I think this ethical scale is a sliding one. It really is meaningless at the level of 5.6 lead climbers. If you get up the thing without falling off it you can call it an onsight. Big fucking deal. But at the level of 5.11 climbing it starts to make a difference. I've noticed that a lot of the newer high rated sport climbs at Muir that they're putting that first bolt way up in the air. I think that says, "Don't get on this unless you can climb this level." To stickclip at that level brings the difference of redpoint v. pinkpoint into question but most people that climb that level with a stickclip would call it a send or redpoint... but some wouldn't. Once you get up into the elite rankings it's a really small group of people we're talking about. If you climb 5.13 and up anything you've got a small peer group to communicate with and as a group you decide the rules. I sent a 5.6 sport lead this weekend and I'm calling it an onsight, dammit! And after that I sent a harder route! Yeah! Go me! I'm so fucking proud I could... do something nasty... to your mother.
Seriously, though, I find this whole concept of difficulty ratings, especially as it works in the higher levels, to be incredibly interesting.
And the talk about getting out into the woods at its many enjoyment levels (let's face it, a good hiker that knows what he's doing will quickly find an animal trail to follow and will do less damage than a line of hungover sport climbers* stomping up a path) is great. I love cutting down from the crags to the creek and tracing the deer paths along the water. You have to duck a little more but the flora is different from the main paths.
Oops. Gotta go. Dammit. So many threads, so little time.
*or a line of drunk trad climbers. Or stoned bouldererers. Whatever.
[size=75]You are as bad as Alan, and even he hits the mark sometimes. -charlie
"Not all conservatives are stupid, but most stupid people are conservative." - John Stuart Mill[/size]
