pope

Witty. No, I mean it. But you really shouldn't have gone through so much trouble. Next time, a tiny but highly exciting little BLOW JOB will suffice.

When my mother found out, it made her cry. Real men don't make their mothers cry. Damn! You really oughta give your momma's tits a break. You must be a school boy on summer break. How do I infer? 'Cause you've got NO CLASS!

So what if it's "only 5.4"? That's gotta be one of the coolest looking mountains anywhere. It's on my list. Nice work, Feck.

Many years ago we went up to do Iconoclast. Somehow we missed the exit out of the big corner and started up Hyperspace. After realizing our mistake, and thinking we probably didn't have the right rack for Hyperspace, we went out left...I think it was the last pitch of Galaxy. It was terribly dirty, and I remember placing a nut way up under a squeeze roof chimney thing before traversing further left. My partner wasn't small enough to squirm up and reach or even unclip the piece, so he went back to the belay and untied. I pulled the rope and threw it back down. There were some tense moments because we weren't sure I could throw the rope in a place where he'd be able to grab it. It all worked out, but I wasn't left with the desire to climb the complete route.

You, JayB, aren't qualified to comment here. But your statement is so incredibly stupid, I feel obligated to remind you that never in any of my posts (including this one) will you find me stating that climbing ability carries weight in ethical debates. Yet the number of times wankers on this site have stated that we should defer to hang-dogging 5.13 climbers regarding the legitimacy of sport climbing is......"greater than zero". This beer-induced, late-night post was simply a reaction to the notion that pope's peers are convicting him. Again, I ask, "What peers?" BTW, the summer I soloed 30 pitches before lunch (up to 5.10c at Castle Rock, Snow Creek Wall and Givler's Dome) was not twenty years ago (more like 12). Regardless, these climbers you mention who are superior to pope.....you ain't among them. Not today, not twenty years ago (if you were even out of diapers). I can out-climb you on your best day and I could out-drink you right now. Yes, but climbing is but one measure of a man, and I have no doubt life provides you with no small number of rather stark reminders of this fact rather more often than you'd like. Reeeeach....

When my mother found out, it made her cry. Real men don't make their mothers cry.

Hope you didn't graduate from high school. Moderate routes? I'll bet it would take you three days to complete the circuit I did in five hours. Have you even climbed Brass Balls? Again I ask, "What peers?"

Didja getta boner?

Cease the adulation and commence with the BJ.

You, JayB, aren't qualified to comment here. But your statement is so incredibly stupid, I feel obligated to remind you that never in any of my posts (including this one) will you find me stating that climbing ability carries weight in ethical debates. Yet the number of times wankers on this site have stated that we should defer to hang-dogging 5.13 climbers regarding the legitimacy of sport climbing is......"greater than zero". This beer-induced, late-night post was simply a reaction to the notion that pope's peers are convicting him. Again, I ask, "What peers?" BTW, the summer I soloed 30 pitches before lunch (up to 5.10c at Castle Rock, Snow Creek Wall and Givler's Dome) was not twenty years ago (more like 12). Regardless, these climbers you mention who are superior to pope.....you ain't among them. Not today, not twenty years ago (if you were even out of diapers). I can out-climb you on your best day and I could out-drink you right now.

You 3rd-classed Brass Balls? How about down Canary? And Outerspace? How about all of this and more (30 pitches) before lunch one morning? Because if my "peers" are going to "convict" me, I should probably know who they are!

Just noticed this subject line on the recent Ken Nichols thread. Joke. Got news for you kids, you ain't my peers. Not until you've done this:

Hi Pro Mountain Man. Somewhere in this thread I explained how that bolt went in. Basically I drilled the hole on lead for a 3/8" bolt but was out of Rawls. This was I think the third hole I ever drilled (and the last). Anyway, the Fixe bolt (advertised as 3/8") wouldn't fit. I knew the hole was fine but somehow the Fixe was undersized. At that point Scotty and I borrowed a Hilte from Jim Phillips and decided (with this kind of drilling power) to build an anchor with two 1/2" bolts on top and also enlarge the hole I drilled on lead, but this time on rappel. I didn't like the idea of drilling on rappel, but we did like the idea of making that bolt REALLY bomber, once we realized how important it was to the route. I didn't have a 1/2" bit for the hand drill and I didn't feel like I could free climb with the Hilte. We could have abandoned the route, but we had already drilled by hand on lead. Scotty was pretty excited about the route and so we agreed to use the Hilte to get in a 1/2" bolt. I can't remember if I drilled it or Scotty or it might have been Dave Bale who came by to give advice. The whole thing felt kind of dirty, even though I liked the result. I haven't drilled since.

