gate at solar collector/darkside entrance

Post by **pigsteak** » Tue Mar 30, 2010 5:48 pm

see clevis, gates aren't heavy handed....the new solar gate is not locked..you'll find away around it I am betting.

Post by **krampus** » Tue Mar 30, 2010 6:12 pm

I am not taking sides in this matter personally, because its up and its not a big deal and ultimately I think it will help raise some cash for the coalition. I think Clevis like to start shit, and gets what he gives. However, no matter what he says, I am sure he was gate hopping 7 years ago. But 7 years ago, the coalitions efforts where not as public and rumors where all we had to go by, and....well....who wasn't gate hopping back then. Shit back in 2003 I would let my dog run a muck in muir and crap in the middle of torrent all in the same day, only to find a way to drive to "drive by" the next day. I am sure that many have shared these experiences, and when the crowds got bigger the dogs got louder, the crap got piled higher and owners got pissed off, only a few backed off the behavior when the land owners posted rules and we lost torrent, and dog owners lost muir. I suppose, if the gate solar doesn't help raise money, it will at least make people think about what we stand to loose if we keep acting juvenile. Gate destroying on the other hand, that's a whole different ball game,

Post by **toad857** » Tue Mar 30, 2010 8:49 pm

krampus wrote:and when the crowds got bigger the dogs got louder, the crap got piled higher and owners got pissed off, only a few backed off the behavior when the land owners posted rules and we lost torrent, and dog owners lost muir. I suppose, if the gate solar doesn't help raise money, it will at least make people think about what we stand to loose if we keep acting juvenile.

well said

Post by **clif** » Tue Mar 30, 2010 10:08 pm

i think there has been some useful exchanges in this thread. Clevis, you know that i don't agree that the gate is heavy-handed and threatening or whatnot. but i do think that it is unfortunate that the primary opportunity for exchange with the decision makers at the rrgcc seems to be to attend the Board meetings in person. after the free for all experience at this site that can appear exclusive. your point was well argued from my corner.

Post by **pigsteak** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:37 am

come on clif....non profits are never run thru an open forum..they have officers, have to hold elections, have meetings, etc....How in the world is holding an "open" meeting exclusive? you lost me.

this site is about grandstanding, and like me, clevis loves the attention it brings to him. it is rarely a forum for solid discussion.

Post by **Clevis Hitch** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:48 am

Maybe I am wrong here and you guys can set me straight. If you can honestly tell me that the CC isn't primarily a "users group" that was formed to parlay with the NFS and that as a users group its purpose was to represent climbers,plural. It wasn't formed at a brunch by a couple of well-to-do's and that since its a users group it has to represtent users. i.e. direct election of officers and a proccess where when the users of the group don't feel like their representatives are representing them then they can be recalled.
Right now, the CC is run like a non-profit charity(which its not, although charity is one facet of it) The CC is supposed to represent climbers and it does represent some climbers.

Anybody see the difference here?

Post by **clif** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 12:55 am

Pigsteak-if i answer your post will you finish my taxes?

the difference in the returns donated?

Post by **pigsteak** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:06 am

lol...I have a new job clif..I don't currently do much tax work, but we can work it out.

I am a bit out of my league here, but I am pretty sure RRGCC has 501c(3) status, which by default makes donations to them tax deductible. why? because of the "charitable" nature of the entity.

I am not on the board and do not have any special understanding, so someone else may be able to clarify.

Post by **caribe** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:15 am

Clevis: You should state what you are trying to accomplish with this conversation. Your purpose seems to be drifting.
â€¢ Is this conversation promoting solidarity in the climbing community?
â€¢â€¢ If not, what is this line of argumentation accomplishing at the expense of solidarity, and is it worth it?

Post by **Clevis Hitch** » Wed Mar 31, 2010 1:28 am

How about this... Arbitrary decisions(gates) are made in the name of climbers with out any real input from climbers. There is a users group that doesn't fully represent the wishes of the users.
I guess the gates are a symptom. I mean we, climbers, are supposed to be about opening access, not shutting it up behind gates. I think that there is a vast, underrepresented majority of climbers out there who arent engaged because they feel'"whats the use" or "they've got it handled".
Did you know that the average climbers income is over eighty thousand dollars? Theres money out there for climbers to sweep up. Its just not. Because people aren't participating.
I think the way to get people to engage is to more accurately represent them. I think the way to get people to engage is to put something i their hands. I think the way to get people to engage is to be more open and not throw up gates and close doors.