Dr. Bob Matheny and Muir Valley
-
the lurkist
- Posts: 2240
- Joined: Wed Nov 13, 2002 2:07 pm
-
Guest
so if a person were to write you an PM stating "You are no longer welcome in Muir Valley and are hereby permanently banned. Take your disciples and go to the Southern Region or to hell for all I care" wouldn't you assume your disciples were banned, too? This quote from Rick Weber is the source of the misunderstanding/rumor. But is something discussed among friends when these friends are concerned about another friend really a "rumor"?
No, Sandy, I would assume that if a person were to be banned they would be notified directly by Rick, just as Terry was in the referenced PM. And, yes a false rumor is still a false rumor, even if it is among and about friends.Sandy wrote:so if a person were to write you an PM stating "You are no longer welcome in Muir Valley and are hereby permanently banned. Take your disciples and go to the Southern Region or to hell for all I care" wouldn't you assume your disciples were banned, too? This quote from Rick Weber is the source of the misunderstanding/rumor. But is something discussed among friends when these friends are concerned about another friend really a "rumor"?
Here's what I learned tonight
Wes wrote:Just because a person (Rick) does something good for the climbing community, doesn't mean they are are beyond reproach forever and at all times. And it doesn't somehow automaticaly make them good person.
BTW, Does PM stand for "Personal" Message?? I would assume there is no such thing on this site.
I would also assume that if someone is going to publish a PM on this forum, they would publish the full context of the situation, of which this poster was well aware.
In view of the public quoting of the PM that Rick sent to Terry months ago, I feel that the people reading that quote out of context of the situation have a right to additional information. I am quoting the following information from an e-mail that I sent to Sandy and a similar message to Meadows this evening, both of whom have attacked Rick for supposedly banning Dr. Bob:
"Rick wrote the now-infamous PM after receiving three venomous, rants from Terry. Rick finally lost all patience and became ticked off. He certainly had no trust in or desire to meet with Terry.
"Rick and I are far from perfect, but we have been at a loss these past three years as to the root cause of his vendetta. Rick had tried to be supportive of Team Suck, because he believed in what the Team was doing for the benefit of the climbing community in general. As you may or may not know, we donated a lot of bolts, hangers, and money to your Team’s efforts. In return he gets the …... Frankly, we were bewildered.
"Rick’s only subsequent communication either to or about Terry was posted on RRC.com and ended in this statement: “I have the greatest respect for Terry's efforts in re-bolting worn routes in the Gorge, but certainly not for his character. It is nice that he has so many high-caliber friends eager to jump to his defense and make excuses for his behavior. Although Liz and I hold many of those people in high esteem, I have no desire to be counted among Terry's friends, nor to waste any time talking with him in person to provide a further platform for his venom.â€
-
Guest
Publishing the contents of a private message is pretty low. Especially when you only publish a snippet of it.
I am continutally bewildered that there exists such a rift between climbers. It simply doesn't make sence in today's climbing world with all its access issues and other encumbrances that some individuals try to bad mouth other individuals or even climbing areas with their pugnacious and often capricious comments.
I guess in this menagerie there are always going to be factions that have their own agendas.
I am continutally bewildered that there exists such a rift between climbers. It simply doesn't make sence in today's climbing world with all its access issues and other encumbrances that some individuals try to bad mouth other individuals or even climbing areas with their pugnacious and often capricious comments.
I guess in this menagerie there are always going to be factions that have their own agendas.
Sarcasm is a tool the weak use to avoid confrontation. People with any balls just outright lie.
[quote="Meadows"]I try not to put it in my mouth now, but when I do, I hold it with just my lips.[/quote]
[quote="Meadows"]I try not to put it in my mouth now, but when I do, I hold it with just my lips.[/quote]
I don't usually post during the day but want to address this idiotic hypothesis that there are two "factions" or two "parties" at the Red. Freakin grow up. Just because there may be disagreement and conflict does not make this a civil war or the freakin Hatfield's and McCoy's. All of you who claim that the climbing community is divided and that there is this great fissure have too much damn time on your hands. There is no fissure. There may be discord, but no fissure. So get over it. This isn't Days of our Lives. It's a group of people figuring things out.
No one has an agenda either. That belief is stupid. Maybe there was a misunderstanding, well, it's obviously been cleared up. Maybe there were hurt feelings, guess what, those will dissipate as well. Now I am as guilty as anyone in digging in the dirt. But good God quit being so dang melodramatic. No one hates Rick & Liz. Some people just have questions.
No one has an agenda either. That belief is stupid. Maybe there was a misunderstanding, well, it's obviously been cleared up. Maybe there were hurt feelings, guess what, those will dissipate as well. Now I am as guilty as anyone in digging in the dirt. But good God quit being so dang melodramatic. No one hates Rick & Liz. Some people just have questions.
Jesus only knows that she tries too hard. She's only trying to keep the sky from falling.
-Everlast
-Everlast
i've got sandy's back, especially in this sense:
don't we tell kids to speak up about when we think something wrong is being done to someone? don't we teach people that being grown up is about standing up for what is right, not letting the oppressed be silenced, to bring the truth to light? i usually learn much less through silence. open discussion (however adverse i am to it at times personally) almost always helps people understand one another better than before.
before people jump to conclusions (where's my mat when i need it?), whether it be about the weber's, about sandy, about anyone, think about what information you have and what might still be out there. instead of saying, "how immature" or "these are wild rumors and climbers are inconsiderate, ungrateful jerks", think about the side that you don't see. think about the simple fact that you're probably not right about any of it.
as for drama, no one likes it. but sometimes it's necessary to get to the root of things. and would you say that nothing's been figured out by this? if that's how you feel, read the first post and decide again. if nothing was said, perhaps nothing would've ever changed and bob wouldn't have ever felt welcome there.. whereas now i would think he understands more..
and could you say it's impossible for you to see how weber's intents could have been misunderstood? personally, i can see how there'd be confusion as to what was meant.
no one has anything figured out. it's never as black and white as we'd all like to be.
"everything in this book may be wrong" -illusions, richard bach
don't we tell kids to speak up about when we think something wrong is being done to someone? don't we teach people that being grown up is about standing up for what is right, not letting the oppressed be silenced, to bring the truth to light? i usually learn much less through silence. open discussion (however adverse i am to it at times personally) almost always helps people understand one another better than before.
before people jump to conclusions (where's my mat when i need it?), whether it be about the weber's, about sandy, about anyone, think about what information you have and what might still be out there. instead of saying, "how immature" or "these are wild rumors and climbers are inconsiderate, ungrateful jerks", think about the side that you don't see. think about the simple fact that you're probably not right about any of it.
as for drama, no one likes it. but sometimes it's necessary to get to the root of things. and would you say that nothing's been figured out by this? if that's how you feel, read the first post and decide again. if nothing was said, perhaps nothing would've ever changed and bob wouldn't have ever felt welcome there.. whereas now i would think he understands more..
and could you say it's impossible for you to see how weber's intents could have been misunderstood? personally, i can see how there'd be confusion as to what was meant.
no one has anything figured out. it's never as black and white as we'd all like to be.
"everything in this book may be wrong" -illusions, richard bach
and great loves will one day have to part -smashing pumpkins