Not sure who you're talking about here. Anybody wanna know my name just send me a PM.

You stole the words out of my mouth. I include Don in that statement as well. As far as the rest of it goes, there would be no routes on El Cap or Monkey Face without bolts. None. Monkey Face West FAce is 4 pitches. 3 are fully bolted, they were done on lead, with a hand drill. It really is a good route - which could have been 1 pitch ending at a rap anchor though. It was put up in the 60's. I see things like that and do not see a huge gap (although I agree that there is one) between a typical sport route at Smith. How many routes on glacier point would exist without bolts? None of the great ones which cruise to the Oasis, including the one Chouinard put up: Coonyard. So the real question is how to define style, what is really worthwhile, what is not. I do not think anybody here would be drilling on Pope about the single bolt, except it seems (until now) inconsistent with what he has been saying all along. When we see something like Dishman, we recognize obvious shit, but after that - it is a small step here or there to a true pure crack. Obviously, many of us see that bolt on Popes route as a precondition for many routes to exist. If a person like John Bachar were to do a FA as a near free solo, dragging a rope along, and then tell the rest of us you will die if you cannot free solo 5.11, does that not kind of screw everybody else? Should a first ascentionist consider others as well? PS, Pope, I congratulate you for doing what I (my opinion only here, and all of this is only OUR opinions, including yours) consider the right thing. I once retro-added a bolt (3/8" hand drilled) to the crux near the top of a 5.6/5.7 route I had done when it was suggested that many aspiring leaders would be trying it die to the grade, but that a full pitch of shit placements was a time bomb waiting for some one to blow it and auger in as their pieces ripped. Nice post Bill. You're easily the most articulate and reasonable fellow in this conversation (next to Dwayner and me). I'm not sure why anybody would believe I'm opposed to bolting. I've been very careful to criticize rap bolting, sport climbing, grid bolting, bolting next to cracks, bolting in wilderness areas, etc. I've also quite frequently argued that a commitment to ground-up ethics would eliminate many of the problems we see with excessive bolting. I've discussed routes that employ bolts that I feel improve the climbing experience. I'm guessing that participants in this conversation already know I'm not completely anti-bolt, it's just fun to believe you've caught Pope in some kind of hypocrisy. And then you can go back to enjoying your sport climbs. What's particularly disturbing is how many of you, who supposedly recognize Dishman and Exit 38 as being shitholes, who agree that Infinite Bliss never should have been drilled in a wilderness area, will actually defend this shit when somebody suggests doing something about it. Or when somebody does publicly chop a retro-bolted trad line like Dan's Dreadful Direct, it's amazing how much grief they receive. How did we get to this point?

Very, very funny. So you're saying that you really don't want your real name associated with your own posts? You do realize you are just validating the argument anyone might make for putting your real name out there, don't you? I'm actually a proponent of allowing people to continue to use "screen names" which permit relative anonymity (though the personalities do come out anyway, don't they?). But what you are saying is that you would rather not have your name associated with what you post (which should stand apart from what anyone else has to say). You're saying that you can't stand behind your own arguments, because you're embarrassed to do so. Maybe thats not what you intend to say, but read what you wrote and think about it. If you don't actually want your name associated with this debate, then don't post. Respect yourself and don't waste your time if it is so beneath you. In case I look at this stuff at work, I don't want the connection to be obvious. I assumed many participants here already know my name. I once got some grief from the cyber police at work because I had used a tiny thumb of Frank Zappa with his finger up his nose. On closer inspection, it turned out to be his middle finger. The folks monitoring my activity believed it was a photo of me flipping off the camera in my college days. Joke. Anyway, I'd be embarassed for a couple of sassy things I've said or photos I've posted, but mostly by the frequency of vulgar talk from the very participants who are scolding me for being juvenile. I never post from work and rarely look at this site, but that's the reason I use a character instead of my real name. That and to protect my family from pot-smoking maniacs on the web.

