goatboy Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 Hello, Since I joined this site (seems like a long time ago now) I have seen many raging debates go on surrounding well-publicized accidents (many on Mt Hood, Rainier, most recently Mt. St. Helens...) and they tend to follow a familiar cadence: - some statements of fact and link to news reports - lots of well-wishes and thanks to rescue teams - inevitable questioning about the techniques and brain-power of the injured parties - people taking the high road and asking for common courtesy and compassion - others taking the absolute low road and blaming the climbers, their partners, and the rescue teams for their roles or failure to act Sometimes, moderators or others step in and separate the thread into two, one for accident reporting and good wishes, the other for analysis of what went wrong... It's interesting to me to see how often this cycle repeats, and how predictable it is ... but at the same time, how it seems like the wheel is being recreated over and over... possibly to the detriment of any family members or others who might stumble upon this discussion in their attempt to find information online. Is there a need for cc.com to establish any kind of rules of common courtesy to separate blaming and analyzing from factual reporting and good wishes to the injured party and rescuers? If the moderators have already thought about this and decided against it, so be it - but I for one would like to see room for people to question and analyze (in the interest of learning) in one place, and to get news reports and updates from involved parties elsewhere ... I personally don't see the value in blaming and shaming other parties, based on partial information from notoriously incomplete sources. So, the question I pose is, should cc.com develop a community guideline that separates accident reporting from accident analysis? Or some other approach that attempts to foster learning from accidents without the blaming and condemnation? Or, do folks really like the process of recreating the wheel each time something happens? If so, perhaps that's a valuable process that people need to go through... for me, however, I don't need more of the same. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billcoe Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 RC.Com has tried to do exactly that Goatboy, however, when an accident is still fresh, open debate of any sort, even discussing only the technical issues involved in a highly moderated thread, often comes off as rough and mean sounding. ("Ed Earl had put his hash pipe down and backed off the edge of the cliff thinking his rappel setup was looking good, while Bubba, his partner, was busy picking up the pipe and firing a bowl while forgetting to eye Ed Earls setup") You might check it out, they are able to make it work most of the time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Lucky Larry Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 Be on guard; even when you think your partner knows something they may space it out eg I did a rap that barely reached the ground; my partner had also done it before and was swinging out at the base over our heads- I just thought he was messing around- the second time he swung out he popped off the rope about 12-14 ft off the deck, hit the deck between big boulders on his back. Busted his wrist-very fortunate no head/spine injury. I could'a, should'a, would'a, and he could'a...... And yes, we had been smoking the ganja. I don't loose any sleep over it but i think he still blames me. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mountainmandoug Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 It is a difficult issue, even though the discussion of what happened often isn't very polite, analyzing accidents is beneficial in avoiding future ones. At least in theory it is. Personally, what I would like to see, is that there isn't any analysis until after the situation is resolved. I think it would be best if the thread for news and well-wishes went on all thought the rescue process, and a different thread was started to discuss what went on. I have two reasons for this. One is that we actually don't know what happened until afterward pretty much ever. It seems like usually once the whole thing is over we get posts from rescuers and/or climbers who were directly involved, and these usually correct all of the mis-information that has come through the media. Personally I don't think all of the speculative discussion is nearly as helpful as the factual discussion, so I would rather wait until we know more to start trying to figure out what happened and how to avoid it next time. Even if we don't get any first-hand reports at least we can comb through all of the news reports at once, rather than getting them one at a time. The other reason to wait has to do with family and friends of the people in trouble potentially reading what's on the site and possibly being offended or hurt by people's remarks. This could be a very real issue, based on my time in SAR it is easy for distraught family members to mis-understand even well-intended remarks, and let's face it on here there are often remarks that aren't even well-intended. I suppose there is also some risk of the greater media reading the site and than mis-representing it to the world at large, I'm not sure if that's ever happened or not. But once accidents are resolved, most likely the rest of the world stops paying attention, and we could carry on here without having to worry about them so much. Even if a family member does decide to look at CC.com after there loved one has been found/or