna hurt my feelings), or maybe people disagree with him (like you) and would like to leave a reply on the subject, or maybe people agree with him (depending on the number here, he could be right on his assumption about me and without knowing, my text could appear to have some second intention, but it does not! It wasn't my intention at all and you saw that.).
Careful when reading, I said "maybe" three times.

I just wanna know other people's opinion and get to a conclusion myself.

Again, thanks!

I didn't at all find your article sensationalist. Mont Blanc is known to kill a lot of people, it is dangerous because it is so high, and because it is very exposed to winds from the west bearing a lot of moisture and causing snow storms, even if the normal route is sometimes described as just a promenade in snow. I think your article may make people stop and think about if they are actually well prepared to make this climb that only lacks 190 meters in being a 5000 m climb, and so possibly save lives.

Wishing you all the best in fighting your disease!

Paulo,
I thought you had a good article there and I am glad you shared it. Don't let the 'downers' get to you.
Best,
Tim

nartreb said it very well. as didn't even seem to understand statistics himself, and by the way you responded perfectly well to his post. Now the best thing to do is completely forget about him. He is only one person out of many, and you already know that the vast majority don't agree with him. Continue on just as before!

And DO NOT thank me... writing this didn't take much effort!

mrchad9 wrote:nartreb said it very well. as didn't even seem to understand statistics himself, and by the way you responded perfectly well to his post. Now the best thing to do is completely forget about him. He is only one person out of many, and you already know that the vast majority don't agree with him. Continue on just as before!

And DO NOT thank me... writing this didn't take much effort!

Ohh Chad, I had to thank you just because you said me not to ahahaha...

I read the article and didn't really have a idea of what your point was. Then I re-read the first few lines and picked up that it was only an analysis. Thats a good thing, you weren't really playing a side.

I wonder if as to some extent misinterpreted your intentions in his/her response. Seemed kind of like as thought you were attacking ones will to attempt Mont Blanc.

I thought your article was excellent, and very informative. I completely disagree with as(shole). Keep on fighting!

Paulo, I don't know you, but I'll tell you what your problem is. You let the opinion of one person "make all my work seem useless."

+1

I do not know you neither, but you seem like an honest guy with a kind soul. It takes a lot of honesty to write about real issues in your life at the moment. Everyone can have own opinion, don't worry about his.

Well, my previous comment didn't seem to take, so let me try again.

First, you can ask the elves to remove overly contentious comments. I've seen that done before.

Second: don't take it so seriously. The internet is rife with folks leaving nasty messages. Take a positive view: if your topic were not controversial and worth being debated, it would have low chance of drawing controversial comments. The fact that it draws emotions indicates it is significant.

My life on the outskirts of academia was filled with extremely nasty reviews for journal articles and grant proposals. The surest way to a heart attack is to let that stuff eat at you. Let it fall from your back like water off a duck. I found that most nasty comments came from folks who were looking to be angry; they would read the first few sentences, see red, and react to what they supposed might be in the rest of the text, regardless of what was actually there.

MoapaPk wrote:you can ask the elves to remove overly contentious comments. I've seen that done before.

Well I hope they don't do that, and I hope Paulo doesn't ask them to. 'as' should be able to make any comment he wants to as long as it is relevant and not threatening, even if he makes himself look foolish and asinine. Paulo wrote a great article, as didn't like it, and every else can decide on their own where they stand (looks like Paulo is winning that event).

I don't think eliminating criticism is the right course of action. Probably better to weigh it appropriately in light of your own intent and objectives, and perhaps those that know you better (i.e. as's comments are worthless and only discredit himself). Leave the post and everyone can make their own judgements as they are doing now.

And to their credit the mods generally do not remove such comments (when they are on topic). Remember the Ship Rock trip report? Or the Inyo traverse one? I've seen a couple other similar ones regarding various trespassing, accidents, or emotional articles.

And as I said before, Paulo handled him very well in his response on the article. Now just forget about him!

MoapaPk wrote: The surest way to a heart attack is to let that stuff eat at you.

+ 1

To Paulo: ..... hehehe ...

You can't let "one man's opinion" get to you! Gotta keep going, man, gotta keep going .. the road will always have THORNS, as well as ROSES.

Reminds me of myself .... when THEY get critical ... gotta take the GOOD with the BAD .... and I do mean bad, just like that "M.J." dude ......

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=B6-vb4_3LlI[/youtube]

YO PAROFES ......

You gotta be tough ..... when the going gets tough, the tough go SHOPPING ..... just ask Czech Superstar Lucie Bila ....... .........

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VspL1YpruZo[/youtube]