I beg to differ (from the above comment.) Hedgehogs have plenty of color and attractiveness - I vote for MORE HEDGEHOGS on SP !!!

Alex Wood wrote: Living the lifestyle is awesome, but go back to the roots of it.

Now that is funny! I am and have been living in the roots of this lifestyle going on 43 years now. That is more than twice the amount of time you have been on this planet. Being completely rebellious and getting away from the crowds of the status quo recreationalists in order to set my/our own standards to live by. So please do not tell me to go back to the roots. You are completely clueless as to the origin of them roots.

I am not getting your panties tied into a wad young man. Just completely agree not to post up established hiking trails as a route. They are two completely different entities. I also completely concur with a single pitch Sport gig as not being a route. It isn't.

Again, I completely understand Knoback's frustrations. Just wish he could of tolerated the issue of this OP a tad bit more....

lcarreau wrote:I beg to differ (from the above comment.) Hedgehogs have plenty of color and attractiveness - I vote for MORE HEDGEHOGS on SP !!!

95% of the hedgehogs I have seen were either hiding near my garden compost or flattened on a road side. Not so much related to the essence of SummitPost.

I guess there should be an "SP Technical" and an SP Non-Tech", then all the elitists who look down on us class 3 or less hikers can avoid our pointless drivel. And then you guys can hang out and stoke each other within your own site.

Marmaduke wrote: And then you guys can hang out and stoke each other within your own site.

Marm, you'll have to show us how it is done. We are too busy climbing.

The Chief wrote:

Marmaduke wrote: And then you guys can hang out and stoke each other within your own site.

Marm, you'll have to show us how it is done. We are too busy climbing.

This was exactly my point in the elitist thread. At the end of the day if climbers and hikers can't sit around and BS about their day/weekend in the wilderness, because some think they are so much better than others its sad commentary on those peoples personalities. You guys want to act like Kobe Bryant and Barry Bonds, be my guest. I guess we need to all go learn at least a 5.4 before some here on SP will speak to us, read a TR, look at a Route Page and move us up to their level, the elitist level..........................NO THANKS, I'm happy with where I'm at, a non-elitist who loves the wilderness for what it is.

This thread is ridiculous. How can you not consider trail or scramble as a route?! Have no idea why climbers have to look down on hikers. I do both and I can appreciate all kinds of 'routes.'
There is Mountainproject.com for pure climbing routes. Do you guys want to delete Whitney Trail because it does not have any climbing on it? Or maybe screw it, let's delete Mountaineer's route too since it is just a "descent" for most of our entitled "climber" population.
Ridiculous!

Route-1. the choice of roads taken to get to a place
2. a regular journey travelled
3. (Engineering / Automotive Engineering) (capital) US a main road between cities Route 66
4. (Individual Sports & Recreations / Mountaineering) Mountaineering the direction or course taken by a climb

Basically it is a way to get from point A to point B. It could be a scramble, walk up, climb, road. It could be 20 miles or one pitch.

I am not happy about a member leaving, hope he comes back after thinking it over. All people here should AT LEAST tolerate the way others have fun. Although we do not have to agree on everything.

Where is all this attitude coming from? I find myself agreeing with one guy, then the next. "Yeah," I think...trad climbers like me don't get any respect, and then "Yeah!" I say...this kind of hierarchy and elitism is what I was running away from when I got into climbing in the first place!

Plainly we are all just bored and incapable of imagining seeing anything inspiring here. Everything has to be dismissed. What it tells me is that this site isn't good for us anymore. Not because we are better at anything...we just need to be doing something new that engages us without this poisonous lurking in the back rooms diagnosing everybody else's hangups.

Everybody who made more than 2 replies here should vamoose for 6 months or so, go have an adventure and come back and talk about it when you can do it without putting anybody else down. You'll find that the technical grade (or lack of grade) won't seem so important.

Steve1215 wrote:

Marmaduke wrote:I guess we need to all go learn at least a 5.4 before some here on SP will speak to us, read a TR, look at a Route Page and move us up to their level, the elitist level.........................

Oh brother, Marmy, you sure have a lot to learn. Learn 5.4 before the elite will even speak to you?

Not quite. Before you can even be in the same room with the elite...and smell the sharp aroma of an elite climber, you should at a minimum be able to...