So, Dwayner and pope are responsible for being deliberately inflammatory....I think the topic of bolts lends itself to argument and passionate opinions on all sides; especially because if some of us had our way, some of your "fun" might be curtailed. But let's take a look at some of the "civil" uninflammatory discourse offered by some of the other people participating in this topic, and then perhaps you can reassess whether we're the BIG culprits: "From moderator “Off-White” in addressing “dmuja”: For a born again wannabe dwayner-lite sycophant, you sure know how to be a sport climber…and it's so cute when you act all tough 'n sh*t…What a tool. “Kevbone”, addressing “JosephH”” What an assh*le……” "What does think he is f$%king Hitler? “high-on-rock” writes: “From the casual observer, what is lacking from Don Ryan and Pope is rationality and civility. Calling people Dorks and posting Pee Wee Herman photos lowers the level of discussion far below any level that educated folks want to partake.” NOTE: Read from the beginning of the topic to this point. The discussion from me was very civil and certainly rational from my perspective…no dorks…no Pee-Wee Herman…perhaps the only naughty thing I said up to this point was that calling sport-climbs “art” was conceited. Go ahead…check it out yourself…see who’s amping it up. More from “hign-on-rock”: “gotta tell you don, it blew me away to find out that you are actually an educated person.” “The sad part is that you are the only one who does not realize that the high horse has stumbled and you are falling.” “Give us your information Pope. Come on girlfriend, be brave." JayB joins the fray: “Bill - don't distract them. With every post you coax out of them you're depriving them of a morsel of time, energy, or concentration that they'll need so bring about the closure of all sport climbing areas in the Northwest.” Ken4ord contributes: “BTW poop….” Kevbone addressing “Puma”: “Another asinine comment…..” “Well…..tough sh*t…..” Dechristo chimes in: “what a dork” A few more Kevbonisms: “......you need to get your head examined.” “Wow......Pope.....that was a bitch slap if I ever saw one. Getting crushed at your own game.....wow!” “Oh man Pope......getting worked over eh?” RuMR: “Dwayner and his sidekick poop are all about themselves...only themselves...and they will couch their attitude in a "more ethically pure" bullsh*t frame.” “Come on, quit being a dick... f&ck, man, you and dwayner just make everything f&cking so black and white...get a f&ckin' life and take up a worthier cause...” “cue raindawg with a richard simmons circle jerk poster...” RichardNoggin: “YO POOP……get a life…STFU." “…too bad you cant see through your own sh*t”. More from “high-on-rock”: “The problem with Pope and Ryan is that they try to use the anonymity of the internet to be jerks without cost. No one has a problem with the views they put forth, merely with the junior high manner through which they put forth the views, and the “holier than thou” condescending tone they use. From here on out I believe I may send their identities by PM to folks upon whom they anonymously piss. Perhaps with a lack of anonymity comes accountability, and through accountability comes temperance.” Yup...it's all Dwayner and Pope...gettin' the folks all hot and bothered and MAKING THEM express the poetry cited above. Very nice review. Eight pages of "civil" and "educated" types like high_on_bolts making all kinds of insults and then admonishing you and me for being juvenile. Looks like they shut up for the moment....maybe they were just unaware of how nasty they were making the conversation! Sorry gang, I've been working all day. Is there anybody here who really wants to know (and doesn't already know) my name? Send me a PM and I'll tell you. But please don't spread my name around in full view on this board. II'd rather not have my real name appear in conjunction with all of the snotty, juvenile stuff (like that which Dwayner just posted), just in case somebody respectable happens to be reading this. Regarding JayB's question: there are two aspects of sport climbing that make it considerably differnt than traditional slab climbing. First, sport climbs are always established on rappel (by definition). ANYBODY can "pioneer" such a route. Zero commitment, zero balls, zero skill, zero judgement required. Stopping to place a bolt is done on the way down by locking off the rope. There is complete safety. There is zero adventure. Often the bolts (being so easy to place) are placed way too close together. Often the climbs (being so easy to establish) are squeezed way too close together. Now, after the first ascent, once a line of bolts exists (on a sport climb or on a traditional slab climb), is there a difference? Generally yes (but not always). Because the bolts on sport climbs tend to be so close together you CAN often aid from one bolt to the next, or at the very least, you can climb completely out of control, throwing yourself at each move (or sequence of two moves) between bolts as though it were a bouldering problem. Great fun! But if you take that approach on most traditional slab climbs, you're going to get spanked. Traditional slab climbing requires you honestly to be able to handle the climb's difficulties (or deal with huge falls). So, even after the route is established, there is an extremely important difference in the two approaches.

