Climbing at Torrent
-
soccerfast007
- Posts: 86
- Joined: Thu Jun 01, 2006 5:28 pm
you have your fantasy tank, and i'll keep mine. choco made the movie for me, but like i said 'you live in your fantasy world, and i'll live in mine" and in my world, it does lick itself...or else it gets the hose again.
"well Sco doesn't have my peripheral vision" - mason allen reminding us all that our peripheral vision often overlooks creepy crawlers and flying things.
I agree, saying you don't have a single dollar or even a nickle is a cop out. Yet what is the excepted amount and is this a "charge" or a donation. It's a slipperly slope piggie if you starting calling it a charge. It is NOT a charge it IS a donation to the porperty owner who is graciously allowing people to climb in his back yard.pigsteak wrote:"...but if someone says they don't have cash, i have never pushed it....."
....I find that hard to believe...99 times in a hundred that is a person's way of just being cheap...
if this is the case, then go climb where there is no charge, so everyone else doesn't have to feel the wrath....
So what is the accepted amount of the donation? I usually drop in about 2 to 3 dollars depending on how many singles I have on me. Never less than 2 and rarely more than 5.
Years ago when Torrent got re-open and I learned about the donation, I would hear, "please drop in a few bucks in the tin can at the base of the trail up to the 11 wall".
Remember when we used to have to sign a waiver to climb at the lode? I think if you look in the woods near the base of the trail where it starts to head up hill you might still be able to see the old sign. What ever happened to that? Did people just stop signing waivers just like they just started dropping in a few bucks in the tin can?
"Climbing is the spice, not the meal." ~ Lurkist
to be honest, i'm probably cashless about 30% of the time. all i ever need is $.27pigsteak wrote:what in the world would someone be doing at the Red, on a roadtrip, without cash? I find that hard to believe...99 times in a hundred that is a person's way of just being cheap...
that said, i've donated ever since i found out the container is actually maintained and offered to mark to make a new kiosk for him.. but never heard back. he was out of town, then, i think..
and great loves will one day have to part -smashing pumpkins
.27 for that ice cream cone?
naw, I don't buy it..people have money for beer, money for miguel, money for RRO, money for gas, money for a new cord....it is a cop out, plain and simple.
better just to admit we are mooches and deal with that.
rhunt,
only a slippery slope for those trying to mooch and not pay. if you pay and move on, there is no slope.
naw, I don't buy it..people have money for beer, money for miguel, money for RRO, money for gas, money for a new cord....it is a cop out, plain and simple.
better just to admit we are mooches and deal with that.
rhunt,
only a slippery slope for those trying to mooch and not pay. if you pay and move on, there is no slope.
Positive vibes brah...positive vibes.
all I am saying piggie is if "we" continue to use the word "charge" instead of donation it puts Mark in a bad place. What if one of the free loading low lifes that doesn't donate when he/she climbs at Torrent gets hurt at Torrent. He or she reads on redriverclimbing.com that torrent charges for climbing and get his/her rich daddy to suit Mark and wins claiming that it was posted on the internet that he "charges" to climb on his property.
It's a donation.
It's a donation.
"Climbing is the spice, not the meal." ~ Lurkist
lol..now that is a stretch, but I'll play....First, I would assume it is the person who paid who would want to sue for negligence. If they didn't pay, they would be trespassers.
And your contempt for "rich daddies" needs to be a bit more understated to get the point across. Taking your liberal bias out that only rich people sue is misplaced. Everyone knows it is the welfare crowd that is looking for a free lunch.
now , just a guess, but I would assume Mark or a representative of Torrent would be the only ones who could declare that Torrent is a "pay to play" site....it isn't hard to see we don't qualify...but we both know, conspiracy is more fun than reality, and the truth doesn't win in court. It is the person with the best lawyer who gets the spoils.
And your contempt for "rich daddies" needs to be a bit more understated to get the point across. Taking your liberal bias out that only rich people sue is misplaced. Everyone knows it is the welfare crowd that is looking for a free lunch.
now , just a guess, but I would assume Mark or a representative of Torrent would be the only ones who could declare that Torrent is a "pay to play" site....it isn't hard to see we don't qualify...but we both know, conspiracy is more fun than reality, and the truth doesn't win in court. It is the person with the best lawyer who gets the spoils.
Positive vibes brah...positive vibes.