Lead 5.9 crack or face. Lead minimally runout routes, say, executing 5.8 moves a minimum of 20ft up from your last bolt/protection piece. Know how to lead without using cams; ie, have some nutcraft under your belt. For instance, be able to lead a tricky 5.9 route of small, discontinuous cracks, using only occasional small stoppers for pro. And know how to lead greasy slabs and balance on small greasy edges; at least 5.9+ in rating; and minimally bolted.

That is entry level for being anywhere near an elite climber. Meet the requirements, or your presence will only give the elite climber allergic hives.

best of luck

-

Well I did say "at least". I do recognize that is an entry level climb, so no respect for that? Sorry for my ignorance, I guess a 5.4 really isn't climbing anyways, the REAL STUDS would free climb it, reducing it to just another "hike" Speaking of free climbers, would the elitist climbers here on SP be worthy of chatting with the likes of Honnold or Potter or Davis? Exactly what are the different levels one must reach to associate with the great ones?

Everybody who made more than 2 replies here should vamoose for 6 months or so

mvs, I can't, I have work. I just spent a week in Banff though, does that count?


All in good fun- don't go getting your panties in a bunch.

Vitaliy M. wrote:This thread is ridiculous. How can you not consider trail or scramble as a route?! Have no idea why climbers have to look down on hikers. I do both and I can appreciate all kinds of 'routes.'
There is Mountainproject.com for pure climbing routes. Do you guys want to delete Whitney Trail because it does not have any climbing on it? Or maybe screw it, let's delete Mountaineer's route too since it is just a "descent" for most of our entitled "climber" population.
Ridiculous!

Route-1. the choice of roads taken to get to a place
2. a regular journey travelled
3. (Engineering / Automotive Engineering) (capital) US a main road between cities Route 66
4. (Individual Sports & Recreations / Mountaineering) Mountaineering the direction or course taken by a climb

Basically it is a way to get from point A to point B. It could be a scramble, walk up, climb, road. It could be 20 miles or one pitch.

I am not happy about a member leaving, hope he comes back after thinking it over.

All people here should AT LEAST tolerate the way others have fun.

Although we do not have to agree on everything.

Perhaps you should read what you wrote!

Buz Groshong wrote:Perhaps you should read what you wrote!

Perhaps you should read what I wrote, one more time. I said we all should TOLERATE each other (it is a public site). But we should not all have one view for all. When I have an opinion on something I usually say what I think (maybe some time I can learn to do it in a way that does not bring up an offensive response ), but I do not get extremely mad because someone else thinks differently. I do not leave the site because there is a thread or a route I do not like!
On the other hand, when one claims to want to make the site better by deleting contributions that other members submit. And than leaves it/takes all his shit down, does not qualify as tolerance for others IMO.

People add what they climb. If you want to see more hard core routes than class 3 (or 1 & 2) routes, then simply add more of them instead of whining. If a route page is of poor quality (regardless of difficulty) then vote it that way.

If you only want to see hard-core rock routes, why not just filter them out that way?

Here are all the routes on SP over 5.8 in difficulty (it took all of four seconds to weed them out):

http://www.summitpost.org/object_list.p ... bject_name

It's not that hard people. Throwing a fit over it is dumb.

We, the Technical Dudes, are the few here on SP.

The same can be said of any specialized dicpline of climbing. Personally, I thought climbing a PD alpine route at 20,000 feet or doing a class 2 in -50's windchill was much harder than climbing a four or five pitch 5.8 rock tower (which is easy by rock tower standards-I've never done a tower over 5.11 and probably never will). There aren't that many "winter dudes" or "high altitude dudes" here either. Maybe they should join in and vent their frustrations against fair weather rock climbers. Or maybe all the routes that aren't at least 5.10 YDS and WI4 ice and high altitude (which by most mountaineering definitions I've seen includes only elevations above 18000-19000 feet) and done in harsh winter conditions should be deleted. Personally, I think I've tried most types of climbing (rock, waterfall ice, alpine, high altitude, scrambling, winter, ski mountaineering, etc.), excelled at none of it, but still had fun.

Elitists have small penises.

borutbk wrote:

mrchad9 wrote:Elitists have small penises.

This is not at all what we are talking about.

No. They generally don't like to talk about it.