Are the bolts on slab routes not the substance of the means? Even on friction pitches where the only bolts, and the only protection, come in the form of a bolted anchor (rather difficult to get any "rarer") - I don't see how one can argue that the bolts don't facilitate the climb in a way that no other means of protection could. I don't think that Online, for example, would have ever seen an ascent, much less regular traffic without the protection afforded by bolts. I'm not aware of too many people that would consider the route a sport-route, either. So here we have a bolted route, that is not a sport-route, for which bolts provided the substance of the means. Time for a new ethical criterion, methinks. This makes me question how much climbing you've really done. If you're climbing slab between bolts placed at large intervals, and if you're also climbing close to your limit, the bolts won't provide the substance of the means. They will simply catch you and hopefully prevent injuries greater than a sprained ankle. You won't be able to yard up on the bolt by your hip so that you can then clip the bolt by your shoulder, followed by special little mime sequences while your buddies yell "Send it!" as you comb your hair. You'll actually have to climb the rock, and because the bolts are spaced greatly, you'd probably better be in control.

Let me spell it out for you. I-F Y-O-U A-R-E G-O-I-N-G T-O A-T-T-A-C-K D-W-A-Y-N-E-R-'-S E-D-U-C-A-T-I-O-N, T-R-Y T-O S-O-U-N-D I-N-T-E-L-L-I-G-E-N-T. BTW, I see you're chummy with the Spokane Mountaineers. I just visited their Ourdoor Ethics Committee page where I found the following: "Leave What You Find Follow the maxim, "take only pictures, leave only footprints." Leave flowers, rocks and all other natural features undisturbed." They offer classes! Maybe you'd like to participate. "

Ouch! "Who would have guessed...." requires a question mark. And statements are never questions. Glad to see you didn't teach logic. (That comes from his website) That's noble. What do you teach the young whippersnappers about picking up trash? What do you teach the kids about treading lightly in the wilderness?

Couple of comments are in order. Educated folk generally end their questions with....you guessed it, a QUESTION MARK, not a period. Secondly, educated folk generally at some point develop analytical skills that would allow them to infer that pope's bolt placement is not only consistent with the ideals to which he subcribes, but also provides an example of mountaineering excellence to which high_on_rock should aspire. You used to teach high school? Hopefully not a course in logic.

Unless it's an ugly bolt trail established on rappel, especially one in a wilderness area.

I've stood right at the base of this in disbelief that anybody could climb this. I figure if somebody could do such a long route with next to no pro then it's no big deal to make one extra move to a spot with potential gear placements. I agree. You wanna go chop it with me? I don't need that bolt. Every subsequent party will have to complete the crux or get pretty banged up. It's not just a matter of doing a little run-out to get through the crux. You're looking at a ledge fall or a large swing into a dihedral. The gear ain't there. As is, you have a completely natural route but for one bolt. But I really don't care either way, and I'd defend the bolt if I had nothing to do with the climb. Remember, I came out in favor of bolting that belay on Orbit.

Sorry Bill. I've been on a northwall all day (I'm painting my dad's house). To all of you who think you've scored some kind of nifty little victory here, you're invited to answer these questions: 1. Did I ever state that bolts have no place in climbing? 2. Is the single bolt on the route in question inconsistent with views I've advocated since 1985? 3. How many of you putzes have climbed the route on lead? When you do, I think you'll give up on the notion that "pope bolted a crack".

Well, I believe a bolt was a good idea in that case. You're trying to promote this image of me as being "black and white" on the issue, opposed to every bolt. It ain't so. Bolts have a place, a proper place. That bolt on that route is in a proper place. And if you're not too old and fat, you should go do it. Then you'll agree, and you'll probably thank me not only for placing the bolt but for showing such great restraint and wisdom. And then I'll probably ask you to shut up and stick this in your mouth: