RRC Archives

[quote="Andrew"]I know of a few. They might not wholeheartedly agree, but the man has some valid points. Joe just needs to work on his delivery.[/quote]

Joe, you paying attention? Every org needs a few dissident voices to help keep them honest. They perceive it as a pain in the ass, and the dissident slogs on. However, consider that you might be somewhat more effective if you tried a different approach. Maybe you could effect change from within; you know, that whole subversive thing. But I suspect you're not programmed that way. That's okay. You do ask good questions from time to time. Keep at it.

Oh god, please don't encourage him. If he wants to enact "political change" he should work on some pressing social issues where his energies would actually be desired and needed, instead of harrassing a few hardworking, unpaid volunteers doing unappreciated and highly tedious "dirty work" to keep climbing areas open for everyone else.

Bottom line--are 95% of climbing areas open in the Red? Yes. So STFU and move on to something more important like starving children or drug addiction. Joe's shrill whining about nothing does no good for anyone and is a desperate cry for attention.

tbwilsonky wrote:

kato wrote:

tbwilsonky wrote:...we don't really have enough experience... to make a proper decision.

Santayana was talking to you.

king of your couch when Jeopardy is on...

You mean , WHAT IS king of your couch...

daily double.

dustonian wrote:Oh god, please don't encourage him. If he wants to enact "political change" he should work on some pressing social issues where his energies would actually be desired and needed, instead of harrassing a few hardworking, unpaid volunteers doing unappreciated and highly tedious "dirty work" to keep climbing areas open for everyone else.

Bottom line--are 95% of climbing areas open in the Red? Yes. So STFU and move on to something more important like starving children or drug addiction. Joe's shrill whining about nothing does no good for anyone and is a desperate cry for attention.

I don't know why you hate me so much. I've never done anything to you. You fight me and hate on me so hard.....why?

Ask yourself why I tool on the CC about this. Think about all of the energy that I spend working on this. Its because I have alot of energy that I want to spend working on the S.R.. It's just that I can't bring myself to do all the work that I want to do for an organization that is set up like An oligarchy (from Greek ὀλιγαρχία, oligarkhía[1]) is a form of power structure in which power effectively rests with a small segment of society distinguished by royalty, wealth, family ties, or military control. The word oligarchy is from the Greek words "ὀλίγος" (olígos), "a few"[2] and the verb "ἄρχω" (archo), "to rule, to govern, to command".[3] Such states are often controlled by a few prominent families who pass their influence from one generation to the next.

Oligarchies have been tyrannical throughout history, being completely reliant on public servitude to exist. Although Aristotle pioneered the use of the term as a synonym for rule by the rich, for which the exact term is plutocracy, oligarchy is not always a rule by wealth, as oligarchs can simply be a privileged group, and do not have to be connected by bloodlines as in a monarchy. Some city-states from ancient Greece were oligarchies.

calvinivlac wrote: However, consider that you might be somewhat more effective if you tried a different approach. Maybe you could effect change from within; you know, that whole subversive thing. But I suspect you're not programmed that way. That's okay. You do ask good questions from time to time. Keep at it.

I've tried to change my approach a couple of times . Mostly by PM'ing privately so that they (the CC members) 8) wouldn't be so defensive about my "dissidence". That ended with the CC member in question violating that privacy and passing the PM's in question around to cause drama. So here we are back to the full frontal assault.

The smilies that you see me using are me trying to make my diatribe more palatable...

The coalition is an oligarchy?

Who are the wealthy overlords that are running the show? You do realize that the people that move this show along are climbers? Isn't is easy to say you want to help, but yet find an excuse not to do so?

clevis has a point. what i don't get is the method he is using to alter the political structure.

"It's just that I can't bring myself to do all the work that I want to do for an organization that is set up like an oligarchy"

dude. it's not like you're trying to fix the plutocratic US corporate state. there aren't multiple branches set up to resist structural change. there aren't billion dollar lobbies. it's just a group of rock climbers sitting around a (smoke-free) table. all it really required was for you to do enough work to get on the BOD and then sally forth with a palatable pro-democratic diatribe, shake hands, and pat children on the head. this shouldn't be hard to understand. rather than say "hey i have a better idea for an organization i am not affiliated with" you might consider a "hey i have a better idea for OUR organization". change through equivalence rather than difference.

and yes i get your arguments suggesting the CC 'should be' different. but it isn't. no amount of bickering about the mission statement is going to alter the organizational structure. to put it in other words, if you really think it is an oligarchy then why do you insist at throwing pebbles at the castle walls?

coffee,

Clevis Hitch wrote: Ask yourself why I tool on the CC about this.

I have no idea who you are, don't think we have ever met, but just from reading this thread, it seems like you have this assumption of entitlement. My guess is you will completely misconstrue that statement, but I really have no dog in this fight. But as I see it, the RRGCC went out and secured this land and I don't think they are really obligated to anyone at all. I'm very happy that they are doing this for the climbing community, but I don't think they owe anyone anything. Donations of time and money are given in good faith (by the minority, it seems) and the CC has not merely allowed contributors to climb, but allowed everyone to climb. That's above and beyond, in my book. It seems a little ludicrous to be asking, "why don't they come and ask for my opinion??"

Clevis Hitch wrote:...... Its like what Charlie said about changing the charter to allow for voting and all of the paperwork that it entailed. Too much work. But if he designated authority and spread the work load among a few people who were so inclined then it would be a cinch.

A cinch? Obviously you know much more about this than me and are plenty more qualified to pull it off. Especially since I'm still not sure there's a payoff for changing it.

We can compare resumes if you'd like but credibility at any level of organizational functionality, you just ain't got it.