declared un/findable or self-rescued or whatever happens, they will probably not be in as sensitive a place as if the situation were not resolved. And of course our conversation would probably be less harmful simply for the reason that it would be based more on fact and less on speculation. Personally, I've never seen much point to idle speculation during the process of people being over-due in the mountains. We used to do it all the time in SAR, mostly for our own amusement, but we were always careful to do it in private, not even to some outsider we came across and definitely not where the media or family could possibly hear. I think if people want to speculate during an incident they should do so over PM or E-mail, and keep it out of the public conversation. Hopefully afterwards it would be safe to talk in public. So that's my two cents, spray on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 Unfortunately most of the accidents are a chain of bad decisions, combined with bad luck and knowing what happen is the best way to prevent them in the future. I think we also have to remember, unlike in The Alps or Alaska, we don't have a specialized rescue services, so the best line of defense is self-rescue. BTW, saying the accidents are a private matter is complete bullshit- they are not. The have long lasting impact in the form of subsequent regulations- vide fees for Denali or recent attempt to force avi beacons for climbers. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ivan Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 we can have all the community standards we want - enforcing them on the other hand - holy shit, that big n face of hood debacle was a monster of its own making w/ no possibility of policing eventually seperating an initial accident report into a well wishes/remembrance thread and a cock-eyed analysis thread makes sense, but it takes time to see if an incident is even really worth the bother, right? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 I personally don't see the value in blaming and shaming other parties, based on partial information from notoriously incomplete sources. On the contrary I see $200 value when I apply for Denali permit, Thanks only to all the "bright" individuals from a few years ago. In the 30 years of climbing a vast majority of accidents are caused by ignorance, lack of experience, and lack of judgment, rather then simply "bad luck". Unfortunately the rest of us has to suffer the consequences of such actions in the forms of fees and regulatory steps. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 I always wonder WTF the point is of posting "my condolences to the family and friends" aka MCTTFAF, on a thread few if any of the family or friends will read. And anyway do random condolences from some faceless avatar on teh interwebs that never met him really make any mom whose little Jimmy just froze to death inside a Tauntaun, feel any better? No they don't. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Water Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 I always wonder WTF the point is of posting "my condolences to the family and friends" aka MCTTFAF, on a thread few if any of the family or friends will read. And anyway do random condolences from some faceless avatar on teh interwebs that never met him really make any mom whose little Jimmy just froze to death inside a Tauntaun, feel any better? No they don't. I'd say it is not for the family as much as it is for the posters. Almost everyone has had experience on the mountains and when an accident happens it brings mortality to the fore, above other topics. People would like to contribute something. You may as well read it as "Jesus, that could have been me! It is a shame someone who I can identify with has tragically died. I can't imagine what xyz climber's friends and family must be going through, because I know mine would be in such and such a state" But we say "My regrets and condolences to the family" It is one of the societal things maybe similar to "I'm going to let you go" when you need to hang-up and "I don't mean to interrupt" as you knock on someone's office door because you need to interrupt them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
tomtom Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 I personally don't see the value in blaming and shaming other parties, based on partial information from notoriously incomplete sources. On the contrary I see $200 value when I apply for Denali permit, Thanks only to all the "bright" individuals from a few years ago. In the 30 years of climbing a vast majority of accidents are caused by ignorance, lack of experience, and lack of judgment, rather then simply "bad luck". Unfortunately the rest of us has to suffer the consequences of such actions in the forms of fees and regulatory steps. This is an excellent example of the problem. The key part of first poster's statement was "based on partial information from notoriously incomplete sources." The second poster was seething in self-righteous vitriol before finishing the sentence. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 I personally don't see the value in blaming and shaming other parties, based on partial information from notoriously incomplete sources. On the contrary I see $200 value when I apply for Denali permit, Thanks only to all the "bright" individuals from a few years ago. In the 30 years of climbing a vast majority of accidents are caused by ignorance, lack of experience, and lack of judgment, rather then simply "bad luck". Unfortunately the rest of us has to suffer the consequences of such actions in the forms of fees and regulatory steps. This is an excellent example of the problem. The key part of first poster's statement was "based on partial information from notoriously incomplete sources." The second poster was seething in self-righteous vitriol before finishing the sentence. No, the problem is when people don't accept the responsibility. I don't buy into this bro-brah pc bullshit. