Page 8 of 25
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 12:47 am
by the lurkist
sorry- deleterious. (not deliterious)
Having a harmful effect; injurious: the deleterious effects of smoking.
dictionary.com
thank you for the edit.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 2:45 am
by 512OW
This is all really cute.... everybody who believes they know best.
Fact is, it would never have been an issue at all if you all hadn't made it one....
And basically, who gives a shit? Its a head shaker. Then you forget it and move on.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 1:37 pm
by kirker
Assuming the land owners really don't know the dynamics of what climbing involves and mearly interpret what we are doing as safe recreational fun. Wouldn't this thread in the wrong hands, be as catastrophic as Greg falling from Bohica.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 2:49 pm
by Crankmas
not to Greg
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 2:56 pm
by kirker
Crankmas wrote:not to Greg
Your right in more ways than one.
Sorry didn't intend on the comparison going that way.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 8:02 pm
by 512OW
Crankmas wrote:not to Greg
So what? It was Gregs choice.
Why is it when someone does something that "might" have killed them, they're idiots, but when someone really does it, they're dearly beloved?
Sounds like an extreme case of hipocrisy to me.
Driving your car to the crag has a higher mortality rate than free soloing.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 9:03 pm
by Steve
Toad wrote:Yeah. Channel 36 News. Our top story - climber gets two broken ankles.
Belayer get hangnail.
Nah, wouldn't happen here at 36. That story is more of a CH 18 lead.
Posted: Mon Aug 21, 2006 10:18 pm
by Toad
512OW wrote:Why is it when someone does something that "might" have killed them, they're idiots, but when someone really does it, they're dearly beloved?
Beloved only to those that knew the person. If you didn't know them, then they are still an idiot. Even if you knew them well,
you may still think them an idiot while calling them beloved.
So what? It was Gregs choice
If a hold up high broke and he couldn't recover, who's choice would it
become to bring about litigation? Greg's?
Driving your car to the crag has a higher mortality rate than free soloing.
But if you die on the road it doesn't carry the potential of getting a
cornerstone crag on private land closed down.
Posted: Tue Aug 22, 2006 1:53 am
by gregkerzhner
Actually rock climbing in general is way to risky. What if someone climbing on a rope gets hurt, and closes acess to the motherlode. In order to preserve access to the motherlode, all rock climbing is herby prohibited at this crag.
Posted: Tue Aug 22, 2006 1:58 am
by pigsteak
OW,
I am assuming the only person that made it an "issue" is Greg by publicizing his feat in the first place. If he had went out there all alone, quietly did his solo, and then went back and broke bread at Miguel's, maybe the world would be a bit nicer today. By letting folks in our exploits, roped or otherwise, we are all fulfilling a narcissitic tendency to be king for a day. Cut the crap of "I did it for me"..if that were so, no one would ever know.