RRC Archives

dustonian wrote:All that said, if you want to round up a KREW of your own or just go by yourself to check all the draws at Bob Marley, for instance, that would certainly be a service to the community.

So it is of value to the community if I do it, but not of value if we incorporate the community (meaning you, me and anyone else we can round up)? If just I do it, I maybe be able to inspect 1 wall in a day, if we ALL do it, how many walls could be inspected?

You're missing the point. You should be doing this anyway. If you do it anyway everything you're talking about is a waste of time. I don't want to spend any free time babysitting for people who don't check their fixed gear. I want to spend my free time climbing and developing. An "official" event like you're talking about condones and promotes bad, lazy habits.

"Clean the Mank Day" is EVERYDAY people! Just like Earth day HAHAHA!!

climb2core wrote:Dustonian, caribe, rjackson, and bcombs...

If you don't want to participate in an event like the one I proposed to educate climbers on mank gear (and in the process have them assess and fix it) then so be it. Go climb and do what ever you want.

I am assuming most of you had mentors that taught you the ropes and saved you from the Darwin award. Except, the problem is... new climbers are by far exceeding the number of old mentors. I suspect that you do try to provide mentorship and promote safe climbing in your micro-community. Not sure why there is so much push back to a larger community driven event day that would serve a similar purpose and function that your mentor did for you.

So this one time I was on a boat with some friends, and they're like: "Come to the back of the boat!"

climb2core wrote:

rjackson wrote:What makes you assume that we aren't already doing this?

Huh?

I said...
I suspect that you do try to provide mentorship and promote safe climbing in your micro-community.

I misread... My bad.

But I'll use this as an opportunity to agree with bcombs (and still with Dustin). It is not callous to make climbers responsible.

rjackson wrote: But I'll use this as an opportunity to agree with bcombs (and still with Dustin). It is not callous to make climbers responsible.

I suspect we all agree on that. I guess we just differ on using a community driven event as an opportunity to do make that happen.

I'm sorry Krampus, your no vote was not counted in the total votes.

this will be my last post (hopefully) on last night's meeting.

AT the beginning of the night, we had 100% agreement that ultimate responsibility was with the climber. So the last 3 pages on here whining was already at the top of our list. What the group was shooting for from that place was this:

The reality is we have big crowds because our climbing is awesome here. If our primary goal is to place personal responsibility on the climber, will doing anything about the current PD debate have any effect? If we remove all draws, will that once again put personal responsibility squarely on the shoulders of climbers? It would help, but there was still the question of bolts and how in the world can anyone truly inspect them.....outside of a true spinner/visibly pulled out of the hole, there is a ton of faith we all put in the bolts out there. But anyway, I felt that there was 100% agreement that personal responsibility was at the top (a given), and we were merely working on the next level down of how to keep personal responsibility on the climber and not in the domain of the community. Removing all tat, aluminum, and PD's is an extreme, but clearly would shift it back to the climber.

Oh yeah, rjackson mentioned the BOD...this was NOT an RRGCC function at all. this was an open grass roots meeting for all. if anyone is interested in different times (weekends) or in their city, Shannon has already offered to come and help moderate if needed. just quit bitching and step up to the plate to help out. quit whining about the group not being representative. I know for a fact several people on here blathering could have been at the meeting could have been but chose not to. your choice, but like it or not, these meetings really do get a feel for what people are thinking.

lastly, call it what you want to suit your premise/argument. call it rules, ethics, mores, a-hole by-laws...whatever. like it or not, this is an ever evolving system of how climbers interact with one another and their vertical world. having these discussions is the same thing that has been going on since big walls were sieged over weeks/months, Friends were considered cheating in trad, clean aid became the norm, bolts were debated ad nauseum, pink pointing went out the window, hang dogging was for weak sauce, rap bolting was the devil, etc.....it will fade into the sunset at a later date, but right now it is the question on everyone's mind, so it gets the podium.

back to the regularly scheduled comedy.....I've got some new slabs to bolt tomorrow.

Statistically speaking, your sample size is far too small to rule out random variation in drawing any conclusions. This is called type I error. I would also argue that sampling bias played a significant role in the outcome. Holding any sort of vote was presumptuous and calling it a consensus is fallacious at best. Was the purpose of the meeting to "discuss issues" or invoke a false "consensus"?

pigsteak wrote:...we were merely working on the next level down of how to keep personal responsibility on the climber and not in the domain of the community.

When a person decides that they want to be a climber, they have assumed 100% responsibility and they should carry that with them for their entire life. Anything that "minimizes" that responsibility is wreckless.

The grass roots movement to make climbing "safer" is walking a very fine line in my opinion.

rjackson wrote: When a person decides that they want to be a climber, they have assumed 100% responsibility and they should carry that with them for their entire life. Anything that "minimizes" that responsibility is wreckless.

The grass roots movement to make climbing "safer" is walking a very fine line in my opinion.

+1