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 btw please move this to spay, where the fuck this belongs in the first place. don't want to see what people write about an accident? just don't read it- really simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Conway Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 I always wonder WTF the point is of posting "my condolences to the family and friends" aka MCTTFAF, on a thread few if any of the family or friends will read. And anyway do random condolences from some faceless avatar on teh interwebs that never met him really make any mom whose little Jimmy just froze to death inside a Tauntaun, feel any better? No they don't. You only wonder because nobody would post that about you..... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
G-spotter Posted February 17, 2010 Share Posted February 17, 2010 Shit no, they'd be too busy getting ripped on the free beer at my wake! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goatboy Posted February 17, 2010 Author Share Posted February 17, 2010 btw please move this to spay, where the fuck this belongs in the first place. don't want to see what people write about an accident? just don't read it- really simple. My wife is a veterinarian, so I know a little bit about "spay"... and if the mods want to move this inquiry there, so be it... but to address some misconceptions of my intention: 1) There seems to be some misinterpretation of my original post. I am not espousing "bro-brah PC" anything, nor am I saying I don't want to read posts about accidents... if that were the case, I wouldn't bother to post about it myself, here. 2) However, I am saying (and I did say in the original post) that there is a need for "for people to question and analyze (in the interest of learning) in one place, and to get news reports and updates from involved parties elsewhere." Billcoe mentioned that they do try to manage it this way on rc.com... for example, I know that they have an entire forum that is devoted just to the discussion of accidents there... could that be considered for cc.com, with some guidelines to accompany it? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlpineK Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 The AAC yearly publication on accidents is a good resource. In most cases a period of time has elapsed between the actual accident and the discussion. The one thing that time gives you is the chance to get more complete/accurate information on the event. Having reliable information helps when you discuss what you think the bad decisions, failings, or bad luck contributed to the accident. Accidents suck, and when one happens involving an activity you like it isn't surprising you want to talk about it. Trying to stick to figuring out all the events involved is the best first discussion topic. After that and a little time out moving on to speculating or analysis would be just fine and maybe help prevent future climbing misfortune. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmace Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 It's interesting to me to see how often this cycle repeats, and how predictable it is ... but at the same time, how it seems like the wheel is being recreated over and over... Yup drama, people love it they just love it, reality TV, News, whatever and however they need it!! I personally don't see the value in blaming and shaming other parties, based on partial information from notoriously incomplete sources. Dude you must not have cable, thats prime time shit there, best thing for ratings watching other people squirm, cry, shamed whatever they can do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Conway Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Shit no, they'd be too busy getting ripped on the free beer at my wake! Figures. Good American beer at a Canadian wake Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jmace Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Sorry dude, coors light or your weird fruit flavoured beers arent allowed in Canada Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Sorry dude, coors light or your weird fruit flavoured beers arent allowed in Canada BATTLE STATIONS!!!!! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
glassgowkiss Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 One of the few things more annoying then stupid comments after the accidents are people who want to "regulate" stupidity. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Hugh Conway Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Sorry dude, coors light or your weird fruit flavoured beers arent allowed in Canada Thats MolsonCoorslight now champ Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goatboy Posted February 18, 2010 Author Share Posted February 18, 2010 don't want to be [annoyed] by what people post on cc.com? just don't read it- really simple. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jon Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 Hey Happy Birthday Goatboy! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Raindawg Posted February 18, 2010 Share Posted February 18, 2010 This should have been moved to "Spray" from the very first post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.