RRC Archives

Man, HO and I were leaving the Lode today and saw some RRGCC members leaving the Southern region. Just wondering how many RRGCC members have been climbing in the Southern Region since it was closed. I am not certain that these people were, mind you, but they had climbing gear with them.

Yeah, this question is likely to stir up some controversy if there's any truth to it. Also, there are logical reasons for RRGCC members to be back there but man, it would also be easy to take advantage of any "excuses" and climb. So, I don't really think this question is out of line.

It sounds like someone is not telling us something. But I can say that Im happy that I didn't donate money to the project that isn't going to happen.

There have been people back there flagging trails and parking. Doing some trail work, survaying, stuff like that.

I don't know if "people" were back there today climbing. But, if it were people that put in a bunch of work for the project, then it wouldn't bother me. This thing is almost done, and the RRGCC people have put a ton of time and money behind it. Time will tell if it works out or not, but I know I have gladly donated money and time to help if work, and will be doing so in the future.

You don't have to agree with everything they say or do, or even like the people involved, but the project is worthy of support.

Wes

"do as I say and not as I do"

Oh don't get me wrong Wes...I support the project and I am a happy RRGCC member. I have donated time and what little money I can. That doesn't mean that I don't question the "rules" and how they apply.

i've got a serious question, which maybe i should post in another thread or on the rrgcc site...how does the hierarchy of a non-profit organization work? i mean, let's say some of the "higher up" members were climbing in the southern region...would they have any more right to do that than another "regular" member? my understanding is that no one "owns" the rrgcc, although it is run by one person. i guess i'm asking if rules, regulations, actions have to be approved by the whole coalition in order to be carried out justly?

Spragwa, if someone didn't climb the routes while the area was closed they would get all dirty... and the trails would become vegetated from long periods without man. They are doing us a favor by applying fresh chalk to the holds that we can not see.

Horatio Felacio wrote:i've got a serious question, which maybe i should post in another thread or on the rrgcc site...how does the hierarchy of a non-profit organization work? i mean, let's say some of the "higher up" members were climbing in the southern region...would they have any more right to do that than another "regular" member? my understanding is that no one "owns" the rrgcc, although it is run by one person. i guess i'm asking if rules, regulations, actions have to be approved by the whole coalition in order to be carried out justly?

it is my understanding that the Board of Directors make up all of the rules, with little or no input from the body of the membership. The only issue that I have seen put to a vote is the membership of the CAC. Look, for example, at the decision to go with Flash for the new website. Several climber geeks have expressed concern that Flash is not the way to go - and for good reasons. But it is obvious from the exchanges on the RRGCC.org forum that the decision was made and it isn't open for input. Curiously, it is the membership and not the leadership which most needs the new website to be user friendly, with easy access to information. The doubts about Flash's ability to provide this are valid, but they are not being taken seriously IMO.

Anyway, if anyone from the RRGCC is climbing in the Southern Region, no matter what their position, then they are violating their own rules and they suck dirty ass.

Sandy wrote:

Horatio Felacio wrote:i've got a serious question, which maybe i should post in another thread or on the rrgcc site...how does the hierarchy of a non-profit organization work? i mean, let's say some of the "higher up" members were climbing in the southern region...would they have any more right to do that than another "regular" member? my understanding is that no one "owns" the rrgcc, although it is run by one person. i guess i'm asking if rules, regulations, actions have to be approved by the whole coalition in order to be carried out justly?

it is my understanding that the Board of Directors make up all of the rules, with little or no input from the body of the membership. The only issue that I have seen put to a vote is the membership of the CAC. Look, for example, at the decision to go with Flash for the new website. Several climber geeks have expressed concern that Flash is not the way to go - and for good reasons. But it is obvious from the exchanges on the RRGCC.org forum that the decision was made and it isn't open for input. Curiously, it is the membership and not the leadership which most needs the new website to be user friendly, with easy access to information. The doubts about Flash's ability to provide this are valid, but they are not being taken seriously IMO.

Anyway, if anyone from the RRGCC is climbing in the Southern Region, no matter what their position, then they are violating their own rules and they suck dirty ass.

Am I misunderstanding your post or are you really complaining about Flash?

Buster, um, I'm using a specific example, which happens to involve Flash, to illustrate that the opinions of the RRGCC membership doesn't appear to have any impact on decisions made by the RRGCC. Hopefully I am wrong about that. Of course every little decision can't be put out for vote - that would be nuts - but I think this was a good example since it is the members who will be using the website and thered.org blew chunks if you wanted to find shit quickly.

And yeah, Flash sucks, too.